So long. Farewell. Auf wiedersehen. Goodnight!

As the primary blogger for the Environmental Stewardship Committee at VTS, I must now bid a fond farewell to all the greenies out there.  My husband graduates from VTS tomorrow, and as such we will be sent forth from this community into the wider world–where it will be a ongoing challenge to live a “greener” and more sustainable life.  We have had it easy, as they say, here in Alexandria.  Recycling is easy, finding local food is easy–basically, the livin’ is EASY.  We go to a place where it may be more challenging to continue our green quest.   All of the great and banal expressions come to mind about the challenges of life and how they make it worth living…and since there is probably some truth in every one of those expressions I will try to be patient when friends and family use them.  I will also do MY best to enjoy this new phase in our lives.  In the words (of many but most memorably) of the band Aerosmith, I bid adieu with an extra-special platitude:

“Life’s a journey, not a destination.”

Amen.  And thank you.

Repairing the Garden

Repairing the Garden:

An Introduction to Religious Environmentalism

Elderdice Hall

Wesley Theological Seminary

4500 Massachusetts Ave. NW

Washington, D.C. 20016

May 26, 2009   1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Led by: Rabbi Lawrence Troster, Director, Fellowship Program GreenFaith

And

Beth Norcross, Coordinator, Green Seminary Initiative and Adjunct Faculty, Wesley Seminary

This seminar will introduce the participants to the rich scope of religious environmentalism. It will consist of: a brief survey of the history of the religious environmental movement from its beginnings over forty years ago; an overview of traditional Jewish and Christian views on the God/human/natural world relationship; the viewing of part of a new documentary, Renewal, which features a number of faith communities acting out their commitments to the earth; and specific steps your home congregation can begin taking to protect the earth.

This seminar is particularly geared to religious leaders, religious leaders-in-training and seminary faculty. However, all interested parties are welcome to attend.

Please bring your Bible with you.

Please direct questions to Beth Norcross at BethNorcross1@aol.com or Larry Troster at ltroster@greenfaith.org.

You think you’re so smart, grid.

As is often the case, more enviro news ended up “coincidentally” on my desk.  This month’s issue of Virginia Electric Cooperative Living, to be precise.  On the cover is JMU professor and Virginia native Dr. Maria Papadakis and Shenandoah Valley poultry farmer Chuck Horn.  Papadakis has been “working with the Shenandoah Resource Conservation and Development Council and the Dept. of Mines, Minerals and Energy to develop a farm energy-audit pilot program to identify future energy needs and energy-savings opportunities for the state’s agricultural sector.”  Horn “saved thousands of dollars as the result of a lighting experiment conducted by Papadakis,” and, according to magazine editor Bill Sherrod, he’s a “believer” in the “gospel of energy efficiency.”  And I truly hope he also is a believer in the gospel of free range poultry farming, but my Google searching isn’t turning up any real leads there, so I won’t digress further.  This post is, after all, about electricity.

The article goes on to talk about Papadakis’ commitment to the smart grid idea, which in her mind must be coupled with good general energy strategies incorporating four equally important points:

• good energy-efficiency and conservation programs for electricity end-users
• cleanest base-load power that we can get
• addition of new renewable-energy generating sources
• improved electric power grid

She also goes on to discuss base-load power generation and the need for technology to make power sources like wind and solar base load-ready. In her words, “to most effectively use large amounts of variable energy, we need technology to help stabilize it.  Right now, we don’t have the technology to use wind and solar power as ‘base load’ or intermediate load.  Large-scale battery storage is the focus of much research, as is renewable ‘firming power,’ such as solar and hydropower.   A basic amount of electric power needs to be on all the time as a predictable and continuous supply–our grid cannot function without base load.”

Building base load takes time, so according to Maria Papadakis we need to be projecting ahead 15 years or so.  We can also support environmental policies that reduce the need for base load.  And of course, as she reminds us, “there’s simply no ‘magic bullet’ to solve our energy challenges for the future.”  Of course, we have to start somewhere with something.  How’s about now?  How’s about doing our part to reduce our need for electricity?  Guess that means I’ll be turning the computer off now.  But first I’ll direct you to this article about smart grid communities in Boulder, Colorado.

Plastiki, Pt. II

A while back I talked about David de Rothschild, the adventure-loving heir to the English de Rothschild banking fortune who is getting ready to set sail across the Pacific in his boat Plastiki–a boat literally made of water bottles and other debris. I recently discovered an archived New Yorker article (abstract here) from April 6 about de Rothschild and his life journey–and of course more about the Plastiki and its impending voyage. De Rothschild is an interesting guy, and his attempts to raise awareness about oceanic pollution are laudable. But what stuck out in my reading of this article was the information about the Eastern Garbage Patch, a gigantic floating pile of mostly plastic jetsam in the Pacific, so named by Seattle oceanographer Curtis Ebbesmeyer. The patch is estimated to be twice the size of Texas. Twice. The. Size. Of. Texas.

De Rothschild hopes to set sail some time this summer.  Listen to him talking about the Plastiki here.

From sailworld.com (uk)

“Making Places and People Bloom”

Have you heard of Bronx native Majora Carter?  In the late 90s Carter returned to her home neighborhood after finishing her graduate degree, only to find a plan for building a transfer waste station there in the works.  Teaming up with and organizing her own environmental justic groups, she successfully fought the creation of the station.  In 2001 she founded Sustainable South Bronx, a “nonprofit organization dedicated to building a sustainable green economy in the South Bronx through education and green jobs training.”  Like her friend Van Jones, Carter believes that the people in poorer neighborhoods deserve the same green spaces and opportunities as do the more well-off, and she’s determined to get that ball rolling.

In the May Sojourners magazine interview I read, Carter talks about pollution in the poorer parts of cities, and how asthma rates in children are often significantly higher in these areas.  She also lays waste to the erroneous claim that “poor people don’t care about the environment.”  She cites the program she created called B.E.S.T. (Bronx Environmental Stewardship Training)–a green jobs training program that “gives folks on the fringes, like single moms, or ex-convicts, the tools of operating within the environmental restoration field, such as wetland restoration, cleaning contaminated land, urban forestry management, and green roof installation.”

Carter’s hopes for the future rest not only on grassroots efforts but also on people in power, like the EPA.  She claims that the EPA needs to “regain its moral authority as the environmental stewards of this country and really push for things like the national grid…”  In order to further her reach, she has left Sustainable South Bronx in order to form the Majora Carter Group, an environmental consulting firm–and she hopes that this firm will extend its reach beyond the Bronx.

Read the article in the magazine or go here to list to audio excerpts.

What a Relief

Deep in the heart of Virginia Seminary’s Bishop Payne Library is a hidden treasure.  Well, it isn’t exactly hidden–but then again not everyone knows about it.  It turns out that not only is it treasure, but it’s environmentally-friendly treasure to boot.  The library currently houses an installation of 2 Assyrian reliefs, which were “originally part of the walls of the palace and temples built in Calah (Nimrud) by Ashurnasirpal II (884-860 B.C.).”  I knew where they came from and learned a bit more when I shamelessly seached for “Nimrud” in Wikipedia.  What I didn’t know until reading all of the plaque next to the installation is what is depicted in the reliefs.  From the plaque:

The ceremony depicted in both reliefs is the fertilization of a sacred tree from buckets of holy water or sacred pollen.

Human-headed figure--from the south end of the king's palace

As spring rolls gloriously into summer here in Virginia, we see nature re-asserting itself in the blossoming of trees, the greening of any surface that stays still for more than a few minutes, and the veritable swarm of red robins on our campus.  Looks like the Assyrian gods have been at it again.

Full view of both reliefs

Funny Ha Ha

Chemistry

From reusablebags.com; the text next to the photo shares that this fence surrounds a landfill and was built to help wrangle loose plastic bags.

In my search for more information about plastic bags (insidious little buggers) I discovered the website for the American Chemistry Council.  At first my palms got a little sweaty, an instant Pavlovian response dating back to my 10th grade AP Chem year.  (–insert deep breaths and calming mantra–)  Once I was able to focus my vision on the text in a relaxed manner, I read this blurb:

April 21, 2009 – ACC’s Progressive Bag Affiliates group announced a landmark commitment that will dramatically increase the recycling of plastic bags. This initiative sets an aggressive goal of 40 percent recycled content (25 percent postconsumer material) in all plastic bags by 2015. In addition, the effort will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 463 million pounds, conserve enough energy (mainly natural gas) to heat 200,000 homes, and reduce waste by 300 million pounds every year. Over the last several months, we’ve listened to consumers and policy makers and determined that innovation is the solution. Plastic bags require 70 percent less energy to manufacture, generate 50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions, produce 80 percent less waste than paper bags – and they’re fully recyclable. This is a significant and unprecedented commitment, and it’s just one of the many ways we’re demonstrating that plastics are too valuable to waste; they can be – and should be – recycled. To learn more, read our FAQs, view a diagramtips on how to recycle more plastic bags and wraps, or visit our “Too Valuable to Waste” recycling blog.

I suppose I should be rejoicing that at least someone is doing something about plastic bag waste.  But I am also sad that there is really this powerful a pull for plastic, in general, especially as it relates to plastic bags.  I mean, I’ve seen those plastic commercials, where they show you all the great things made out of plastic, and I’ll concede that there are some amazing things that I use every day (probably without thinking about it) that are made from plastic.  Fine.  But plastic bags?  They ain’t one of ‘em.  And the fact that there is a commitment out there to make more bags out of recycled materials does NOT mean that more people will then recycle those bags.  Hello?!!  Rwanda, I am thinking fondly of you….

Going Trayless

As some of you may know, one of the projects the ESC has embraced on campus is Trayless Days in the refectory.  We have supported the idea that going without trays reduces water use and food waste.  Brian Turner sent me a link to a Times online article about colleges and universities that are also embracing this idea.  Reasons cited by environmental folks, college officials, dining hall managers, and the like:

1. Banning trays saves money. Less food is piled on trays (and, consequently, less is thrown away, uneaten).  That saves on rising costs of ingredients.
2. Banning trays saves water. “At Williams College in western Massachusetts, the Zilkha Center for Environmental Initiatives estimates that the college is saving 14,000 gallons of water annually since eliminating trays last spring at Driscoll, one of four campus dining halls, where 147,000 trays had been washed a year.”
3. Banning trays creates less waste. An undergraduate at Skidmore College studying environmental issues did a thesis project on food waste and “asked students to scrape their leftovers into plastic bins over two days, yielding 330 pounds of food on a Sunday and 403 pounds on a Monday.”
4. Banning trays creates more ambiance. Skidmore nixed trays as part of a major dining haul renovation.   I remember the awesome tray collection window with conveyor belt at my undergrad dining hall, piled high with nasties.  Ick.
5. Banning trays may help avoid the dreaded “freshman 15.” One undergrad lost 10 pounds after her dining hall went trayless.  I’m ALL about that, having gained a full 15 pounds myself here at VTS.

Even Rwanda has outlawed plastic bags

Yes, folks, it’s true.  While various constituencies in our cities, towns, and states are squabbling over whether or not to outlaw plastic bags and retailers are lobbying for keeping them and everyone wants to charge a fee, an African country that experienced an utterly devasting genocide in 1994 has already bounced back far enough to outlaw plastic bags.  Say what you will about the quality of life in this country and how grateful we should be.  I will agree.  And then I will once again say something to the effect of:  “folks, Rwanda has outlawed plastic bags.  Rwanda.  And we are still using them.”

Read this week’s New Yorker.  I stopped in the middle of an article about Rwanda (May 4 edition, pp.36-49) to write this post.   Check out this blog post for more info.

Kleenex=Kleercut

Greenpeace campaign for preservation of forests and production of tissue from sustainable sources

Kimberly-Clark is a baddie.  Greenpeace is actively campaiging against the company, which “is the largest tissue maker in the world. Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, the tissue giant owns the Kleenex, Scott, Viva, Cottonelle, Kotex and Huggies brands. Kimberly-Clark produces more than 4 million tons of tissue products annually and generates billions of dollars of annual sales from 150 countries around the globe.”

What’s the problem with that, you ask?  Well, unfortunately Kimberly-Clark is cutting down ancient forests using clear cut methods in order to produce its tissue.  Most of the pulp Kimberly-Clark uses for its disposable tissue products comes from unsustainable sources. This includes wood fiber from ancient forests like the Canadian Boreal. “Most of the consumer products Kimberly-Clark sells in stores, including Kleenex products, contain no recycled fiber at all.”

So what can you do?

1. If you are a parent, teacher or high school student take a look at [the Greenpeace] Kleenex Free Schools Project.
2. If you own or manage a business you can join over 700 businesses that have pledged to use recycled alternatives to Kimberly-Clark products.
3. If you are a college student please check out [the] Greenpeace Student Network Kleercut Campaign.
4. If you are interested in replacing Kimberly-Clark products in your home please take a look at [the] Greenpeace Tissue Guide.

You can also check out the Greenpeace website.  And you can stop buying Kimberly-Clark products.  Period.   Just a suggestion.

Clear cut forest, Washington coast

Cape Wind Update

From a recent L.A. Times article:

By Jim Tankersley
April 22, 2009

Reporting from Washington — The Interior Department will announce new rules today that clear the way for the first offshore wind turbines to be erected along the Atlantic Coast.

The rules will set long-awaited guidelines for offshore leases, easements and royalty payments that the Bush administration worked on for years but did not complete. The guidelines represent the most aggressive move yet from an administration that hopes to shift the nation’s offshore energy supply from oil to wind power. President Obama is expected to mention the rules today in his Earth Day appearance at an Iowa wind turbine factory….”There are many states, especially along the Atlantic seaboard, that are ready to move fast forward with this,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a recent interview. He said he saw offshore wind as having “significant potential” to round out an energy policy that includes clean-coal research, land-based wind and solar energy generation, and potentially more offshore drilling.

Offshore wind is an attractive energy source because the wind blows stronger and more consistently offshore. In addition, turbines off the Atlantic coast — and, eventually, the Great Lakes and deeper waters off California — would be near the population centers that use the most electricity.  But offshore wind turbines cost more than traditional wind turbines. Current technology also limits the turbines to shallower waters such as those found off the East Coast, which has less powerful winds.

The administration is trying to change that. The Energy Department plans to spend economic stimulus funds on research to improve offshore turbine blades….The Cape Wind project has long been controversial but, thanks to backing from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and other state political leaders, appears poised for construction by the end of 2010.

Car show held at Goonhilly Wind Farm, UK

Happy May Day!

The night-winds come and go, mother, upon the meadow-grass,
And the happy stars above them seem to brighten as they pass;
There will not be a drop of rain the whole of the livelong day,
And I’m to be Queen o’ the May, mother, I’m to be Queen o’ the May.

All the valley, mother, ’ill be fresh and green and still,
And the cowslip and the crowfoot are over all the hill,
And the rivulet in the flowery dale ’ill merrily glance and play,
For I’m to be Queen o’ the May, mother, I’m to be Queen o’ the May.

So you must wake and call me early, call me early, mother dear,
To-morrow ’ill be the happiest time of all the glad New-year;
To-morrow ’ill be of all the year the maddest merriest day,
For I’m to be Queen o’ the May, mother, I’m to be Queen o’ the May.

(excerpted FROM Tennyson’s “The May Queen”)

Earth Month–final days

TALK OF THE TOWN

Every week’s New Yorker features an “Talk of the Town” section–many of the recent ones have featured President Obama in some form or fashion.  This past week’s article was, naturally, focussed on Earth Day, the Earth, environmental legislation of the past, and Obama’s plans to address the issue now.  Several paragraphs are devoted to the history of the first Earth Day (April 22, 1970) and the Nixon administration’s reaction to that (creation of the EPA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; signing of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Safe Drinking Water Act–all by 1974).  The article then goes on to discuss what’s happening now:

1. Henry Waxman (of the House’s Energy and Commerce Committee) introduced a comprehensive energy bill a few weeks ago–may be “flawed” but is a step in the right direction?
2. President Obama has been outspoken on the urgency of the problem of global warming.  His “green dream team” of Energy Secretary Steven Chu, White House science adviser John Holdren, and NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco is poised for action.
3. Recently the EPA designated carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases as pollutants, which “initiates the regulation of CO2 under the Clean Air Act, a process that would eventually affect most major industries in the United States.”

The potentially alarming news is that many Americans seem to be less concerned about environmental issues today than their 1970 counterparts.  In a recent Pew survey, Americans placed “dealing with global warming” at the bottom of a list of 20 priorities, “far below ’strengthening the nation’s economy’ and ‘reducing health-care costs,’ and even below dealing with unspecified ‘global trade issues.’ “  The recession seems to have dampened the environmental spirit–and, as the “Talk of the Town” article points out, new legislation may be difficult to get through considering the “tens of millions of dollars” that the opposition is likely to spend on lobbying.

This year Earth Day was pretty mild, especially compared to the inaugural event of 1970, when in New York people picnicked on the sidewalk and in D.C. poured oil onto the sidewalk in front of the Interior Department (to protest recent oil spills).  I agree with “Talk of the Town” writer Elizabeth Kolbert when she says that Earth Day has lost its edge.

Earth Month–Days 25-27

CLOSE THE LOOP

Did you know that 25% is the PET plastic recycling rate in the USA?  Eek.  What can we do?

1. Highlight that recycling brings money (but that’s difficult to do during this recession, when many cities and municipalities are beginning to pay to allow citizens to recycle rather than making money off their recycling).
2. Highlight that recycling often decreases the cost of trash services.
3. Make it a competition. Here on the VTS campus that could mean a competition between classes, or between students and faculty, etc.
4. Educate.  Educate.  Educate. I am a fan of shockucation–an example of this (although a gross one) would be to dump a week’s worth of trash and photograph it, then to go through and pick out the recyclables.  Education efforts can also be more genteel–info about how recycling really occurs, information about the size of local landfills, etc.
5. Make it easy to recycle. Bins with clear signage next to every trash can.  Recycling ambassadors speaking to constituent groups on a regular basis.  Department recycling gurus whom others can ask for advice.
6. Advocate less use and re-use. If we consume less to begin with or reuse the things we’ve already purchased (e.g. keep re-filling that water bottle rather than buying a carton of them) we’ll have less to worry about recycling.
7. Tie recycling to a lifestyle. Trying to eat healthy?  Work out?  Take better care of yourself?  Recycling is taking better care of the planet–and it’s an easy way to do something tangible.

ESC members Drew Foisie and Corry Weierbach show off the Recycling 101 Quiz prizes (which are 100% recycled). Notice the awesome grand prize megaphone found by Casey Duncan and Cinnamon Martin. Yes, we are proud of that megaphone.

“He don’t eat no meat??! Okay-I make you lamb.”

I just read a March 23rd  article from America, the National Catholic Weekly in which author Kate Black takes a few pages to talk about how the issue of animal welfare is often not on the radar of modern Christians.  She touches on the idea that, as American Christians, we often want WHAT we want, WHEN we want it–and this idea often applies to our desire for meat, regardless of what happens to the animal before it gets to our plate.

Man has been hunting, killing, and eating animals for thousands of years.  It’s difficult to deny this fact.  In my recent informal surveys, I’ve heard from vegetarians, pescatarians, vegans, carnivores, and omnivores alike.  Many vegetarians and vegans have cited the cruel treatment of animals in the meat industry as a primary reason for eschewing meat.  Many omnivores insist on upholding the strictest standards in meat purchasing (only cage-free, free-range, anti-biotic-free, etc.).  Some carnivores express concern over how their meat comes to them but insist that they don’t feel “well,” “right,” or that they don’t have energy when they don’t eat meat.

Most folks realize that the high protein content of meat makes it an automatic staple in our nutritional pyramid.  Vegetarians and vegans have to make special efforts to consume as much protein as meat eaters get from a daily piece of chicken.  It’s a slippery slope (at least in my mind).  As the created, we have a responsibility to take care of our bodies–but as the created sharing the earth with the rest of creation, we also have a responsibility to “play well with others.”

Kate Blake agrees with me, and she makes points that, while not new, are certainly compelling.

1. We are not the master of nature.  As Blake says the catechism puts it, “Man’s dominion over inanimate objects and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute….”  The “dominion” idea is one that proponents of Environmental Stewardship are also examining.  Many say that the dominion passage in Genesis doesn’t give man permission to trash and stomp all over the rest of the created–but I think for many years that passage has been used to justify certain behaviors.
2. It is not the use or consumption of animals that is the problem–it is the methods used to treat them. She goes on to share some facts about how pigs and chickens are treated on many farms or in many plants.  Needless to say, it ain’t well.  In her words, “when an animal is denied an opportunity to act or behave in the ways God created it to do, it is no longer living in natural conditions.  That is a violation of the harmony of creation.”
3. It is our Christian duty to address issues of animal welfare and questions of ethical farming practices. I would go on to say that it is our human duty, our duty as the “top of the food chain.”  Our lives are as fleeting as those of the animals we eat, and we would do well to remember it.

I leave you with this quote from the article.

If you have people who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have people who deal likewise with their fellow human beings. (St. Francis of Assisi)

A better way--free-range pig farming

GrOw Michelle, GrOw!

A friend passed along an interesting article from the Times Online.  Seems Big Ag is upset with Michelle Obama for her insistence on making the new White House garden organic–AND for the implication that all Americans can (and perhaps should?) think about growing their own vegetables.  The Mid-America CropLife Association apparently sent a letter to the FLOTUS, in which they never overtly mention “pesticides” or “organic methods.”  They do, however, insist that in this day and age the average American hasn’t the time or expertise to grown her own food  AND they allege that our advances in science, technology, medicine, and the like would not have been made had not large farms and agricultural conglomerates taken over our food production.

The letter’s basic purpose, according to the Times, is to

“respectfully” [encourage] Mrs Obama to recognise the role played by conventional agriculture in feeding America’s growing population and is carefully worded not to be provocative.

But Bonnie McCarvel, the MACA executive director, was not so diplomatic in an e-mail forwarding the letter to MACA supporters and members, in which she said: “While a garden is a great idea, the thought of it being organic made (us) shudder.”

Meanwhile, an online petition is circulating asking for a halt on the “pesticide propaganda.”  It has apparently been signed by over 100,000 people.  Will you be one?

The April 9 planting session--from the White House blog

Earth Month–Day 23

RECYCLE LIKE YOU’VE NEVER RECYCLED BEFORE

As you many know, #5 plastics are infrequently recyclable, but they are everywhere.  Yogurt containers are big offenders–and in fact most containers in the cold section where you find yogurt will be marked with the #5.  I’ve just learned that Whole Foods supports what is known as the “Gimme 5″ campaign going on, thanks to, in their words, “caring companies such as Preserve, Stonyfield Farm, and Organic Valley.  Basically Whole Foods collects these #5 recyclables so that they can be turned into new Preserve products like toothbrushes and razor blade handles.  If you don’t have a Whole Foods in your area, you can also send the #5s to Preserve.  Let’s hope this catches on.

Earth Day Festivities

ESC members Patrick Funston, Casey Duncan, Cinnamon Martin (blog author), & Drew Foisie pose with the new tree

Chapel team member Matt Venuti assists Presider Dr. John Yieh as Dean Ian Markham prepares to bless the tree. At this point Drew has just offered a few wise words. Patrick and Casey look on in amusement?

Students, staff, and faculty process to the tree planting location

(Photos courtesy of Alix Dorr)

Happy Earth Day!

Today we planted a tree after our noon Eucharist here at VTS.  The rain cleared just in time for our procession to the grove, which the choir led singing “praise to the Lord, the Almighty, the King of creation!”  Amen.  I hope you are celebrating the Earth where you are.  We’ve come a long way since the first Earth Day in 1970, and we continue to push ahead, imagining what another 39 years can do!

Earth Month–Day 21

AVOID GMOs

How do I avoid genetically modified organisms?  Why do I care?  Where am I most likely to see them?  Well, I hope you’ll forgive this shameless use of wikimation:

To date the broadest application of GMO technology is patent-protected food crops which are resistant to commercial herbicides or are able to produce pesticidal proteins from within the plant, or stacked trait seeds, which do both. The largest share of the GMO crops planted globally are owned by Monsanto according to the company. In 2007, Monsanto’s trait technologies were planted on 246 million acres (1,000,000 km²) throughout the world, a growth of 13 percent from 2006.

In the corn market, Monsanto’s triple-stack corn – which combines Roundup Ready 2 weed control technology with YieldGard Corn Borer and YieldGard Rootworm insect control – is the market leader in the United States. U.S. corn farmers planted more than 17 million acres (69,000 km²) of triple-stack corn in 2007, and it is estimated the product could be planted on 45 million to 50 million acres (200,000 km²) by 2010. In the cotton market, Bollgard II with Roundup Ready Flex was planted on nearly 3 million acres (12,000 km²) of U.S. cotton in 2007.

Rapid growth in the total area planted is measurable by Monsanto’s growing share. On January 3, 2008, Monsanto Company (MON.N) said its quarterly profit nearly tripled, helped by strength in its corn seed and herbicide businesses, and raised its 2008 forecast.^[8]

According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), of the approximately 8.5 million farmers who grew biotech crops in 2005, some 90% were resource-poor farmers in developing countries. These include some 6.4 million farmers in the cotton-growing areas of China, an estimated 1 million small farmers in India, subsistence farmers in the Makhathini flats in KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa, more than 50,000 in the Philippines and in seven other developing countries where biotech crops were planted in 2005.^[9]

“The Global Diffusion of Plant Biotechnology: International Adoption and Research in 2004″, a study by Dr. Ford Runge of the University of Minnesota, estimates the global commercial value of biotech crops grown in the 2003–2004 crop year at US$44 billion.^[10]

In the United States the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reports on the total area of GMO varieties planted. According to National Agricultural Statistics Service, the States published in these tables represent 81-86 percent of all corn planted area, 88-90 percent of all soybean planted area, and 81-93 percent of all upland cotton planted area (depending on the year). See more on the extent of adoption at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/.

USDA does not collect data for global area. Estimates are produced by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) and can be found in the report, Global Status of Commercialized Transgenic Crops: 2007.^[11]

Now, why should I avoid them? According to The Institute for Science in Society (and these are just some of the reasons they cite):

1. GM crops failed to deliver promised benefits.

• The consistent finding from independent research and on-farm surveys since 1999 is that GM crops have failed to deliver the promised benefits of significantly increasing yields or reducing herbicide and pesticide use. GM crops have cost the United States an estimated $12 billion in farm subsidies, lost sales and product recalls due to transgenic contamination. Massive failures in Bt cotton of up to 100% were reported in India.

  Biotech corporations have suffered rapid decline since 2000, and investment advisors forecast no future for the agricultural sector. Meanwhile worldwide resistance to GM has reached a climax in 2002 when Zambia refused GM maize in food aid despite the threat of famine.

2. GM crops pose escalating problems on the farm.

• The instability of transgenic lines has plagued the industry from the beginning, and this may be responsible for a string of major crop failures. A review in 1994 stated, “While there are some examples of plants which show stable expression of a transgene these may prove to be the exceptions to the rule. In an informal survey of over 30 companies involved in the commercialisation of transgenic crop plants….almost all of the respondents indicated that they had observed some level of transgene inaction. Many respondents indicated that most cases of transgene inactivation never reach the literature.”Triple herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape volunteers that have combined transgenic and non-transgenic traits are now widespread in Canada. Similar multiple herbicide-tolerant volunteers and weeds have emerged in the United States. In the United States, glyphosate-tolerant weeds are plaguing GM cotton and soya fields, and atrazine, one of the most toxic herbicides, has had to be used with glufosinate-tolerant GM maize.

  Bt biopesticide traits are simultaneously threatening to create superweeds and Bt- resistant pests.

3.  Extensive transgenic contamination unavoidable

• Extensive transgenic contamination has occurred in maize landraces growing in remote regions in Mexico despite an official moratorium that has been in place since 1998. High levels of contamination have since been found in Canada. In a test of 33 certified seed stocks, 32 were found contaminated.

  New research shows that transgenic pollen, wind-blown and deposited elsewhere, or fallen directly to the ground, is a major source of transgenic contamination. Contamination is generally acknowledged to be unavoidable, hence there can be no co-existence of transgenic and non-transgenic crops.

4. GM crops not safe

• Contrary to the claims of proponents, GM crops have not been proven safe. The regulatory framework was fatally flawed from the start. It was based on an anti-precautionary approach designed to expedite product approval at the expense of safety considerations. The principle of ’substantial equivalence’, on which risk assessment is based, is intended to be vague and ill-defined, thereby giving companies complete licence in claiming transgenic products ’substantially equivalent’ to non-transgenic products, and hence ’safe’.

5. GM food raises serious safety concerns

• There have been very few credible studies on GM food safety. Nevertheless, the available findings already give cause for concern. In the still only systematic investigation on GM food ever carried out in the world, ‘growth factor-like’ effects were found in the stomach and small intestine of young rats that were not fully accounted for by the transgene product, and were hence attributable to the transgenic process or the transgenic construct, and may hence be general to all GM food. There have been at least two other, more limited, studies that also raised serious safety concerns.

Now, if I’ve decided to avoid them, how can I know how to find them?  Buy organic.  US organic regulations do not allow the use of genetically engineered ingredients in organics.  But to get really freaked out, go here to the USDA’s National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances in organic food production and handling operations.

Compliments of the USDA website

8. http://www.monsanto.com

9. http://www.isaaa.org

10. http://www.thecampaign.org/globalbiotech04.pdf

11. http://www.isaaa.org/Resources/Publications/briefs/37/default.html

Earth Day at VTS

I hope my friends will forgive me for directly copying this e-mail message, but here’s an “authentic, on-the-ground” view of how Earth Week will play out in worship here at VTS:

Last year's tree planting

Dear Friends,
The Chapel Team for the coming week (April 20th through 23rd) would like you to know about how we will be worshiping together.

In recognition of environment stewardship and Earth Day, we will not be using printed bulletins for Morning Prayer.  Rather, the worship leaders will announce the pages in the BCP, and hymn numbers will be posted on the hymn boards.  Morning Prayer will continue as Rite I with a decidedly Easter tone and in keeping with the lectionary readings for the week.  On Tuesday, April 21st, the Prayers will recognize Yam Hashoah: the Day of Remembrance of the Holocaust.

Wednesday’s Noonday Worship will mark several significant events in the life of our community.  First, we will worship in observance of Presbyterian Communion (there will be a printed bulletin for this service).  Your worship team, lead by the Rev. Dr. John Yieh, has been very intentional about honoring our ecumenical worship as a community.  During our Presbyterian worship, the congregation is invited to “sit for prayers and stand for praise.”  The Seminary Choir will sing a ‘Litany to the Holy Spirit’ during the Offering.

The Contemporary Sacred Singers will be singing the Prelude which promises to enliven the community with joyful noise!

The offering for this day will be in support of the Student Aid Society which supports members of the community in times of financial need.

And finally, Wednesday is Earth Day which will be recognized in the Prayers and in the closing procession of the entire congregation to a site in the Grove where a new tree will be planted.

We look forward to worshiping with you in community in the coming week.

Easter blessings from your Chapel Team
Dr. John Yieh, Casey Duncan, Valerie Hayes, Matthew Venuti, Grant Ambrose, Gregg Morris and Dr. Bill Roberts
Honorary Members, Cinnamon Martin and Drew Foise in support of Earth Day planning

Disney NATURE movie

I’m not sure what it is, but I know I want to see it, and I know it opens on Earth Day (that’s day after tomorrow, folks).

Earth Month–Days 18-20

BEANS, ORGANIC, & TOILET PAPER

A few more tips for a great Earth Month:

Drink coffee? Think about switching to fair trade brands.  Why?  And what is fair trade, you ask? Coffee company Allegro Coffee lists these practices, which are in agreement with fair trade ideas:

ON THE FARM: We pay our farming partners a fair price that exceeds their costs of production and includes an agreed-upon profit. This fair price provides them the means to reinvest in their farms, hire and retain the best workers, and stay in business over the long term.

FOR THE EARTH: We partner with coffee growers who share our values for environmentally friendly practices. These farmers utilize traditional and sustainable growing, harvesting and processing practices, including the use of shade trees, manual weeding (forgoing the use of pesticides), water conservation and other organic farming practices

Buy groceries? Think about looking for organic items and making the switch.  On a budget?  Choose a few items to go organic on.  A good start would be in fruits and vegetables and milk.  Why?

Reasons to Buy Organic

• Organic farming meets the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations.
• Growing organically supports a biologically diverse, healthy environment.
• Organic farming practices help protect our water resources.
• Organic agriculture increases the land’s productivity.
• Organic production limits toxic and long-lasting chemicals in our environment.
• Buying organic supports small, independent family farms.
• Organic farmers are less reliant on non-renewable fossil fuels.
• Organic products meet stringent USDA standards.
• Buying organic is a direct investment in the long-term future of our planet.
• Organic farmers preserve diversity of plant species.
• Organic food tastes great.

What does “Organic” Mean?

Organic agriculture is a production method that emphasizes the use of renewable resources and the conservation of soil and water to enhance environmental quality. Organic food products are produced using:

• Agricultural management practices that promote healthy eco-systems and prohibit the use of genetically engineered seeds or crops, sewage sludge, long-lasting pesticides, herbicides or fungicides.
• Livestock management practices that promote healthy, humanely treated animals by providing organically-grown feed, fresh air and outdoor access while using no antibiotics or added growth hormones.
• Food processing practices that protect the integrity of the organic product and disallow irradiation, genetically modified ingredients (GMOs) or synthetic preservatives (info compliments of Whole Foods)
  

From treehugger.com

Crying wolf–update

I reprint the text from this Earthjustice article in full.  For the original text, please go here.

Interior Secretary Salazar Finalizes Wolf Delisting

Conservation groups will challenge the removal of essential federal protections

April 1, 2009

Photo: FWS

Washington, DC — An advance copy of the Federal Register, released today, contains a final version of the federal government’s decision to eliminate Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in the northern Rockies except for those in Wyoming. The delisting effort revives an effort launched by the Bush administration which was halted in January for review when the Obama administration took office. Today’s delisting decision is the second time in twelve months the federal government has removed federal protections for wolves in the Northern Rockies. Conservation groups, represented by Earthjustice, successfully sued to get the protections reinstated in July 2008.Delisting wolves means they will be subject to state-sponsored wolf control efforts and hunting this year unless stopped by legal action. Idaho and Montana plan to allow hundreds of wolves to be shot.

Conservation groups, represented by Earthjustice, will send the Fish and Wildlife Service a notice that the delisting violates the Endangered Species Act. If the agency does not reconsider the delisting rule, the conservation groups will again ask a federal court to reinstate federal Endangered Species Act protections for wolves in the northern Rockies until wolf numbers are stronger and the states pledge to responsibly manage wolves.

The decision to lift wolf protections comes as Yellowstone Park wolves declined by 27 percent in the last year – one of the largest declines reported since wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone in 1995. The northern Rockies wolf population also has not achieved a level of connectivity between the greater Yellowstone, central Idaho, and northwest Montana areas that is essential to wolves’ long-term survival. After delisting, the northern Rockies wolf population may be allowed to drop to only 300 to 450 wolves.

Wolves will remain under federal control in Wyoming because a federal court previously ruled that Wyoming’s hostile wolf management scheme leaves wolves in “serious jeopardy.” The Fish and Wildlife Service in the recent past held that a state-by-state approach to delisting wolves was not permitted under the Endangered Species Act, including in their earlier decision to not delist wolves without Wyoming’s inclusion. In today’s delisting decision, the federal government flip flops on its earlier position.

In addition to Wyoming, Idaho and Montana have refused to make enforceable commitments to maintain viable wolf populations within their borders. On the very day the first wolf delisting took effect in March, 2008, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed a law allowing Idaho citizens to kill wolves without a permit whenever wolves are annoying, disturbing, or “worrying” livestock or domestic animals. The Idaho Fish and Game Commission established rules that would have allowed 428 wolves to be killed in 2008 alone had the court not returned wolves to the endangered species list. Montana also authorized a fall wolf hunt.

Earthjustice represents Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, The Humane Society of the United States, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Friends of the Clearwater, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands Project, Western Watersheds Project, Wildlands Project, and Hells Canyon Preservation Council.

Contact:Jenny Harbine, Earthjustice, (406) 586-9699
Suzanne Asha Stone, Defenders of Wildlife, (208) 861-4655
Louisa Willcox, Natural Resources Defense Council, (406) 222-9561
Melanie Stein, Sierra Club, (307) 733-4557
Michael Robinson, Center for Biological Diversity, (575) 313-7017

Earth Month–Days 16 and 17

HELP SAVE THE RAINFOREST

If you purchase Tropicana Pure Premium and Trop50 juices, you can go to tropicanarainforest.com and enter codes to save 100 square feet of rainforest!  Look for the specially-marked containers in your grocery store.  Tropicana is actually partnering with coolearth, ” a UK based international organization that is working hard to rally everyone’s efforts to halt climate change.”

Remember when saving the rainforest was a big deal?  It was 1992.  I was a freshman in high school (eek!).  And “Ferngully: The Last Rainforest” came out in the theaters.  I’m so glad this issue is back on our radar (although it’s pretty disheartening to think of how many acres of forest have been destroyed in the intervening 15 years or so).

From LIFE photo archive, May 1989

Actress Debbie M., artist Keith Haring, actress Sandra Bernhard, singer Madonna, artist Kenny Scharf, rock musician Bob Weir and bassist Rob Wasserman on stage, waving to the audience at the Don’t Bungle the Jungle! rain forest benefit Brooklyn, NY., May 1989.

Earth Month–Day 15

RELAX AND DO WHAT YOU CAN

Whole Foods chronicles some success:

Earth Month 2008: They stop using plastic bags.

Earth Month 2009: Their paper bags are made from 100% post-consumer reclaimed content, so if shoppers forget their own reusable bags they can’t beat themselves up too badly, especially if they recycle the paper bags.

It’s difficult for me to embrace the idea of “relaxing” when it comes to environmental issues, but I DO realize that sometimes we have to pick our battles.  So, this Earth Month, pick yours.  Whether it’s committing, seriously, to using only reusable bags all the way to eating only local foods, year-round–whatever you decide to do, do it knowing you are having an impact.

If civilization has risen from the Stone Age, it can rise again from the Wastepaper Age.  ~Jacques Barzun, The House of Intellect, 1959

Earth Month–Day 14

EAT IN SEASON

“Growing foods when they naturally grow best uses less energy and resources.”  It also means that less oil is used to gas up semi trucks that carry out-of-season produce from places like California and Florida to places like Alexandria.  As the Whole Foods Earth Month calendar notes, “some variety of organic greens are almost always in season–often locally.”  Perhaps it’s time to think about salads!

To learn more about eating locally and in-season, you can read Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle (see “We read” tab).  You can also check out this archived PBS “article,” for starters.

From jollygreengirl.com

And here are Jennifer Maiser’s top reasons for eating locally:

Eating local means more for the local economy. According to a study by the New Economics Foundation in London, a dollar spent locally generates twice as much income for the local economy.  When businesses are not owned locally, money leaves the community at every transaction.  (reference)

Locally grown produce is fresher. While produce that is purchased in the supermarket or a big-box store has been in transit or cold-stored for days or weeks, produce that you purchase at your local farmer’s market has often been picked within 24 hours of your purchase.  This freshness not only affects the taste of your food, but the nutritional value which declines with time.

Local food just plain tastes better. Ever tried a tomato that was picked within 24 hours?  ‘Nuff said.

Locally grown fruits and vegetables have longer to ripen. Because the produce will be handled less, locally grown fruit does not have to be “rugged” or to stand up to the rigors of shipping.  This means that you are going to be getting peaches so ripe that they fall apart as you eat them, figs that would have been smashed to bits if they were sold using traditional methods, and melons that were allowed to ripen until the last possible minute on the vine.

Eating local is better for air quality and pollution than eating organic. In a March 2005 study by the journal Food Policy, it was found that the miles that organic food often travels to our plate creates environmental damage that outweighs the benefit of buying organic. (reference)

Buying local food keeps us in touch with the seasons. By eating with the seasons, we are eating foods when they are at their peak taste, are the most abundant, and the least expensive.

Buying locally grown food is fodder for a wonderful story. Whether it’s the farmer who brings local apples to market or the baker who makes local bread, knowing part of the story about your food is such a powerful part of enjoying a meal.

Eating local protects us from bio-terrorism. Food with less distance to travel from farm to plate has less susceptibility to harmful contamination. (reference)

Local food translates to more variety. When a farmer is producing food that will not travel a long distance, will have a shorter shelf life, and does not have a high-yield demand, the farmer is free to try small crops of various fruits and vegetables that would probably never make it to a large supermarket.  Supermarkets are interested in selling “Name brand” fruit: Romaine Lettuce, Red Delicious Apples, Russet Potatoes.  Local producers often play with their crops from year to year, trying out Little Gem Lettuce, Senshu Apples, and Chieftain Potatoes.

Supporting local providers supports responsible land development. When you buy local, you give those with local open space – farms and pastures – an economic reason to stay open and undeveloped.

Earth Month–Day 13

GREEN YOUR KITCHEN…BEYOND FOOD.

“In 2008, the sale of Seventh Generation products helped save 725,000 gallons of petroleum, enough for 1228 cars for one year.”  I like Seventh Generation products–the most recent one I’ve tried being their biodegrable dryer sheets.  Whole Foods carries many products their line, but I’ve also seen some of their items at Trader Joe’s, Harris Teeter, Target, and even some CVSs.  What changes can you make in your kitchen that can positively impact the environment?

1. Eliminate paper towels.  See “We Use” tab for substitute ideas.
2. Drink tap water.  If you must filter, see “We Use” tab for ideas.
3. Fill up your dishwasher completely before running it.  Try non-toxic, natural dishwashing liquid or cubes, such as these.
4. Replace your old appliance with energy savers.  In fact, you can go here to win an ENERGY STAR Bosch Evolution Refrigerators.
5. Compost!
   
6. Use a pressure cooker–they reduce cook time and are just plain cool.  See “Under pressure” post.

Earth Month–Days 11 & 12

GIVE CHOCOLATE THAT GIVES BACK

“Easter candy can be all the more deliciously meaningful with Whole Trade chocolate, such as Equal Exchange chocolate bars.”  Equal Exchange is actually a fair trade co-op, and their website begs for further perusal.  In fact, while perusing, I came across the story of how coffee is produced, and I learned a great deal!  Check it out here, and look for fair trade items in your grocery store–the most common and likely the easiest to find are coffee, chocolate and, tea–in addition to a growing number of other apparel and gift items.

From the Equal Exchange website--these are ripe coffee cherries.