Ecotopia

17 May 2011

Last week we talked with Dave Garcia of the Sierra Club, Yahi Group about the dangers of fracking–the hydraulic fracturing of underground shale to release natural gas. Dave told us of the environmentally dangerous side effects to ground water, the rock formations themselves, and drinking water and the air. (You’ll recall his stories about tap water that catches on fire due to dissolved methane.)

 As a follow up, tonight we have on the phone Dusty Horwitt, an attorney with Environmental Work Group in Washington, D.C. He is the lead researcher on natural gas issues for EWG, which has just released an alarming paper concerning a newly formed government study group on fracking.

Listen to the Program

 Our Conversation with Dusty Horwitt

–Please tell us about the new panel formed by the Obama administration on fracking. What’s the purpose of the panel? What authority does it have?

–Your news release says, “Notably, the panel does not include citizens from communities concerned about the damage to health, water, and private property posed by the surge in natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing.” Who is on the panel? Who has been left off?

–Please tell us a little about several of the big oil members, perhaps Panel Chair John Deutch and/or some of the university professors (whom one would think would have a degree of academic objectivity here: e.g. Stephen Holditch of Texas A&M, Mark Zoback of Stanford). Please also tell us about the panel’s outside interests with the oil industry.

–We have interviewed Fred Krupp of the Environmental Defense Fund on this program. EWG identifies him as the only environmental representative on the panel. What role will it be possible for him to play? Why do you have some doubts about EDF on the fracking issue?

–Your press release mentions a new study by Duke University that confirms suspicions in Pennsylvania and New York “that gas extraction was leaking methane into their drinking water.” What other major studies will the panel consider? Are there any studies that actually identify fracking as a safe process?

–More broadly: On our show last week we cited an Exxon/Mobil commercial that brags that there’s 100 years’ worth of natural gas “trapped” underground but that human ingenuity (presumably fracking and other technologies) will free that gas. What’s EWG’s position on 100 more years of fossil fuel consumption? Are there alternatives? Do we need to extract all that natural gas? (If EWG has a position on expanding nuclear energy, we’d love to hear about that, too, and, of course, about solar, wind, and other alternatives to carbon and plutonium.)

–What can interested listeners do to make their voices heard on the fracking panel, in particular, and fracking and other energy sources in general?

Thank you, Dusty Horwitt, of the Environmental Working Group. You can learn more about their work online at http://www.ewg.org. Their California Office is at  2201 Broadway, Suite 308 | Oakland, CA 94612.

And here’s the report that was the subject of tonight’s discussion:

News Release – Administration Stacks Panel With Big Oil and Gas
Published May 10, 2011

The Obama administration panel named May 5 [1] to study hydraulic
fracturing, a natural gas drilling technique that injects thousands of
gallons of chemical-laced water into the ground, is dominated by oil
and gas industry professionals.

Notably, the panel does not include citizens from communities
concerned about the damage to health, water and private property posed
by the surge in natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

“An industry insider like John Deutch is completely unacceptable to
lead this panel,” Environmental Working Group Senior Counsel Dusty
Horwitt said. “It looks as if the Obama Administration has already
reached the conclusion that fracking is safe.”

Fracking involves injecting a mix of water, sand and chemicals into a
well under high pressure in order to fracture underground rock
formations and unlock trapped gas and oil. The technology has been
linked to water contamination, air pollution, release of methane [2]
and deteriorating health in communities near drilling sites.

A study by Duke University researchers [3], made public yesterday,
found high concentrations of methane in 68 wells near shale-gas
drilling and hydrofracking sites in northeastern Pennsylvania and New
York, confirming property owners’ suspicions that gas extraction was
leaking methane into their drinking water.

The new panel’s seven members include:

•Panel chair John Deutch, a former director of the Central
Intelligence Agency, now on the board of Cheniere Energy, Inc., a
Houston oil and gas drilling company that, according to Forbes
Magazine online [4], paid Deutch about $882,000 from 2006 through
2009. During a stint on the board of Schlumberger Ltd., one of the
world’s three largest hydraulic fracturing companies, Deutch received
about $563,000 in 2006 and 2007, according to Forbes.
•Stephen Holditch, head of the petroleum engineering department at
Texas A&M University and a leader in the field of hydraulic fracturing
designs, first at Shell Oil, later as head of his own firm, acquired
by Schlumberger in 1997. Today, he is engineering committee chairman
at Matador Resources [5], a Dallas oil and gas exploration company.
•Mark Zoback, a geophysics professor at Stanford and senior advisor to
Baker Hughes [6], Inc., a Houston-based oilfield services company
engaged in hydraulic fracturing [7]. Zoback is chair of GeoMechanics
International [8], a consulting firm that advises on various oil and
gas drilling problems and that was acquired by Baker Hughes in 2008.
•Kathleen McGinty, chair of the White House Council on Environmental
Quality during the Clinton administration and a former secretary of
the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, now senior
vice president of Weston Solutions [9], Inc., which consults for the
oil and gas industry, and a director of NRG Energy [10], a Princeton,
N.J., wholesale power generation company whose assets [11] include
more than two dozen natural gas companies.
•Susan Tierney, assistant secretary of the Energy department under
President Clinton, now managing principal of Analysis Group [12],
which consults for utilities that use natural gas and for the
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America [13], the natural gas
pipeline industry association.
•Daniel Yergin, Pulitzer-Prize winning author of The Prize, a 1991
book about the oil industry, and co-founder, chairman and executive
vice president of IHS CERA, originally called Cambridge Energy
Research Associates [14], acquired in 2004 by IHS [15], an
international consulting firm whose clients include the oil, natural
gas, coal, power and clean energy communities.
The panel’s environmental representative is Fred Krupp, president of
Environmental Defense Fund, a New York-based nonprofit that focuses on
environmental issues. Scott Anderson, EDF’s senior policy advisor for
energy and spokesman on hydraulic fracturing is a member of the
Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, which opposes extending the
federal Safe Drinking Water Act to hydraulic fracturing. The
commission website asserts that fracking “needs no further study.”
Anderson is a former executive vice president and general counsel for
the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association [16].

Will panel undermine EPA study?

The new panel, named by Energy secretary Steven Chu, is part of the
President Obama’s recently announced energy plan that aims to reduce
dependence on foreign oil. The energy industry contends that hydraulic
fracturing, or “fracking” is critical to expanding the nation’s
natural gas supplies by tapping gas trapped in shale formations.

The energy panel will focus, Chu said, on “harnessing a vital domestic
energy resource while ensuring the safety of our drinking water and
the health of the environment.” That mandate appears to duplicate an
initiative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which
announced in March 2010 [17] that it would undertake a two-year study
on the human health and environmental dangers of hydraulic
fracturing’s impact on groundwater, to publish initial findings by the
end of next year.

The energy panel is working on a faster track, with recommendations
due within six months.

“The new administration panel appears to be an effort to undercut the
EPA’s study by assigning an elitist group of industry insiders to take
a cursory look at fracking,” Horwitt said. “The EPA is trying to
conduct a comprehensive study and to listen to the people directly
affected by drilling. It’s hard to see how the Energy
department-driven panel can have any credibility.”

EWG urges the administration to replace John Deutch as chairman of the
panel with a neutral expert without direct financial ties to the
industry being investigated. EWG also calls on the administration to
balance the panel with citizens who have been affected by hydraulic
fracturing and with other independent experts.

###

EWG is a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, DC that
uses the power of information to protect human health and the
environment. http://www.ewg.org [18]

——————————————————————————–

Source URL:
http://www.ewg.org/release/administration-stacks-panel-big-oil-and-gas
Links:
[1] http://www.energy.gov/news/10309.htm
[2] http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/methane-contamination-of-drinking-water-accompanying-gas-well-drilling
[3] http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-05/du-ml1050411.php
[4] http://people.forbes.com/profile/john-m-deutch/18048
[5] http://www.matadorresources.com/board.html
[6] http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/committeeview.aspx?key=49246
[7] http://www.bakerhughes.com/products-and-services/reservoir-development-services/software/hydraulic-fracturing
[8] http://www.geomi.com/AboutUs/ExecBios.php
[9] http://www.westonsolutions.com/about/officers.htm
[10] http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=121544&p=irol-govBio&ID=184475
[11] http://www.nrgenergy.com/pdf/Projectlist.pdf
[12] http://www.analysisgroup.com/susan_tierney.aspx
[13] http://www.ingaa.org/
[14] http://www.ihs.com/about/executives.aspx
[15] http://press.ihs.com/press-release/corporate-financial/ihs-energy-acquires-cambridge-energy-research-associates-cera
[16] http://tipro.org/UserFiles/Frequently asked Natural Gas Questions(1).pdf
[17] http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/26195e235a35cb3885257831005fd9cd!OpenDocument
[18] http://www.ewg.org

No Comments »

10 May 2011

On this week’s program, we’ll begin with some updates, following topics such as children’s health and nuclear power that we’ve covered recently.  Then we’ll be talking with Dave Garcia of the Sierra Club, which is leading a campaign against something called “fracking” as a way of extracting natural gas from the ground in an especially environmentally unfriendly way.

Listen to the Program

Update: Environment and Health

Two weeks ago we talked with author Dan Farber about his book, Changing Planet: Changing Health, about how climate change can worsen health crises.  This week, we were concerned to read in the online news source, MedPage Today, that “Environmental Illness in Kids [Already] Costs Billions.  An article by Emily Walker published May 5 explains that a new analysis has found:

Childhood diseases thought to be linked to environmental causes cost the nation nearly $77 billion in medical costs and lost productivity in 2008 alone…Building on a 2002 analysis, investigators estimated how much of a role environmental factors play in causing such conditions as childhood cancers, asthma, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and then attached a dollar figure to the medical treatment and lost productivity expected to occur because of the preventable disease or disorder. The study was published in the May issue of Health Affairs, which is devoted entirely to examining the link between the environment and health — an issue that often gets short shrift in health policy and medical circles, although a recent congressional hearing focused on disease clusters and their environmental causes.

 The researchers are  Leonardo Trasande, MD, of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, and Yinghua Liu, MD, of the National Children’s Study New York–Northern New Jersey Center.  They write: “Our principal finding is that chemical factors in the environment continue to contribute greatly to childhood morbidity and to healthcare costs.” Their list of diseases thought to be caused at least in part by the environment include lead poisoning, methylmercury poisoning, childhood cancer, asthma, intellectual disability, ADHD, and autism.

[Cerebral palsy was included in the 2002 analysis, but it was removed for the new study because of “limited data supporting the role of chemical factors.”]

The […most expensive] environmentally-caused disease is lead poisoning, which, Trasande said at a press briefing, cost the nation $60 billion in 2008. About 10% of that cost was for medical care, but 90% is attributable to lost economic productivity from “reduced cognitive potential” resulting from preventable exposure to lead during childhood[….] Lead exposure in childhood — which has greatly declined since the 1978 passage of a law banning use of lead-based paint in homes — has been linked to permanent brain damage and life-long problems with attention and impulsivity control and has also been linked to criminal activity later in life, they wrote.

Methylmercury poisoning — which can lead to brain and spinal cord damage — accounted for $5 billion in lost productivity in 2008, the study authors said. The leading source of mercury in the environment is coal-fired power plants, but people can also ingest it by eating contaminated fish, and, in some few cases, from eating animals that were fed grain coated in a preservative that contained methylmercury.

 Trasande and Liu said more than $5 billion in productivity costs were lost in 2008 because of intellectual disabilities caused by environmental factors. A number of studies have drawn a link between air pollution and IQ, including a 2009 study in the journal Pediatrics that found children who were exposed to high levels of a pervasive air pollutant in the womb had significantly lower full-scale and verbal IQ scores at age 5. Another $5 billion was lost because of ADHD that could ultimately be attributed to chemical factors in the environment.

Meanwhile, asthma cost more than $3 billion in medical costs, such as trips to the hospital and doctors’ visits, in 2008, and another $4 billion in lost productivity as parents had to take off work to care for sick kids.The prevalence of asthma is increasing, which baffles public health experts, because two known triggers — secondhand cigarette smoke and air pollution — have decreased in recent years as a result of anti-smoking and clean air laws.

Trasande and Liu also looked at the costs of autism.  “While we don’t know the specific component environmental factors that contribute to autism, there are a number of reports documenting the role of environmental factors, in specific, chemical factors [that contribute to autism],” Trasande told MedPage Today. Trasande said it’s extremely difficult to pinpoint the exact health effects any of the thousands of chemicals that humans are exposed to in daily life. Manufacturers of new compounds are not required to prove their chemicals won’t make people sick.

A National Institute of Science report estimated that 28% of developmental disabilities may be caused by environmental factors — that is, they are not caused by genetics alone. Or, as the saying goes, “Genes might load the gun, but the environment pulls the trigger,” Trasande said.

Avoiding chemicals is impossible, but parents can attempt to lessen their children’s exposure by monitoring what they eat and airing out rooms when new electronics and furniture are installed.  “That ‘new’ smell is actually a chemical smell,” Trasande explained.

In addition, doctors — most of whom likely never received environmental health training — can ask patients about foods they eat, their living conditions, and past exposure to toxins. Ob/gyns can also inform newly pregnant woman that, although they should be getting omega-3 fatty acids, they should avoid fish such as mackerel and some types of tuna that might contain high levels of mercury. Trasande said he hopes his study will show that environmentally-caused diseases carry a huge financial burden — a dollar figure he hopes will be used in comparisons with the costs of making regulatory changes in the energy industry to prevent pollution. “This analysis re-emphasizes for policymakers the implications of failing to prevent toxic chemical exposures not only for the health of children but also for the health of our economy,” Trasante and Liu concluded.

You can read the full article and other related stories at

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/EnvironmentalHealth/26306

 That story is only part of the growing awareness of dangers to children, and in some cases, we are teaching our children well. From Time online comes an interesting story about “renegade” Girl Scouts who are fighting against the use of Palm Oil in Girl Scout Cookies and who are fighting to preserve endangered organgutans  Borneo.  Tara Kelly explains:

Because of palm oil, a key ingredient, those delicious and addictive treats may not be as innocent as they seem. Not only is the ingredient linked to child labor in Indonesia, but it also allegedly contributes to rainforest deforestation. But now two renegade girl scouts are lobbying the Girl Scouts of America to remove the ingredient from the cookies.

Rhiannon Tomtishen and Madison Vorva, who are high school sophomores [in Ann Arbor, Michigan], stopped selling Girl Scout cookies in 2007 after they began working on a public service project to bring attention to the plight of endangered orangutans in Borneo [due to deforestation]. To ramp up their efforts have teamed up with Rainforest Action Network (RAN) to make the change a reality.  So far, RAN set up an online form for those interested to send a letter to Girl Scouts of America CEO Kathy Cloninger to pressure the organization to stop using palm oil.  RAN also helped Tomtishen and Vorva make a merit badge available to Girl Scouts across the nation. It’s not endorsed by the Girl Scouts of America, Tomtishen said. The RAN partnership comes after a meeting between the two scouts and the organization, which resulted in no action.

Although Cloninger has yet to comment, Michelle Tomkins, a spokesperson from the organization, has said its hands are tied. In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began requiring unhealthy trans-fats to be listed on the Nutrition Facts labels on food products. Two official Girl Scouts bakers worked to make its cookies healthier in light of the changes, said Tomkins. “In order to rid cookies of trans-fats, you had to find another alternative.” That alternative is palm oil. And despite Tomkins admiration for the girls’ efforts, she said the two bakers the organization uses have no plans to change the recipe. But Tompkins didn’t rule out a possible switch in ingredients. “We have little say if not no say in the recipes used by the bakers.”

You can read more online

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/05/05/do-girl-scout-cookies-harm-the-environment-renegade-scouts-fight-against-palm-oil-ingredient/#ixzz1LsHtMxKS

Update: Restarting the Nuclear Industry

Back in March, we talked with activist Harvey Wasserman of Nuke Free dot org, about his concerns,  including the fact that despite the nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, the Obama administration has not backed down on its plans to supply $37 billion in loans for new nuclear plant construction here at home, including  plants using the General Electric/Westinghouse/Toshiba/Mitsubishi design that failed in Fukushima Daiichi. Back in 1979, with David Nash and many others, Harvey helped to organize No Nukes Concerts in Madison Square Garden.  Recently, Nash and David Crosby performed in Newark, Ohio, and Harvey wrote this review:

When a concert starts off eight miles high, only the great can keep it there. That’s what David Crosby & Graham Nash did the other night in Newark, Ohio. The wind beneath their wings was an outstanding foursome of virtuoso musicians. The result was a three-hour love fest that should not be missed.

Crosby/Nash are transcendently talented buddies who come with a set list nicely balanced between the old, the mellow, the rockin’, the oddball and the new.[…  Along the way both Graham and David took some welcome shots at the powers that be. General Electric’s lack of tax bill was enshrined in the edgy “They Want It All,” a sharp, well-reasoned attack on corporate power. “Don’t Dig Here” spoke to the insanity of creating nuclear waste that can kill forever. “Military Madness” gave the brass a kick in the ass.

Some don’t like politics mixed with their music. But these guys have paid their dues and know where of they speak. By way of disclosure, I’ve worked with Graham since 1978 in the “No Nukes” campaign to prevent nightmares like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and now Fukushima. He is savvy, knowledgeable and dedicated.

Most recently [Harvey reports to having]  “conspired” with Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne to help stop billions of dollars in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plants. The fight continues, partly through the www.nukefree.org website, where you can help tip the balance in a fate-of-the-Earth campaign against $36 billion in radioactive handouts. See us now and call/write your Senators & Reps early and often!!!

This memorable show is a tribute to some warm, wonderfully talented electric poets and troubadours who clearly treasure the magic they’ve been spreading for more than four decades. That somehow it keeps getting better is reason for great celebration and heart.

Check out the nukefree.org/ site for even more information on how we can oppose the new efforts on the part of the nuclear industry and our government to build nukes in the name of oil independency.

 

Fracking and the Environment: Our Conversation with Dave Garcia

 “Tower of Power” tells us, “there is only so much oil in the ground.”  Global responses to our energy crisis vary widely.  Some of us are arguing for a change in fuel consumption habits and on discontinuing our reliance on carbon-based and nuclear fuels.  Others seem to be determined to wring every last ounce of petroleum product from our endangered planet.  For example, in an Exxon/Mobil ad currently showing on TV a spokesperson smugly explains that human ingenuity has discovered new ways to extract natural gas that, he says, is quote “trapped” underground, apparently just awaiting liberation from oil companies.  One of extraction methods  is something called “fracking,”  and here in the studio with us is Dave Garcia of the Sierra Club Yahi Group to tell us what it is and why it’s a bad idea.

• Please tell us about “fracking.”  What is it?  How does it work?
• What are some of the dangers of fracking?
  • How can it affect groundwater supplies?
  • Could it actually tip off an earthquake?
• What is the role of the Environmental Protection Agency in protecting us and the environment from fracking?  Are they doing the job?
• Fracking seems like a hugely complex and costly process.  Are the energy companies that desperate?
• The Exxon/Mobil ad that we referred to talks about “clean” natural gas.  Is it actually “clean”?
• You and the Sierra Club both have alternative visions of the future.  Please share some of your ideas about, say:
  • Solar and wind
  • Changing our oil consumption habits
• You’ve been showing a film called “Gasland” around the area.  What’s in it and how can people see it?  (May 15, Pageant, noon-2)
• What activities do and others have planned in the northstate area to publicize the dangers of fracking?
  • What are timetables and deadlines people should know about?
  • How can people get more involved in your effort?

http://sierraclub.org/naturalgas/
http://hfmeeting.cadmusweb.com/
http://www.earthworksaction.org/hydfracking.cfm
http://www.motherlode.sierraclub.org/yahi

 

Playlist:

 

1. Industrial Disease        5:50        Dire Straits        Love Over Gold#2. Teach Your Children        3:02        Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young        Four Way Street3. Nuclear Infected (Album Version)        2:16        Alice Cooper        Flush The Fashion#4 Only So Much Oil In The Ground (LP Version)        3:50        Tower of Power Urban Renewal $5. Mother Earth (Natural Anthem)        5:11        Neil Young        Ragged Glory 6. Weave Me the Sunshine        4:28        Peter, Paul And Mary        The Very Best of Peter, Paul and Mary 7. Oil Spill Summer        2:47        Butt        Horse 8. The Road to Utopia        4:54        Utopia        Adventures In Utopia

 

No Comments »

April 25, 2011

Our topic tonight is “Serious Fun.”  It’s taken from the title of a book by our first guest, Berkeley author-environmentalist Carolyn North, who argues that doing the right thing for the planet can also be amusing, entertaining, and highly creative.

And in the second half of the program, we’ll extend that idea by talking with Marley Zalay and Desi Hatton, of the RARE project of Butte County, a demonstration center shows people imaginative ways to engage in recycling.

Listen to the Program

Our Conversation with Carolyn North

With us on the phone is Carolyn North from Berkeley, who has written a book from Findhorn Press that talks about imaginative ways of being sustainable on such topics as food, waste, water, and money. She is a longtime activist and the founder of the Daily Bread Project in Berkeley, which helps surplus food into the hands of people who need it by way of a network of volunteers.

• Let’s start with the title of your book.  How, in an age of doom-and-gloom about the earth’s future, can you propose that we have “serious fun”?  What’s your philosophy here?
• Please explain your argument that working for environmental sustainability is analagous to natural adaptation in the plant and animal worlds. [Do you think humans can adapt their ways fast enough to avoid planetary disaster?]
• We don’t often think of money in terms of “sustainability.”  Please give us your take on money and how people can use it (and alternative forms of exchange) in creative ways:
  • What is “slow money”?
  • Where does generosity fit into the picture?
  • Can people find employment in ways that are environmentally sound but still bring in the necessary funds for survival?
• We can’t possibly talk about all the topics in your book.  But we wonder if you could give us an example or several of imaginative approaches to:
  • Food: We’d especially like to hear more about the Daily Bread Project. Also your advice to “play with your food.”
  • Water:  Maybe tell us about the water collecting gadget on the cover and how it serves multiple uses.
  • Waste:  What should we be doing with animal and human Sh–FCC euphemism?  What might we be doing with corpses?
• The final topic in your book is about Home.  One doesn’t usually list that among environmental topics. Why is home–the structure, the community–important?
• You are about to launch a new Serious Fun website through your publisher, Findhorn Press.  Please tell us about that.

Our guest has been Carolyn North, author of Serious Fun, published by Findhorn  Press [www.findhornpress.com] on recycled paper that, according to the publisher, saved five trees and 519 pounds of greenhouse gases.  She is at work on a sequel to the book called SHIFT HAPPENS: How Changing Your Mind Can Help Save the World. In addition to the forthcoming blog, she also has two websites that you should check out:  www.healingimprovisations.net and carolynnorth.blogspot.com.

Our Conversation with Marley Zalay and Desi Hatton

In the studio with us now are Marley Zalay, coordinator, and Desi Hatton, assistant, of the RARE project at Chico State.

1. Your project is the Recycle and Rubish Exhibit. Tell us a little about its history.

2. Who sponsors RARE?

3. What is the purpose of RARE? What are each of your roles?

4. Describe the tours you do. What do the exhibits consist of? What
are some of your favorite exhibits? Are they open to the public?
Where are the exhibits?

5. You also do workshops in the schools. Tell us about those.

6. How do teachers sign up to participate? Do you still have spaces
for the spring?

7. What ways are there for community members to become involved?

8. How can we contact you?  http://www.aschico.com/recycle/rare

Playlist for Ecotopia #135: Serious Fun

1. Recycle Reuse Reduce        2:46        Heidi Howe        Give a Hootenanny!
2. reduce, reuse, recycle        3:35        The Junkman (Donald Knaack)        Junk Music 2
3. The 3 R’s        2:54        Jack Johnson        Sing-A-Longs & Lullabies For The Film
Curious George
4. Worms        2:05        Stanley Schwartz        Looking for the Perfect Bagel
Children’s Music
5. Weave Me the Sunshine        4:28        Peter, Paul And Mary        The Very Best of
Peter, Paul and Mary
6. Worms        4:07        Yeasayer        All Hour Cymbals
7. Trash Can Rap        2:41        Jeremy Roske & Karl Anthony        Strike-A-Chord #1
8. Worms        7:23        Dino O’Dell & the Veloci-Rappers        Dino O’Dell & the

No Comments »

 April 19, 2011

Tonight our topic is “Changing Planet–Changing Health.” In the first part of the program we’ll talk with author Dan Ferber, who has coauthored a book with that title. He and Paul Epstein have explored in depth the proven and possible consequence of climate change on human health globally. Wonder why you’ve been sneezing more? We’ll ask Dan Ferber to explain.

Then we’ll talk to Chicoan Pamm Larry, who is interested in protecting our health from another threat, genetically modified organisms. She is part of a team sponsoring a ballot initiative that would require labeling on GMO products in California so that consumers have a chance to know what they are eating and make informed decisions about it.

Listen to the program.

Our Discussion with Dan Ferber

Part 1–The Threat:

On previous editions of Ecotopia, we have discussed climate change and how it is affecting the health and survival of wildlife on the planet.  Tonight, we turn to people. Our guest is Dan Ferber, co-author, with Paul Epstein, of a book titled Changing Planet, Changing Health.  Dan is a contributing correspondent for Science magazine and has written widely on science issues, including articles in Popular Science, Audubon, and Nature Conservancy.

The subtitle of your book is How the Climate Crisis Threatens Our Health and What We Can Do about It.  Let’s save the “what we can do about it” part for later in the show and start with the the threat to our health. Broadly, what’s your view of the relationship between climate change and our health?  Why are we in trouble?

You’re not talking about a “theory” or “thesis” here.  You say, “Clearly climate change is hazardous to our health.”  Why do you and Paul Epstein find the evidence so persuasive?

The opening chapter of Changing Climate–Changing Health focuses on Mozambique as an example of the climate-induced health crisis and presents a substantial and frightening list of diseases and epidemics: “an epidemic of epidemics.”
–Why did you choose to begin the book in this way?
–How does Mozambique bear out the theories of early 20th-Century Austrian ecologist, Ludvig von Bertalanffy?
–What is “the science  of the whole”?

A chapter entitled “Every Breath You Take” offers an explanation for  increased sneezing! What’s the relationship between climate change and respiratory problems​?  Who has lobbied against proposed agreements such as Kyoto and Copenhagen (not that the U.S. was signing on to these anyway)?

The book covers a vast range of planetary ailments.  Could you review (your choice of) one or several of these:
–toxic oceans and declining fisheries
–forests in trouble
–agricultural problems
–storms and sickness

You have a chapter called, “Sobering Predictions.”  As we end this segment, we want to ask an impossibly broad questions: Could you please give us a sobering prediction of how health will worsen over, say, the next 50 to 100 years if we do not alter the rate of climate change?

Part II: Solutions Along with sounding the alarm, you and Dr. Epstein have recommendations for “what we can do about it.”  Let’s talk about some of these.

What do you mean by “Gaining Green by Going Green”? 
–How might going green positively effect, say, the insurance and banking industries?
–How else might the economy actually be improved by fighting global climate change?
–Could you please talk about Gary Hirshberg and his dispelling of myths about:  externalities, sending away waste, and pollution dilution?

Can green captialism produce the needed changes?  (We’ve had people on this program argue that by its very nature, capitalism can never be green–it will always be devoted to squeezing out maximum profits by exploiting any resouce it can. What do you think?)

Throughout the book you refer to Kyoto and other international agreements (or non agreements) on climate change.  What’s your view of the possible success of these kinds of global efforts?  Will they produce the change we need?  How can we “prod the politicians”?

Do you sense that community-level strategies can be successful, e.g., smart growth, campaigns and targets to lower emissions?  (In Chico, our Sustainability Task Force is working on these problems.)

What advice do you have for individual listeners to help us “veer from our tarnished history, creating a legacy of healing for both the Earth and ourselves.”

The book is Changing Planet–Changing Health, by Paul Epstein and our guest, Dan Ferber, and it’s published by the University of California Press.  You can learn more about the book at http://www.changingplanetchanginghealth.com/.  Dan also has a Facebook page, https://www.facebook.com/ChangingPlanetChangingHealth, that includes blogs, comments, and links to other articles. We’re posing all those links on our own website, ecotopiakzfr.net.

Our Discussion with Pamm Larry

Pamm Larry has lived in Chico for 33 years and has worn many hats in her tenure here–one as a farmer in the mid ’80s to ’90s. She’s a mother and a grandmother and has been a mini activist for decades. After years of being depressed about the future of our food she had an epiphany on January 20, 2011 to take a strong stand and organize the state for a ballot initiative to require mandatory labling of genetically engineered foods and the factory farmed animals that eat them. 

1.  What was your epiphany?
2. What is the ballot initiative you are creating? What would it require by way of labeling?
3.  Why is it important to have GMO food labeled?  (Does labeling
actually protect us from GMOs or simply alert us to food content?)
4.  Please tell us about your fundraiser this coming Saturday.  (We’re
not allowed to state ticket prices over the air–goofy FCC rule–but
you can tell people how and where to get them.)
5.  How can people learn more about the initiative and get involved?

Playlist for Eco 133: Changing Planet–Changing Health

1. Global Warming Blues 3:42 Lenny Solomon Armando’s Pie
2. Danger (Global Warming) – Radio Mix 3:35 Brick Casey Danger (GlobalWarming)
3. Health 2:50 Electric Guitars Health
4. Good Health 3:37 The Dixie Hummingbirds In Good Health
5. Health and Strength 4:28 Pressure Riddim Ruller: Drop It Riddim
6. Weave Me the Sunshine 4:28 Peter, Paul And Mary The Very Best of Peter, Paul and Mary
7. The Health And Welfare 8:58 Urlaub In Polen Health And Welfare

No Comments »

April 12, 2011 

On several editions of Ecotopia, we’ve talked with people who argue persuasively that Green Jobs are going to increase dramatically in the future.   Tonight, we’ll be talking with Melissa Everett, a career counselor and green activist from New York, who has mapped out possibilities and strategies for “Making a Living While Making a Difference.”

Listen to the Program

Before we talk with Melissa Everett, we thought we’d share an amusing story from the Wall Street Journal.  Reporter Annie Gasparro says that:

McDonald’s Corp. is hoping to bulk up its burger-tossing forces and recast the image of the “McJob” with a nationwide hiring event April 19. On this self-proclaimed National Hiring Day, McDonald’s and its franchisees plan to recruit as many as 50,000 U.S. employees to add to its roughly 600,000-member ranks.[…]

The fast-food giant is promoting the hiring event in print magazines such as People and Us Weekly, as well as social-media channels. The campaign highlights employees of varying ranks, from cashiers to corporate, in an effort to improve the image of working there. For years, people have used the term “McJob” as derogatory slang for low-paying, dead-end work in the kitchen or behind the counter. McDonald’s thinks by putting the spotlight on employees who have risen through the ranks in successful, long-lasting careers, it will be able to give the McJob a new meaning.

Jim Norberg, a senior vice president in McDonald’s restaurant support office, began his career making french fries when he was 16. This month, he is celebrating his 30th anniversary with the company.

“We want to show people what a McJob really means to those of us who have them,” Mr. Norberg said in an interview. “About 40% of our company staff started out working in the restaurants, so the opportunities are out there in a big way.” […]

McDonald’s says the job offers will be a combination of full- and part-time positions in its 14,000 restaurants. […]

[And here’s the fine print:]

Bringing on more part-time and seasonal workers would allow McDonald’s to decrease full-time staff, which would reduce costs at a time when health insurance and other full-time benefits are becoming more expensive for companies.

“Labor costs are a real problem for restaurants this year,” said Ron Paul, president of Technomic, a Chicago-based industry research and consulting firm. “The changes in health-care benefits are going to force companies to rely more on part-time workers than before.”

You want fries or health insurance with that McJob? 

Melissa Everett has some alternatives to McJobs.

Our Conversation with Melissa Everett

Melissa Everett is author of a book titled Making a Living While Making a Difference.  She is a community activist and a career counselor. As the book title suggests, she believes strongly that it’s possible to contribute in positive and sustainable ways to our world and still make enough dough to keep the wolf from the door.  She also practices what she preaches as Executive Director of a group called Sustainable Hudson Valley, and we will ask her about that in the second part of the interview.

Part I: Making a Living While Making a Difference

• The subtitle of your book is “Conscious Careers for an Era of Interdependence.” Please tell us what that means and why you think it is important.
• You write of “sustainable livelihoods–meaningful work that fulfills . . . the needs of all members of a community.”  What are the characteristics of a “sustainable livelihood”?  Could you give us an example or two?
• In recent programs, we’ve had a lively discussion of “green capitalism.”  Some of our guests have argued that by its very nature, capitalism consumes resources exxtravagantly and really can never be green.  However, your writing is filled with suggestions for working within the system (including the possibility of being a carbon trader!).  Please tell us how your ideas mesh with the problems of unsustainability that we see in the current capitalist system.
• Please give us a few examples of sustainable, difference-making careers that our listeners might not be aware of.
• Your book includes a ten-step program for people to find these kinds of careers.  We note that the majority of the steps involve personal self assessment rather than just playing the job market–aiming for self employment.  Why does the individual and his/her values/psyche figure so prominently in your program?
• You recommend that people do what they think to be important whether or not they get paid.  Is that realistic?  (What’s the difference between volunteerism and entrepreneurism?) (What if you find yourself in a career that does not meet sustainability criteria?)
• How does your advice vary by age level, say:
  • a high school graduate thinking about military service? [We work with a counter-recruitment group that helps high schoolers think about alternative careers, so we are especially interested in your advice here.]
  • a new college degree holder with a stack of debts?
  • a person plotting a mid-life career change?
  • a senior citizen figuring out how to spend the golden years?
• How has the financial crash of the last several years affected the market for jobs that make a difference?  Has it affected your optimism about making a living while making a difference?

Part II: Some Questions about Sustainable Hudson Valley

Melissa Everett describes herself as a “social entrepreneur.”  She puts her ideas into practice as Executive Director of Sustainable Hudson Valley, a nonprofit located on the Hudson halfway between New York City and Albany.

• Please tell us about the formation of Sustainable Hudson Valley in 2004.  Why was it created?  What is your mission?
• What kinds of projects does your organization undertake?. Could you give us a few examples of projects that you’ve done over the years?
• What’s the 10% Challenge campaign and how is it going?
• In the first part of the interview, we talked about (and maybe challenged) your optimism.  Can SHV really make a difference?  How many organizations like it would be required to make the Hudson Valley truly sustainable? the rest of the world? 
• What is the range of people working in SHV as volunteers or paid professionals?  Have people become self-employed on the job?
• Since you don’t produce a capitalist profit, how do you sustain the organization itself?
• What advice can you give people (like listeners to this program) about the most effective ways to make their communities more sustainable?  And what kinds of career choices and changes can you suggest to our listeners so they can be part of this revolution?
• What’s your next career?

We highly recommend Melissa’s book, Making a Living While Making a Difference.  It’s published by New Society.  Also be sure to check out the Sustainable Hudson Valley website http://www.sustainhv.org, which includes a great range of environmental information as well as Melissa’s blog, which you’ll find at http://www.makinglivingdifference.com.

Playlist

1. Get a Job        2:27        The Silhouettes        Original Solid Gold Hits, Volume 2                       

2. Working Man’s Blues        3:46        The Devil Makes Three        Do Wrong Right       

3. Sixteen Tons        2:37        Tennessee Ernie Ford        Hotdogs, Hits and Happy Days              

4, Clear Blue Skies (LP Version)        3:07        Crosby, Still, Nash & Young          American Dream       

5. Weave Me the Sunshine        4:28        Peter, Paul And Mary        The Very Best of   Peter, Paul and Mary       

6. Mother Earth (Natural Anthem)        5:11        Neil Young        Ragged Glory        Rock               

7. Working Class Hero        3:09        Shawn Douglas        Shawn Douglas        Blues

 

No Comments »