Carbon Footprint Calculator

Colin Beavan is a man who obviously very passionate about what he is interested in. Combined with the ability to live without electricity, he successfully can say that he lowered his carbon footprint tremendously. While I’m sure that he doesn’t expect everyone that sees his documentary to live this way, he really opens the human eye to some changes that can be made.
I was personally interested in what my carbon footprint could possibly be. I’m a student living in a two bedroom apartment with very little use of air conditioning. My only downfall is that I drive a Land Rover which is practically a tank. I went on a search for a carbon footprint calculator that could possibly give me a ballpark estimate on my carbon footprint. I came across a calculator that asks you a couple questions regarding electricity, diet, transportation, and waste. (http://www.nature.org/greenliving/carboncalculator/index.htm)

Thankfully, greenhouse gas emissions are lower than the average person in the United States. The largest of my problems is surprisingly my home energy usage. I’m convinced that this number is so high because I put down that I live in Florida. I found it funny but smart that they have a donate button to offset your carbon footprint so you don’t feel as guilty:)

Whats your carbon footprint? Were you surprised by the results?

Hurricane Sandy- Polluted Rivers

A week ago, Hurricane Sandy hit the North East. The storm has left the rivers in a terrible state. An abundance of toxic chemicals has been washed into the New York Harbor, as well as the areas nearby rivers.  According to the New York Daily News, more than 630  storm-related oils spills have been reported in the state of New York. Floodwater that had been collected in Lower Manhattan tested positive for E. coli and coli form. Just knowing that all of the pollutants that soaked themselves into the city streets are now being carried out to sea is unsettling. This will only lead to more concerns about fish as a source of food.

Reduce Reuse Recycle

I think a good majority of us can say that we’ve heard the mantra “reduce, reuse, recycle,” but how many of us actually try to apply it to our lives to the best of our abilities? Our class discussion on climate control and watching the first bit of No Impact Man really got me thinking of how little we do to preserve our planet as a whole.  It’s sort of terrifying actually. Why don’t we do more to prevent our planet from dying off? Maybe it’s because we don’t see the consequences of global warming as dramatically as if we were to live up north where we could see the icecaps melting rapidly. It could also be that some of us are just waiting for “the next guy” to come along and take care of the issue. And, it’s a shot in the dark, but maybe the majority of the human race isn’t thinking about Earth’s needs because we are too wrapped up in our daily lives… Which now thinking of it, is probably the case… Anyway, one of the easiest ways to help benefit the planet is to follow that mantra of reduce, reuse, recycle and it really isn’t that difficult. We have to do our part, however small it may be. It really does help. Real talk.

I’ve even heard people say that they believe that global warming isn’t real and the planet just takes care of itself. That concept is just mind blowing to me… Like really… you don’t think that the fumes radiating from your F150 isn’t killing anything? I think that most of us need to be educated on the matter a bit more and luckily for the younger generations, I think it should start with them. When I was in grade school they would tell us how to reduce, reuse, and recycle, but we never truly applied it. We would read about it and move on. Things need to change a bit more in order for us to have a cleaner planet.

Anyway, here is some Jack Johnson.

Would I ever go “No Impact”?

No.

I find that extremely pointless and only doable if you were born into that lifestyle. For certain people having such a drastic lifestyle change would make them go insane. There is a reason why we live so comfortably now–because living without electricity, heat, and running water is ridiculous. Ridiculous and stupid.

It is a nice thing to do…saving the environment, I mean. But, just one person making an effort won’t do anything at all. There are almost 7 billion people inhabiting this planet. One person not using toilet paper wouldn’t make a difference at all. Maybe if, as a race, we hadn’t abused our inventions to the point of destroying our air supply, our planet would be in better shape. People could plant more trees and we could also start going completely digital. Stop making paper books and move everything onto a harddrive. Schools are beginning to require their students to have some sort of tablet for classes to replace hard cover books. I think that’s genius and would really help our planet. We don’t have to go completely no impact in order to save “Mother Nature”. We just need to find alternatives to killing off thousands of trees everyday.

We do create a lot of trash and we waste a ton of food, it’s awful. I do my part already by not littering and recycling what I can. In my opinion, going “no impact” is a ridiculous idea and only those who feel superior to others would do it, for example, the man in the movie “No Impact Man”. It was so frustrating that he was forcing his wife and child to drop literally everything man kind has struggled to create just for the future generation’s comfort. He gave off an “I’m better than you because I’m going this far to prove that I care about the environment more than you do” air. It was disgusting.

So, would I go no impact?

No. I would not.

The No Impact Man

The No Impact Man is an incredibly annoying movie. It is about a man who is so full of himself he thinks that by forcing his family to cease all use of man-made items he will help the world’s pollution issue. Ha. Haha.

Normally I would just ignore something like that–it’s nice that you care enough about it, and it is admirable, but keep it to yourself. The one thing that bothered me in the movie was how much of a pretentious jerk the guy acted like. He got visibly angry when his wife complained about having caffeine withdrawals and  gave her a snotty attitude because his beliefs were making her lifestyle extremely uncomfortable.

I find it nice when people care about the ecosystem and how they effect it but I find it so useless when people change their lifestyles so dramatically because of it. 3 people not using much energy (or any energy at all) will not make a difference, I’m sorry. Along with that note, the guy is just a complete jerk. He thinks he’s so high and mighty because he went “Amish” during WINTER in New York. Why? He forces his wife and toddler to live without power, without eating meat, without coffee…aka to live a horribly uncomfortable lifestyle. In the winter. In New York.

The guy is doing something nice for the environment, but the way he holds himself and acts throughout the movie is so obnoxious.  I hate him. I hate people like him. You can do whatever you want with your life but don’t act like you’re better than other people for it. You’re not. You never will be superior to someone for eating hot cabbage during the winter and taking 9 flights of stairs to get to your home.

Private Space

After last week’s viewing of the movie The Cove, I was really struck with how stupid this whole argument is.  Japan is insistent on forcing the lie on the world that the dolphin market (for both meat and capture) is nonexistent.  What strikes me as funny is that it is obvious when looked into, but from the outside (or inside Japan, rather) you would not known otherwise.  What is even more odd is the toxicity of dolphin meat, yet it continues to be sold and eaten en masse.  Japan isn’t fooling anyone here; that stuff is terrible for the country.  Do they want to begin a generation of people with major disabilities?

Personally, I don’t believe an animal should gain recognition and immunity (aka gaining endangered status) on “cuteness” or supposed intelligence that can’t be measured, but I do believe dolphins have the right to be free from capture and hunt because they have such an impact both up and down the food chain.  I also believe that it is wrong to hunt dolphins due to the toxicity levels they leave in the ocean when slaughtered and in their meat when consumed, no matter the species doing the eating.

It just does not make any sense to me that those running this dolphin scandal kill off the dolphins unchosen by dolphin-trainers.  As bad as this sounds, a lot of the controversy over The Cove could be solved by just not killed the unpicked ones.  Leave them to reproduce and grow for the next years of picking, if anything.  Since the head price for a dolphin by trainer is exorbitantly larger than the price for its meat, why not just leave it for next year’s picking?  That would be like a car company destroying the outgoing generation of cars just because they did not get sold within the first year.  Let’s be a little business-savvy here now.

-Dakota Hopkins

Sources

The Cove movie

Oh Fishy, Fishy Fish, Where Did You Go?

Questions arise with the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization’s (FAO) projections regarding the wild fish harvest in 2012. Specifically about the ecological damages that have been inflicted on wild fish populations. FAO’s projections estimate that the wild fish harvest will fall 2 percent from 2011, which means that this haul will be now 4% below the all-time greatest haul of wild fish which was reached in 1996. With rapid growth throughout the 1980s and 90s due to the expansion of fishing into new fishing stocks the total wild fish harvest climbed, then held steady until in recent years the total wild fish haul began to fall.

Based on an evaluation in 2009 the FAO reported that 57% of the oceanic fish stocks are now “fully exploited” meaning that if the fishing efforts regarding these stocks were to increase the stock would begin to slowly decrease and they would tumble into the category of “overexploited”. 30% of the oceans fish stocks have already been declared over exploited and immediate action must be taken to stop the destruction of our oceans. Based on the last 38 years, starting from a study in 1974, and continuing to today it seems that the hope for the survival of our oceans aren’t all that bright. In 1974  it was reported that 40% of the oceans wild fish stocks were under exploited, today only approximately 13% of the oceans fish stocks can be classified as “underexploited”. With a greater percentage of our oceans overexploited (30%) than they are underexploited (13%) it would seems that not only the industry but the oceans will soon fail if corrective actions aren’t taken.

However, thankfully scientists and organizations have dedicated themselves to working on these issues and actions are being taken to improve the remaining fish stocks. Actions, like the reduction of fishing pressures, are being enforced in attempts to improve the spawning success of future fish. Scientists are targeting “forage fish” as species to reduce fishing pressures on as forage fish are the fish that support the stability of the species higher up on the food chain, like salmon and tuna which are both popularly consumed fish.

Other actions, like restrictions on gear types, total catch sizes and dividing shares of catches among fishers and the designation of marine protected areas and “no-take” zones are also proving to improve the success of fishing stocks. For instance in Australia a study performed in 2010 revealed that no-take reserves had in six years doubled the populations of fish in no-take zones as well improving the total size of the fish meaning a greater biomass per fish. Not only did the areas of no-take increase the areas around these reserves increased their fish populations. Due to the success of theses efforts Australia announced this past June that it is going to increase its total number of reserves resulting in a total of one third of its waters being marked as protected.

How can I reduce my impact on the Earth?

“No Impact Man” is a self made documentary about a family in New York City that decides to erase their impact on the planet. They do so by walking to where they need to go, canceling magazine and newspaper subscriptions, eating food raised only in the area in which they live, discontinuing use of electronics, etc.

As for myself, I would find this feat infinitely frustrating and difficult. I could go without magazine or newspaper but I would need internet. Television is an easy one to get rid of as well. Where my issues start to arise is the notion of recycling the material used to wipe your butt. Honestly, kinda gross. Walking to my destinations would also be problematic seeing as how my parents, who I visit frequently, live in Bradenton which is a twenty to thirty minute trip in a car. Call me lazy but I have things to do. However, I could imagine myself halfway accomplishing the food rule. Since I do have my own private space, it would be possible for me to raise my own fruits and vegetables but with things like chickens and livestock I’m afraid I have neither the prowess nor the resources to be successful. And I suppose I could purchase locally but at a much higher rate than the supermarket, which for me being a “broke-ass college kid” is not practical.

Obviously I cannot be as minimal on the Earth as the “No Impact Man” and this is not a completely selfish decision but a decision of convenience, practicality and possibility. This is not to say that myself or anyone else who shares my sentiments are unable to reduce their impact on the Earth. Fortunately there is much room for compromise in our society. We can take public transportation to farther destinations, grow a small garden and purchase just meat from the market, purchase recycled toilet paper from the market rather than the new toilet paper, get your news and entertainment from the internet, recycle cans and bottles. Not everyone can be perfect but the “No Impact Man” is a proof that one can reduce their impact in many different ways.

Nicholas Lorini

Busy Bees and Stressful Work Environments

So what’s happening to all the bees?

I really enjoyed the Vanishing of the Bees documentary we watched last monday. However my memory of the documentary is a little fuzzy at the moment and I don’t remember if they figured out what the cause for the bee disappearances are for sure. However the link between insecticides used on farmers crops seems to show some promise. We need pollinators like bees to be there to help us grow our crops. These creatures are vital to our agriculture system and if we don’t have them around then we won’t have very many fruit or vegetables to eat. In the documentary they say that after exposure to the plants with the insecticides, over many generations the bees start to act a little funny. This could point to some sort of genetic disorder that becomes more of a problem as the generations continue to breed. I think they might have pointed that out in the documentary, but it’s a good guess none the less.

I do have a theory that’s probably wasn’t mentioned in the documentary (At least I don’t remember it being mentioned). In the movie it’s explained that the queen bee is replaced every so often by the bee keepers. The hives old queen is killed and a new one is replaced. Now I don’t know a lot ( well anything really) about bees and how they perceive they’re surroundings, but I do know (by being stung) that bees can sense danger. Now if I assume that bees can sense danger they might also feel some sort of stress (however that is from my own human perspective). So is it possible for bees to realize their queen is missing and panic? The documentary explained that the bee keepers replace the queen with a new artificially inseminated queen right after they get rid of the old queen. However they need to keep this new queen in a special container until she gains the hives smell so that the other bees don’t see her as a foreign entity and try to kill her. I curious if the bees even notice if there original queen is missing. If they do than I would think that would put the hive in a state of red alert and thus they would be in danger. So that would mean that until the new queen has been accepted by the worker bees they are feeling some sort of stress. This combined with a constant change of environment (bee shipping) and a poisonous food source (insecticide covered crops) can’t created a very ideal work environment. If these issues are not the problem they’re probably part of the problem. Any way I hope that we can get it resolved fairly soon because I really enjoy feeding the vegetables on my plate to my dog when no ones looking.

To be honest this whole idea is based around the assumption that bees have the mental capacity to feel stress of any kind. I’m not sure if any research has gone into the subject but I think it’s a possibility. However if anyone has any thoughts on this please leave a comment in the comment section.

written by: Matthew Trammell

Changing To Green (Emanuel Gonzalez)

CHANGING TO GREEN

I find Colin beaver to be an incredibly brave man I would not be able to do with out more than half of the thing he left behind on his quest to be green. But with out a doubt he is nothing but inspiration to us all, his proof that we can all change to green if we really wanted to.

One of the first questions when trying to become greener is always what can I do with out, this is always the first and hardest step; being honest with your self and eliminating the stuff you really don’t need. First thing that comes to my mind is what is the most toxic object that I use? For me it would be oil paint but this is my problem. As a painter I cant give up my paints because that’s how I would make my income there for I would absolutely not stop from using them.

But in my opinion going green does not mean you need to kill everything that is not exactly perfect to the environment like Colin beaver did in his film. I think is more about knowing what you can leave out of your life to become a better person.

Emanuel Gonzalez

Video Link :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWAbuc2WpuE