Colloquium Blog #10

Calculate your ecofootprint at: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/. How did you fare? Click the explore scenarios button. What behaviors could you modify (be reasonable now!) to reduce your footprint? What is the resulting value? Assume the average American ecofootprint is 4.6 (earths). If everyone lived like you do, what is the maximum population that earth could sustain (according to this calculator)?

                                 

After calculating my ecofootprint, I fared at 4.7 Earths. When I first saw my results, I was shocked.  I didn't think that I lived such a wasteful lifestyle.  Unfortunately, this is close to the norm for most people.  We only have one Earth, and if everyone lived as I did, we would need to start looking for other planets to call home base.  This calculation really put me to thinking.  If I recycled more, bought fewer books and turned to e-books, and borrowing books from others, bought a car with greater mileage, and own a house that is eco-friendly, I was able to lower my footprint to 4.3.  I won’t be able to purchase the new car and house now, but for the future, I know what the most environmental investment will be, and therefore further lower my ecofootprint, in the long run.      

Colloquium Blog #9

Is energy too cheap? Is conservation a dirty word? What would you say to “Jimmy Cardigan”? With regards to alternative energy sources (renewable's) are you a "free-marketeer" or proponent of government intervention to steer us away from fossil fuels? In your opinion, what type of renewable energy has the most upside potential? What steps can you take 1) tomorrow and 2) within the next five years to reduce your energy footprint?

Energy is worth 10 cents per kilowatt hour. Many people would say that this isn't much, but if you calculate the amount of energy that a household uses in one day, its more than what you'd think. I personally do believe that energy isn't too cheap, but I do think that the price should go up. If energy was more expensive, even if it was by a couple more cents, more people would be willing to change their lifestyles so that they are saving money, thus saving energy. Saving money has a better ring to it, for most people, than saving the environment. Conservation is not a dirty word, but a word that needs to be instilled into our daily lives. This means turning the sink off when we brush our teeth, not letting the shower run, turning the lights of when someone leaves the room, and so on. This may come to a surprise, but these slight alterations really make all the difference, in the long run. 

With regards to alternative energy sources, I would tell Mr. Jimmy Cardigan that he was a bit too ambitious. He asked the American people to lower their thermostats to a frigid 65 degrees Fahrenheit, during the winter time, and just put on an extra sweater to keep warm. Jimmy Carter had great intentions, but no one in their right minds would make an already cold house even colder, just to conserve fossil fuels.  I think its a great idea if the government manages the way energy gets used throughout the country, but at the current moment in time, fossil fuels is a main source of energy for us. In order to build the eco-friendly devices  fossil fuels have to be used. So for right now, the best we can do is be more sustainable with our resources and conserve them for years to come. 


In my opinion, I would say that using solar energy seems to be the most sustainable. If there can be mini solar panels on calculators, that take up no space whatsoever, I am sure, that with the right technology, smaller panels, that absorb the same amount of energy as the larger ones, if not more, for households and buildings can be created as well. 


To reduce my energy footprint tomorrow I will recycle more, shut off the water when I am not using it, un-plug any electronics that are not in use, and produce less waste by buying more biodegradable products. As for in five years, I hope to continue the same process but also purchase a car that has better gas mileage, than the cars today.

Colloquium Blog #8

In your view, is climate change anthropogenic (manmade), "natural", or some combination of the two? What (or who) would you consider reputable sources for climate change information? How is climate change portrayed in the media? Does this portrayal make you more or less likely to alter your lifestyle? What do you think the effects of climate change will be on your children and grandchildren?

In my view, climate change is due to a combination of both anthropogenic and natural causes. I believe that man has sped up the process by emitting an excessive amount of fossil fuels into the atmosphere, drilling for oil, and adding more waste into the environment, amongst many other reasons. The change of temperatures, and the rising and falling of the water levels, has been an ongoing event since the beginning of time. Through the division of the super continent, Pangaea, through the cold Ice Age, and so on. The Earth's climate is a cycle, that changes every hundred thousands of years. Therefore, this proves that the climate change is due to natural causes, but the fact that it is occurring at such a rapid pace is due to mankind. Climate change is portrayed in the media to be explicitly man-made.

The media at first started out by calling it Global Warming, and now they are calling it Global Cooling. I feel as if the media is aggressively pushing the green movement to the public's attention. Wherever you turn, the "green" movement is everywhere. I personally do not mind it and am for the movement, except I don't just blame humans as the sole cause of the climate change. The green movement has taught me to recycle and be more resourceful, which is a positive lifestyle change. 

For my future my children/grandchildren, I believe that the climate change will cause harm if we don't take sustainable measures now. We have already increased the hole in the ozone layer, which has caused multiple of negative effects already. We don't need to make it any bigger. In order to have a better future, we must establish better methods and implement them on a worldwide scale.

Colloquium Blog #7

Hypothetical scenario – ArborGen (a biotech company) has expressed a desire to plant test plots of genetically modified eucalyptus here at FGCU! This GM eucalyptus has been engineered with enhanced cold tolerance. This allows it to grow not only in Southwest Florida, but potentially as far north as South Carolina. As an eco-aware citizen, the USDA has subpoenaed you to testify on the merits and pitfalls of this plan. Do some research on the web and prepare a brief statement to the USDA addressing the following questions:

•         What is known about the ecology of the eucalyptus tree in general?

•         What are the benefits of this technology?

•         What are some of the potential intrinsic concerns?

•         What are some of the potential extrinsic concerns?

•         Can reasonable and cost-effective steps be taken to mitigate these risks?

Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

The eucalyptus tree can adapt itself to live in areas with a warm climate. It is a fast grower, and can reach heights of 40-45 meters, or 13-15 feet. By bioengineering the eucalyptus to withstand colder temperatures, allows it to live in almost any climate. This tree is predominantly harvested by commercial paper industries. The benefits of this technology are few, the fact that more trees can be planted in different regions of the United States, means that there is an increase in capital for the paper industries. The major issues with the eucalyptus are that it intakes a lot of water, and is extremely flammable. The U.S. Forest Service stated that this tree lowers water tables, so much that it is capable of eliminating seasonal streams. This drainage leads to longer lasting droughts, and for people who do not have access to a reliable water supply, this affects their entire livelihoods. The fact that this tree is highly flammable means an increase in the risk of wildlife fires.

Some potential intrinsic concerns are that the ecosystem at FGCU will be negatively affected, and many of the rare flora and fauna will suffer because of it. CBS News revealed that, “the commercial paper industry's plans to plant forests of genetically altered eucalyptus trees in seven Southern states have generated more cries from critics worried that such a large introduction of a bio-engineered nonnative plant could throw natural ecosystems out of whack” (CBS Interactive Inc, 2010).  FGCU was built on a nature preserve, and so therefore it should be. The eucalyptus tree will absorb much of the water, making the area more dry, which kills the other plants in the process. If there is a wildfire on campus, it won’t just be the ecosystem that gets affected but everyone who is on campus.

Some of the potential extrinsic concerns are that the eucalyptus tree is known for being a carrier of the fatal fungal pathogen, Crytococcus Gattii, which can cause fatal fungal meningitis among people and animals that inhale the trees spores. If more of these trees continue to be planted, then this fatal fungus will be creating a habitat in the ecosystem. This is extremely dangerous, and if a host tree is planted on FGCU, then there will be many people and animals that will need immediate aid.

There are cost-effective steps that can be conducted to mitigate these risks like planting few eucalyptus trees, planting them away from other plants, and ensuring that none of the trees are infected with Crytococcus Gattii. In the end, the benefits do not outweigh the risks. This tree will put a strain on FGCU’s ecosystem and as a result will increase the costs to have to maintain it.

Interesting News Article About The Eucalyptus: 

CBS Interactive Inc. (2010, June 7). Altered Eucalyptus Tree Plan Triggers Concern. Retrieved February 27, 2011, from CBS News Tech.: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/07/tech/main6557285.shtml

ECHO Fieldtrip Blog

What was your overall opinion of ECHO? Did anything in particular stand out? How do the examples that were showcased compare to your view of "American" agriculture? Do you feel that their work is relevant to the developing world? What is "appropriate technology"? Would you be interested in performing your service learning with this agency? Why or why not?

ECHO is by far one of the most interesting field trips I have been on in a really long time. It is fascinating to me the many ways you can grow crops out of resources I could have never imagined. Examples include, using plastic bags, car tires, soda cans, socks, you name it and it was most likely used, as a crop growing method. ECHO was created by founding member Martin Price, as a means to show third world countries sustainable methods for growing crops, finding a water source, and maintaining livestock, in all ways that correlate with each other. Recycled materials are used to house the seeds; recycled materials are used to work with the land to establish an irrigation system, as well as the animals are caged to collect the fertilizer which helps to maintain the seeds. ECHO is divided into different sections according to climate regions: tropical, sub-tropical, highland, monsoon, aired, and so on.

This picture is an example of one of the many methods for irrigating water at ECHO. This device is called a treadle pump. In order for it to work, a person has to push the two paddles with hid/her feet and apply their weight. The faster they "treadle," the faster the water will spill out into the crops. This method helps to control the amount of water being released and therefore allow the families who use it to have enough drinking water.

These examples that were showcased compare to my view to "American" agriculture, in the sense that they both produce crops that can be used to feed many people. Although the methods used, are ones that America used acquire, in order to waste less resources, and use minimal chemicals. The methods at ECHO are more environmentally "friendly" win comparison to typical American not so "friendly" methods. The work at ECHO is extremely relevant to the developing world because this is work that people from these regions, if educated about these methods, can actually do themselves.

The two biggest problems that the developing world is dealing with are poor nutrition and a difficulty in finding a reliable water source. One of the solutions that I learned at ECHO is the use of Maringa seed, most widely known as the “miracle seed.” It gets its name because this seed can grow in almost any severe climate. Its leaves provide 7 times the vitamins of an orange, and over 2 times the amount of calcium, and so on. This plant has many nutritious benefits and can feed a starving family. The seed is also perennial, which means that when planted and grown, the plant will live on for years to come. Another benefit to this “miracle seed” is that when placed water; it will cause any impurities to be moved to the bottom, thus clarifying the water, and killing 90% of bacteria in the process. ECHO has harvested several Maringa seeds and has shipped them overseas to these countries.

Appropriate technology is using whatever resources you have to produce what you need. This form of technology is great for the developing countries since they don’t have much.  Appropriate technology teaches these people to be innovative and resourceful. An example would be using a car tire, with plastic lining to catch water. Inside the tire there are empty soda cans, use to provide stability, which are then stuffed inside socks, which are used to soak the water and for root attachment. From this crops can be grown.

Goliath Bunny! (Seriously, this thing was huge) =D

After visiting ECHO, if I had the chance to go back I would. This is such a great organization, and more people need to know about it.

Colloquium Blog #5

What are the major elements of "sustainable" farming? How are ecological principles woven into this framework? Do you buy organic or "naturally" labeled foods? Why or why not? Do you feel connected or disconnected to the current food system? What is the role of the "Third Frontier" in this phenomenon? If there were space on campus, would you be interested in growing your own vegetables (or, if the thought of vegetables makes you wince, fruit instead)?

The major elements of sustainable farming are organic pesticides, free range grazing, natural fertilizers (manure, compost, etc.) is on a more local level (no further than 100 miles), and much more. Sustainable farmers use traps to kill animals in comparison to the industrial farmers, that use chemicals to eradicate them. The sustainable farms are usually small and are no larger than five acres. The produce from these farms are mostly seen in local farmers markets. In my opinion, I would say that they are the better looking and tastier produce in comparison to the highly manufactured and chemical induced produce from industrial farms. Ecological principles are woven into this framework because it goes along with its name, it is the most sustainable, and therefore has a lesser impact on the environment. Since less chemicals are used, less chemicals that are being drained into the main water source. Natural fertilizers, help to improve the land, and tend to maintain an ecosystem longer, than by using harmful synthetic fertilizers, which can damage it.

I do not buy organic or “naturally” labeled foods, and if I do it’s on rare occasions. I find them to be over priced and think that the term organic has been used as a mere marketing gimmick. There are products out there that stick true to their promise of being organic, but there are many others that don’t and just say that they are, when in reality the produce were treated with a synthetic chemical. I feel that I am very connected to the current food system. I always look into the ingredients of a product before buying it, and I tend to go for healthier options, over the junk food. The role of the “Third Frontier” in this phenomenon is that people don’t really know what they are putting in their bodies. Many people have no clue as to exactly how many herbicides, pesticides, and other synthetic chemicals were used to grow their food. Many people have no idea as to where the meat that they are eating came from, and the life of the animal that was killed to feed them.

If I had a choice to grow my own vegetables/fruits on campus I would. In fact, there are actually people  who are growing carrots and I believe tomatoes in the outside gardens at the Arts Complex. Not many people know this but it's true. Being able to grow my own food would be a great experience and would also teach me how much work that actually goes into producing the vegetables/fruits. As a plus, it save me time and money from having to head over to the super market as much.

Colloquium Blog #4

In your estimation, what is the most pressing global environmental issue facing us today? Why? If a wealthy benefactor like the Rockefeller Foundation gave you $100 billion to address a global problem, how would you allocate the funds? Would you dedicate 100% to the most pressing issue, or partition the money among many different issues?

The most pressing global environment issue facing us today is the one on sustainability. America is the most affluent country in the world. It is to no surprise why we produce the most waste. It has gotten so bad, that America is even sending some of its trash to other countries. This may reduce the amount of trash buildup in the U.S., but simultaneously it is worsening the waste issue on a worldwide scale. This buildup has a severe impact to the environment. The main issue at hand is that most of waste is not biodegradable, which means that it cannot decompose at a steady rate, it will take years upon years. This explains why so much of it continues to be piled up on top of more trash.  Many animals are dieing because they either are ingesting pieces of trash that are extremely hazardous, or are even eating other organisms that have already done so. In turn, this comes back to the humans because if animals are getting sick, this means that so will the we, in time. We all need to come together to produce less waste as well as strictly  enforce methods of ridding vasts amount of trash, in a way that creates a smaller carbon foot print. 


If a wealthy benefactor like the Rockefeller Foundation gave me $100 billion to help solve this ongoing issue, I would spend a good chunk of it on waste cleanup and the treatment of many animals that have been injured and/or sickened. Before this issue can be ultimately resolved, we must first pick up what was left behind. This will take a lot of money and dedicated people who are willing to volunteer and save the planet. Many organizations need to unite to attack this waste issue from all sides. If this doesn't happen, then it will only persist to worsen, to the point where the horizon would be just another mound of trash, flowing out it into the sunset, and if you ask me, than is not at all a romantic site to see.