First Non-Veggie Meal in a Month

About 23 minutes ago was the end of the official four-week vegetarian stint. So, I'm about to have some Easter ham and sausage that I did not eat earlier today at a family dinner. I'm pretty excited. That being said, I do plan on adhering to my every-other-day vegetarianism indefinitely. See you all on the flipside.

Reflections on ENVS1100: Nature and Society

This blog exists because of ENVS1100: Nature and Society, a course I'm taking. And now this course is coming to an end (although the blog won't be). I have definitely enjoyed the class. It was challenging, but nearly all of the work done was incredibly intellectually stimulating, both on individual case studies and big-picture conceptual material. (My only real qualm was with Silent Spring. It is definitely important in the fact that it brought to light environmental degradation in a time when that was basically not considered at all, but the writing style is, in my opinion, quite boring.)

The course also allowed me to embrace vegetarianism, something I probably would not have had the will to do otherwise. And as my previous posts will reiterate, that experience has stuck with me and has allowed me to prove to myself that I can take on a more environmentally sustainable lifestyle. I also thoroughly enjoyed discussing environmental, political, and societal issues with my fellow students in class. Moreover, it was great to be able to connect with them on the camping trip.

While I was already environmentally conscious before taking this course, it did show me that there are people working at environmental and sustainability problems. There are intelligent and motivated individuals and groups who care about humanity's impact on the world around us.

Photo: space.com

Sports Fix #1

Just wanted to let you all know, if you hadn't heard, that the Detroit Red Wings swept the Phoenix Coyotes in the first round of the NHL playoffs. Go Wings!

Beyond Four Weeks

My vegetarian experiment is nearly over. Sunday at midnight, it will have been four weeks since stopping the consumption of meat. But I am certainly not going to jump back into the carnivorous diet I had before. I've seen that I do have the ability to make changes in my life that have a positive impact on the environment and humanity's sustainability. Right now, I'm thinking that I'll be an every-other-day vegetarian, thereby cutting my meat consumption to half of its normal levels. I can still enjoy meat (which I do truly love), but I won't do it excessively. Also, when I do eat meat, I plan on making it the "center-piece" of the meal less often. I'm going to be back in my hometown this summer, and I'm going to try to convince my parents to do the same thing.

And who knows, perhaps I'll ween my meat consumption even further in the future. I may one day become a week day vegetarian like Graham Hill (see previous post). Regardless, I feel that what I'm doing is certainly a step in the right direction.

And it is small steps like this that we all need to take to ensure environmental integrity and a civilization that will be able to continue into the future. If every person takes a small step, the combined effects are incredible. Even if Americans used automobiles 25% less, the environmental benefits would be tremendous. People tend to become apathetic, assuming that massive change is not possible. But humanity has unbelievable ability to force change through unified action.

This confidence in the ability to change must be coupled with, however, the abandonment of the 19th century industrialist mentality that consumption can, and should, continue infinitely. It is ridiculous to believe that there are infinite resources to provide for humanity, and, moreover, the collection of these resources has no repercussions in terms of surrounding environmental damage or disruption. We have witnessed the edges of the forests, counted the number of fish. We are in a finite, closed system and must work within its boundaries.

Vegetarianism is just one way where we can recognize that there must be responsibility in terms of consumption. I truly hope you consider your responsibility in creating a more sustainable society in whatever way you see fit.

TED talks vegetarianism

TED (originally standing for Technology, Entertainment, and Design) is a very cool organization that promotes the spread of "ideas to change attitudes, lives and ultimately, the world." They do this by providing a platform for these ideas through presentations and conferences. And, the posting of these presentations online has allowed the dissemination of these ideas even faster. The TED series has developed a cult following of people interested in solving the world's problems and discussing humanity's progress.

And lo and behold, there is a lecture on vegetarianism found within the TED database, conducted by Graham Hill. Graham Hill is the founder of the TreeHugger.com, an environmental website, and is a promoter of sustainable lifestyles in general. There's also a short animated feature after the discussion for some reason. You can skip that.




Done watching? Good.

I know that Hill isn't the best public speaker in the world, but his views are very much in tune with a sustainable lifestyle. What surprised me particularly was his statement that livestock produce more greenhouse gases than all global transportation. I had to look this up to be sure, and Hill was right. The facts were confirmed by both the Christian Science Monitor and the Los Angeles Times.

It is irresponsible for our society to eat so much meat, especially when we, as Americans, are also releasing incredible amounts of greenhouse emissions from energy production. But I've said this over and over again in this blog. The word needs to spread about this now. People need to watch videos like this, and read articles on the subject so they can understand how to help the problem.

TED has it right. Information spreading is the name of the game.

Talking With a Fellow Vegetarian

I thought it would be interesting to talk to another vegetarian about the lifestyle. So I interviewed my friend and fellow vegetarian Elise Kokonas, a junior at Marquette University.

Elise became a vegetarian during her sophomore year of high school. There were several catalysts that led to this decision. First, she viewed a video of a cow being slaughtered during a presentation on animal rights and was extremely disturbed by it. Soon after that, Elise came across a piece of entirely clear piece turkey that, understandably, pushed her tastes further away from meat. I can not imagine how a piece of turkey would become clear, but it definitely would not look appetizing. She then did a little more research into the benefits of vegetarianism, and attended an event known as Veggie Fest. Here she learned about the positive environmental impact of the diet and decided to continue with it.

When asked if she actively advocates vegetarianism among friends and family, Elise said that she has, "had [her] moments." She has discussed the benefits of vegetarianism with those around her and will talk about it when it comes up in conversation, but she does not force her diet on anyone. She feels that, in general, people should eat less meat, but she doesn't believe that everyone has to be a vegetarian. I am in absolute agreement with her in this regard.

Elise still eats meat on occasion, particularly when the meal evokes memories of childhood or family. She'll gladly partake in a meat dish prepared by her father during the holidays, for example. She considered a completely vegan diet, but didn't think she would enjoy it. There are simply too many delicious foods with some kind of animal product. Furthermore, those who embrace veganism tend to develop unsocial behaviors because of that diet.

I feel that a stigma is still currently associated with vegetarianism. This is attitude is ridiculous. Vegetarianism is an ideal and well-documented way to help reduce humanity's impact on the environment. Elise is a picturesque example of vegetarianism and the very reasonable life adjustments that come with it. I'd like to thank her very much for allowing me to talk with her.

Music Fix #3

I know you know these guys, you know? The White Album is great late night music.

Carbon Footprint Analysis

Today’s post is focuses on a the carbon footprint calculation presented by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and features an analysis of carbon footprints for two households.

A carbon footprint measurement is the amount of greenhouse gases released by, in the case of this project, a household. Of course, a carbon footprint can be measured for an individual or a larger body of people, such as a company, municipality, or an entire nation as well. In this way the measurement is effective in determining an entity's contribution to global warming. Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas, and the WRI takes this into account by converting other greenhouses gases used into a carbon equivalent in terms of “global warming potential.” The specific unit being used in the calculation is pounds of carbon dioxide per month.

The carbon footprint calculation from the WRI combines driving habits and the amount of electricity, natural gas, heating oil, and propane utilized by the individual or group. However, a true carbon footprint would also account for all the energy used to create and maintain all the products that a person or organization uses. Since transportation and home power usage constitute approximately 40% of all energy used by an average American, this “true” carbon footprint would be 2.5 times the value given by the calculation from the World Resources Institute. For the purposes of the blog, however, I will only be using the original footprint value calculated.

Determining Carbon Footprints of Two Houses

I took carbon footprint data from my house in Kalamazoo and from my Aunt Ginger’s home in Interlochen, MI. I choose her home for comparison because I wanted to see if there were emission differences based on rural and urban settings. Specifically, my aunt, living in a rural village, must commute to work in a larger town and must drive farther for standard day-to-day tasks because of rural dispersal of resources. Furthermore, I wanted to see if there was increased energy use at a home in a slightly cooler climate like the northwest Lower Peninsula of Michigan (where Interlochen is located) compared to southwest Michigan.

It should be noted that because I've only lived in the Kalamazoo house since house since mid-August, I'm collecting data for the two homes between September 2010 and and March 2011 only. Accordingly, data will predominately reflect patterns of winter energy use. Once this data was collected I produced a monthly average rate for electric energy and natural gas use. Transportation figures were averaged on a weekly basis. Also please take not that both houses use natural gas for room and water heating.

My House, Kalamazoo, MI

3 residents

Car1: 60mi/week, 23mpg

Car2: 18mi/week, 22mpg

Car3: 70mi/week, 26mpg

277.57 KWh/month

6.65 mcf natural gas

1835lbs carbon dioxide per month (below national average)

72% Home Energy, 28% Transportation Energy

Interlochen, MI

2 residents

150mi/week transportation, 13mpg

446.71 KWh/month

5.97 mcf natural gas

2472lbs carbon dioxide per month (approximately at national average)

60% Home Energy, 40% Transportation Energy

I think it is very clear that my aunt's transportation played a major factor in her increased carbon footprint. She traveled farther and with far worse gas mileage. This makes sense as she has a large pick-up truck and must travel into Traverse City for work at her office (a drive of about 12.5 miles). What I can not ascertain, however, is how my aunt's home used so much more electricity than mine. Perhaps this energy went to a dishwater and a washer and drier for clothing? My house does not have such equipment and her home does. This is a possibility, but I can not be certain.

I believe that my greater rate of natural gas use can be attributed to two major factors. First of all, there is an extra person in the Kalamazoo house, meaning extra showers that use extra natural gas to heat water. This heating use would probably add up fairly quickly. Second, the windows in my home let out significant amounts of heat, so more natural gas must be used to maintain the comfortable temperature. My original conjecture that a house farther north would require more heating from natural gas seems to be proven false by this test, but of course a complete analysis of that hypothesis would require a study of more than two homes.

I am happy to be able to say that my home was below the national average for carbon footprint. What makes this most impressive is that this level was obtained during a period dominated by the winter months, which are extremely energy intensive because of heating requirements. My home does not have air conditioning, so energy use in the summer months would most likely not rise significantly.

However, there is always room for improvement, and being below the United States' average of carbon emissions still makes me a large polluter from a global perspective. For example, I should absolutely apply energy-efficient plastic around my windows to prevent heat loss. Furthermore, although my aunt is not above the national average, she really should invest in a car with better gas mileage. Even those who are not the major contributors to the problem must help to alleviate it. As always, we're in this together.

The Amateur Vegetarian

As I type this first sentence, I've completed 10, count 'em 10, days of a vegetarian diet. And I still don't really think I know what I'm doing. But I'm still healthy, so I must be doing something right. Right? Until very recently, I specialized in being a carnivore. Today's post is going to talk about what I've been eating since I decided to step away from meat for a while.

Breakfast
This meal hasn't changed a bit for me. It still usually consists of bread and peanut butter or a bowl of cereal if I have the time. Obviously the abandonment of meat is not going to change anything there. However, when I went out to breakfast at locally-famous Theo and Stacy's over the weekend I did have to pass on my usual Western omelet, instead going for French toast, sunny-side up eggs, and hash browns. A more than adequate substitute in terms of taste and fulfillment.

Lunch and Dinner
Eleven days ago or so, essentially every lunch or dinner I was a part of included meat. Lunch was almost always some kind of cold-cut sandwich or a pizza after a shift in the dishroom at the cafeteria I work at on campus. Dinner generally involved a rotation of frozen supreme pizza, frozen beef burritos, fish, chicken, sloppy-joes, and macaroni and cheese with a hot dog thrown in. Ok, you got me, two hot dogs thrown in.  Don't get me wrong, I still ate a balanced diet. Salads, vegetables, fruit, and pasta were all in the mix. But meat was always present.


While meat isn't my mainstay anymore, I'm still eating similar foods. Bean and cheese burritos instead of beef. Cheese-only pizzas. And still plenty of mac and cheese, but without the hot dogs. I've also started eating some main courses that are meatless to begin with, like red beans and rice. I haven't really tapped the tofu scene at home yet, but I did have an amazing tofu sandwich at the Crow's Nest. (It's on S. Westnedge Ave in the student ghetto. If you haven't been there, you really should make a point to.) And of course, veggies are still a major source of nutrition for me.

Snacks and Other Foods
Snacking hasn't changed that much for me either. I still pop open the bag of chips every other night or so at around eleven or midnight. I used to grab a slice of deli ham or something similar for snacking as well, but the urge to do so has been gone since I began this endeavor. I did buy a protein-substitute drink to make sure I'm still getting proper nutrition. But I haven't had to tap too much into it. I think I'm still getting enough protein from other sources.


Status Report

Important parts of my new diet.

As of right now, I'm actually not missing meat all that much. It's really surprising to me. Sure, I'll see a commercial for a Whopper and think, "Boy, that looks delicious," but I haven't had even the slightest urge to break my new habit. Cheese has become a major part of meals. Maybe it has allowed me to enjoy some of that "heartiness" I enjoyed with meat. And I'm still getting a balanced diet. Peanut butter, nuts, and beans are all helping me maintain my health.

Perhaps my relatively smooth transition from meat is because, as stated before, I am eating foods that are basically the same products, minus the meat itself. But that's just fine with me. I wanted to try vegetarianism because of the environmental impacts of meat consumption, not because I wanted to discover vegetable-centered cuisine. As long as the meat is gone, I'm fulfilling what I set out to do.

So far, the experiment is going pretty well.

Music Fix #2 (a and b)

So I had some Pandora stations going during this writing session. Started with the Black Keys, then I decided to go with Ludwig van Beethoven. You might say that's on odd combination. You'd be correct in that assessment. Nothing like some classical and rock.

from Wikipedia Commons

from Wikipedia Commons

Well that was a little terrifying.

I just read the first two chapters from Bill McKibben's Eaarth. And to be completely honest, it scared the bejeezus out of me. These two chapters discuss current climate change facts, the incredible damage that can be done by this change, especially coupled with other human environmental damage and massive resource consumption, and how human civilization has to adjust to changes brought by warming or crumble away. Furthermore, there is discussion of how so far we collectively have failed to do so. The change in some of the planet's dynamics because of climate change leads to McKibben to the conclusion that we are no longer living on the Earth of our ancestors. He states this is a completely changed place.

Satellite imagery of Arctic ice melt.

The facts that McKibben deals to the reader are astounding. The northern polar ice cap is melting, and quickly. In 2008, for the first time ever, enough ice melted to allow for a "Northwest Passage" for shipping through the Arctic Ocean. Hurricane season now lasts for longer periods of time (from July to November in 2008) because of increased air and water temperatures. And the storms are stronger and hitting places they haven't in the past, like Brazil. As tropical climates spread with increased temperatures, so do tropical diseases like dengue fever. The list of problems goes on and on.

And what makes these problems worse is that often our modern economic system handicaps our ability to deal with the problems because of our insatiable need for "growth" in the economy. This growth is a problem because we are attempting to grow on a world with a finite amount of resources. For example, the major source of power industrial society relies on - oil - is going to run out eventually. Some studies have suggested peak oil was reached in 2008.

As this commodity and others, such as water, become more and more scarce, people will cling more and more to the current economic system and the potential for conflicts may rise. We have seen this already as part of the reason for the Darfur conflict. Furthermore, as our attempt to grow falters because of lack of resources with which to expand, there are decreasing amounts resources available to fight environmental degradation. A developed nation, such as the U.S., does not have the resources to help a developing nation such as China embrace green technology. A vicious cycle thus continues with an economic system allowing environmental problems but which is then unable to fight them. McKibben, therefore, suggests we need to embrace an economy that sustains itself, instead of attempting to grow exponentially.

This text had a large impact on me. In fact, I normally drive to my Monday 8:00am biology lecture, but after reading the first chapter Sunday night, I couldn't in good conscience do it. I have always been aware that global warming is an important issue with dangerous consequences, just as I know that consumption levels combined with the number of people on the planet can lead to incredible environmental problems. I suppose I have just never seen all the major issues associated with these two problems stacked on top of one another. Furthermore, I have never been shown examples of how these problems compound with one another from an economic perspective. It has made me look deeper into what I am doing to ensure civilization's continued existence. Perhaps my vegetarian experiment should be permanent.

It is abundantly clear that Eaarth is a much more serious text than McKibben's Hope, Human and Wild. The latter is full of positive examples of sustainability throughout the world that exist despite long odds and can be used as reference points for change in the world. Eaarth on the other hand, points out the underlying problems, which are intimidating if not largely depressing. But, in the last chapters of the book, McKibben does talk about taking action to change society to adapt to the "new planet" we have created through our ignorance.

Action is also what McKibben's organization, 350.org, is concerned about. Through 350.org, McKibben is attempting to raise awareness and mobolize action to curb carbon dioxide emissions (although, as stated in Eaarth, even stopping all emissions now would not come close to alleviating all our problems) and to promote environmental protection and conservation in general. 350.org wants to form grassroots action that will force those in power to act in favor of emission reduction. For example, there is currently a protest campaign against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is believed to be controlled by business interests who benefit from continued hydrocarbon use.

Absolutely, I was frightened by the stew of facts that McKibben serves up in Eaarth. Decreasing carbon dioxide emissions when our economy currently runs on them is no small task. And attempting to solve the problems already occurring from climate change is more than daunting. But it is important that we continue to find solutions. As McKibben states, the fight to change things is where our hope truly lies.

Music Fix #1

I thought it would be cool to let you guys know what I'm listening to while doing these posts. For this previous one it was Radiohead's In Rainbows. If you're not familiar with it, you should give it a listen! Great homework music.

Three Days In

So I began four weeks of vegetarianism on Monday. To be completely honest, I got one last piece of bologna in at about 11:53pm Sunday night. I really do love meat. Feel free to judge me. Now, writing this entry just over 72 hours after that last piece of meat, I'm feeling pretty good. I haven't had an physical withdrawals, probably thanks to the fact that I've kept my diet fairly balanced. I'm keeping up with protein intake - plenty of beans and rice, chick-peas, a meal with tofu, and a protein drink. Hopefully I won't be over-compensating in this regard.

I wanted to use this post to bring to light the environmental benefits of a vegetarian diet, or rather the detrimental effects of meat consumption. This is what really sparked my interest in the vegetarian lifestyle, as opposed to ethical concerns over meat consumption in general. (Although I do feel that factory farms are wrong. But I digress.)

It is important to know that livestock are incredible sources of greenhouse gases, namely nitrous oxide and methane from digestive processes. The EPA has stated that livestock are the number one source of methane pollution in the U.S. The entire commercial process of meat production releases much more carbon dioxide than crop production per calorie produced. Eleven times more in fact, according to PETA.

Livestock production also has a huge impact on natural resources, a subject near and dear to my heart. (My specialization with in my geography major is environmental analysis and resource management.) The EPA has studied the polluted run-off from factory farms and found that it is a larger pollutant of water supplies than industrial processes. PETA has also pointed to the fact that meat production is less efficient in terms of water use. The production of one pound of meat uses 2400 gallons of water, while one pound of wheat needs only 25 gallons. Furthermore, more and more forests around the world are being destroyed for grazing land for livestock. This results in decreases in biodiversity and loss of those forests as sinks of carbon dioxide.

To read more on the environmental impacts of meat consumption, visit PETA's website on the subject. I realize that PETA may seem like a biased source, as they would like to see meat consumption ended regardless of environmental impacts,  but their calls for decreasing levels of animal agriculture are supported by the U.N., the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Lance Armstrong Foundation (a.k.a Livestrong) and other organizations. Livestrong's position on the subject, for example, can be found here.

I firmly agree that meat production and consumption should be decreased. The environmental impacts are, as you can see, quite significant. But I do not believe we have to get rid of meat consumption completely. For me, a good steak is one of the great joys of life. And no one should take away hot dogs on June day at a major league ball park. But could I get by on only two steaks a year, instead of the six or so I eat now? Absolutely. Do I need meat once a day? Of course not. We all need to start taking steps in this direction to ensure more efficient resource use, a better environment, and a bright future.

We can do it.

Kerala's Steps

photo from billmckibben.com

Bill McKibben, in Hope, Human and Wild, focuses on what this blog is attempting to discuss - the need for sustainability of human action, the promotion of environmental integrity, and the recognition that we have the capability to do great harm to the natural world.

One example McKibben gives of a place that has achieved a high level of economic, social, and environmental sustainability is the Kerala State in southern India. Kerala's political and social traditions have in fact fostered a community that is responsible in terms of resource use and consumption while also creating an educated and democratic citizenry. Peaceful protest is not unusual throughout the region, and a strong Leftist foundation, even among the more conservative politicians, has resulted in high literacy rates (96%, an unheard of rate globally in a developing nation) and quality healthcare. This literacy, and general educational quality, has given citizens of Kerala an incredibly strong understanding of the world around them, with a better knowledge of world events than most Americans.

What is even more amazing about the Leftist spirit of the state is that it does not come with the authoritarian figures for which socialism and communism have become infamous. The government has transfered power multiple times from conservative politicians to the Communist Party and back. As someone who leans pretty far left myself (although I'm certainly not an out-and-out Communist), I found this incredibly intriguing and hopeful for the future of socialist thought around the world.

What is truly amazing about the health and educational quality of Kerala is that it came about without massive industrialization or trade with the West. Consequently, however, Kerala is still impoverished in terms of modern economic standards. Unemployment rates are high. Disposable cash is at a minimum, as is material wealth. You will not see a TV in every home. In fact, you won't see a bed for every resident. On the other hand though, Kerala has the ability to feed itself via local farming, it has a rich cultural tradition that is still enjoyed by all, and it has an incredibly small impact on the environment, unlike the consumerist economies of the developed world. This diminished impact on the environment stems from the lack of "convenience technology," which is over-utilized in the West, such as multiple cars per household and the unnecessarily large "McMansions" of Suburbia. Furthermore, the people of Kerala are intelligent, content, and not starving.

McKibben is making the point that the Western ideal stating of ever-constant capitalist economic development and continued consumption is not the only way to lead to a better human existence. Furthermore, and I agree, the exponential nature of consumption that developed nations seem to have embraced will lead to environment disaster, as it is likely that if all people on Earth lived as Americans do today, there would not be enough resources to go around and pollution levels would be astronomical.

Kerala is given as an example of a society in which the environment is respected, resources are saved and shared, and human dignity is placed at a higher level of importance than increased consumption and corporate expansion. That being said, I do not completely agree with what appears to be McKibben's all-out attack on Western consumerism. While I do feel that developed society consumes far too much,  I do still believe that we can obtain an ecological balance with our surroundings without having to forgo enjoyable things like cable television and convertibles. But perhaps I'm just being defensive about the lifestyle have become accustomed to. We'll save the self-psychoanalysis for another post.

Absolutely, however, McKibben is not overestimating Kerala's power as an example of sustainable development in all realms of life. It is possible for human society to have relevant modern existences and live with, and not fight against, the environment around them.

Small steps brothers and sisters, small steps.

So it begins.

As of 12:00am March 28, I have started a vegetarian diet. Updates to come.

Kicking it off.

Hello all!

Thanks for reading the blog. Just a little info on what I, Ben Roush, will be discussing in it, at least for the next few weeks:

The importance of sustainability for the continued existence of human civilization will be the central theme. It is my belief that we can maintain advanced technological society while also respecting the integrity of the environment and managing resource use in a responsible manner. This ideal will be coupled with a few other topics.

First will be a personal sustainability project of mine. Namely, a stint of vegetarianism. I want to see how the lifestyle affects me on a day to day basis and how it may or may not change my outlook on what I am doing to ensure balance between humanity and the environment. I'll also be posting my thoughts on two books by Bill McKibben about the state of human interactions with the environment and the necessitity for a sustainable human future. And lastly, I'll be comparing and analyzing carbon foot print data between my apartment here in Kalamazoo and my Aunt Ginger's home in Interlochen, MI.

Once we get into May, I'll keep covering sustainability issues, but I'll probably throw some other political, cultural, and, quite frankly, completely random stuff at you too.

Cheers!

-BR