Katie

Week Four: Sustainability and Food Over the past three or four weeks, the major under-lying theme of these posts has been sustainability. First off, what does it actually mean? Is it the same thing as being green? Using Bilal Bomani's (from Week 2) definition of "green," I would say that sustainability is a smaller part of being "green" - it is the action of preserving energy and resources for future use.

Obviously, many plans of action have been made on how to combat the problem of running out of drinkable water, farm land, and other nonrenewable resources while also keeping costs down. I think that one of the most important issues currently is food. According to [|this article,] approximately 40% of all food in the United States is wasted. Especially since Americans eat more meat per person than any other country, and it takes more resources to produce meat, this is a HUGE waste of resources. Last year, approximately [|52.2 BILLION pounds of meat was consumed by the U.S]. This is about 166 pounds of meat per person per year. That is the combined weight of 2 members of my family (mother and brother). So what can we do to use less resources for food that not only takes more to create, but also has a 40% chance of never being eaten? I think first we need to learn that our eyes are bigger than our stomachs. Have you ever seen the posters that show you that an actual serving size of meat should be the size of your palm or a deck of cards? On many restaurant menus, the actual serving size of steak is often the smallest amount offered. This doesn't encourage eating the amount appropriate for someone. People are not used to eating proper portion sizes, and that is one issue we definitely need to tackle. Over the past 20 to 30 years, portion sizes have doubled or even TRIPLED. And much of this food is thrown away, or eaten entirely, leading to obesity. It's not as if humans evolved to need to eat more in the past 20 years, so this "portion distortion" is a serious problem. Besides portion control, the consumption of meat is another contributor to the waste of resources as mentioned above. Last week, Berenice, who volunteers at the Humane League of Philadelphia, came in to talk to us about the League's mission, treatment of animals, and America's meat consumption. One of the things she spoke about was CAFOs, or concentrated animal feeding operation. This is where "animals are kept and raised in confined situation" according to the EPA's page about CAFOs and AFOs (animal feeding operations). Not only are these often to cruel to animals, but they pose a large environmental threat. For example, cows fart, and a chemical in their farts is methane, which is a greenhouse gas that traps more heat than carbon dioxide. In America, there are approximately 100 million cows used for food. That is a LOT of methane being released into the environment. Another blow to the environment caused by CAFOs is the mismanagement of wastes from the animals that often runs off into nearby water sources, leading to high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus that make the habitat unsustainable. Also with run-off, water can become dirty and unhealthy for humans, and can also carry water-borne diseases. To produce ONE quarter-pounder, 6.7 pounds of feed, 52.8 gallons of water, and 74.5 square feet of land is needed and/or used. And cows obviously produce more than one quarter-pounder, so the sheer amount of land and water needed for one cow is extreme. Becoming a vegetarian or vegan would be the best option in order to cut back on resources used for meat production, but many people do not feel as if they can do that. So here's another option - become a weekday vegetarian like Graham Hill. So, instead of cutting out meat entirely, you can still treat yourself to meat on the weekends, and STILL be consuming less meat and therefore using less resources. In this TED Talk below, Graham Hill explains why he's a weekday vegetarian. media type="custom" key="23279976" Hill begins by reiterating what I have said above, with how meat production uses almost 100 times more water than the production of most vegetables. He then says the many reasons for why he should have become vegetarian, one of them being that eating meat everyday increases the risk of dying by 33%. Then Hill says he felt as if he wasn't quite ready to go from being a meat-eater to a vegetarian - which is probably something many people feel. He proposes a program called "weekday veg." You can still eat meat, but in a structured, restricted way. Since you are not eating meat for 5 days of the week, you are cutting your meat consumption by 70%! There are also so many benefits to becoming a weekday vegetarian if you are not yet comfortable with becoming a full vegetarian. You live longer, you save money, you lessen pollution, etc. So this is my take on sustainability and what we can do to promote being "green." Week Three: "Cancer Villages" In class this past week we discussed how observing and counting the "class" of the insects in an area can determine how polluted the area is. Unfortunately, there aren't multiple species of humans who have extremely varying degrees of sensitivity to pollutants and it may not be evident that there is a serious issue until it's too late - like getting cancer, for example. In China, the phenomenon of "cancer villages" has become a reality and is a serious issue. There is an extremely high concentration of people getting cancer in this particular region of China, which is one of the largest industrial centers in the country, and the __largest__ textile factories. Volunteer scientists comissioned by Greenpeace found over a dozen toxic chemicals (like Chromium-6, a known carcinogen). The specific levels of Chromium-6 in the river is 240 times higher than the allowed amount in drinking water in the USA. This clearly shows that the drinking water in this area is not safe at all. Especially since this water is the same water used to grow crops, like rice paddies, the food is not safe either. There are also mounds of chemicals, such as Chromium-6, near food sources. Unfortunately, since these farmers are so poor, even though they know that the food is contaminated, they have no choice but to sell it into China's food supply. Especially with rain, these mounds of sludge (one in Yunnan is estimated to be 300 MILLION pounds) often runs off into the river and after rainfall the river is described as bright yellow. Environmental activists try to petition the factories, but there has been no response. People have also spoken to the local officials, who admit there is a problem but have never mentioned any specific solutions. As one farmer who is concerned about the pollution says, "Ordinary people can never fight the officials and win." This is an indicator that environmental change is not a big problem in the officials' eyes, which is an issue because China is now one of the largest economies in the world and has the largest population.

media type="youtube" key="WqTZWFJ17pU" width="560" height="315" align="center"

media type="custom" key="23198732" align="center"

In this TED Talk, Bill Davenhall speaks about how the health care industry needs reform. He always thought he was healthy but he suddenly got a heart attack. Then he realized that it was because of the places he had lived. For example, he grew up in Scranton, PA, where he constantly inhaled high concentrations of sulfur and methane. Then, he lived down in the South and lived next to a rubber manufacturer called __Rubbertown__ - which released chloroprene and benzene (known carcinogens) into the air. Unfortunately, it was not visible and as Davenhall puts it, "It was insidious". Mr. Davenhall inhaled that for 25 years, and then he moved to LA where there is particulate matter and carbon dioxide. So, a ton of how healthy you are comes from where you grow up. But, physicians don't actually ask your "place history": even though your origins and where you live (since you spend about 75% of your time there) has a huge effect on your health. Breathing in particulate matter for 30 years is NOT healthy. So, Davenhall believes that physicians should now have a "place history assessment" so that can be a factor as to the condition of your health. But how long would it take to integrate this? And how much money would it cost going back to everyone's health records and recording this information.

For more information, specifically on these villages, follow these links:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/28/world/asia/china-cancer-villages-mckenzie/index.html?hpt=he_c2

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/chinas-toxic-harvest-growing-tainted-food-cancer-villages

Week Two: More Energy-Efficient Jets (and Fuel) I was reading an article from National Geographic about the (lack of) fuel efficiency in jets. Currently, the average mile-per-gallon efficiency of "an average jet" flying domestic flights is 0.54. 0.54 mile per gallon! Moreover, this is a huge increase (about 40%) since 2000. And in larger jets used for international flights, the mpg is 0.27mpg. This is obviously not efficient at all, and with increasing air traffic every year, will be a huge contributor to carbon-dioxide emissions. According to the article, the burning of airplane fuel is responsible for 2-3% of all carbon-dioxide emissions - a number expected to increase 500% by 2050. Besides this, another big reason for working to conserve fuel or creating a better alternative is cost. Even more so than labor, airlines' biggest expenditure is paying for fuel - an approximate $47 billion just for airlines based in the United States.

There are currently many research projects going on to find ways to make planes more fuel-efficient. One of the proposed ideas is composite ceramics. The reason ceramics may be a good idea is because they can withstand hotter temperatures (up to 1,500C). This allows for hotter combustion of air and the fuel which, apparently, could prove to be more efficient. The nickel-based alloys can't withstand as much heat as ceramics, so a shift in plane materials to ceramics could prove to get more mileage per gallon. But, ceramics alone are very brittle and cannot bend. So, scientists have developed metals with ceramic fibers so the composite has ductility while also withstanding hotter temperatures. Hopefully, more ceramic composite materials will be incorporated into jet planes, thereby increasing the fuel efficiency.



A second example is the "flying wing." This idea proposes that rather than having the classic wing structure, move to a more manta-ray shaped silhouette. Apparently this shape is much more aerodynamic and would use less fuel. BUT, the current shape of commercial airplanes is able to withstand more pressure and regulate the cabin pressure. Another issue is that a plane with this shape would be very, very heavy. Currently, scientists at NASA are developing lighter, while also strong materials to build the planes out of (perhaps the ceramic composites?). With these two new developments, planes can soon become much more fuel-efficient that they have in the past.



If interested in learning more about other NASA research projects, follow this link.

Another way to increase fuel efficiency is not in the actual plane model, but the fuel itself. According to this TED talk, NASA is developing plant fuels as an alternative to the current fossil fuels used in planes now. But before going into more detail about that, Mr. Bohami brings up an interesting point about what being "green" really means. Being "green" is now a trend - with companies labeling many things green. But are they actually green? Some simple (but overlooked) criteria: is it sustainable? (meaning: is the item preserving energy and resources for future use?); is it alternative? (is it leaving a smaller carbon footprint than what is normally used?) and is it renewable - does it come from natural resources that can be replenished?

Using these criteria, what NASA is working to develop - plant fuels - is definitely "green". Not only does it have all three criteria, but it also has directives that will truly change and help the world. NASA's goal is to not only create a more efficient fuel, but to do it using saltwater, and without using farmland or food crops. Combining all of these resulted in the GreenLab Research Facility. This lab's goal is to produce the "next generation's aviation fuel using **halophytes.**" Halophytes are plants that can survive on saltwater. This is not a food crop, does not use arable land, and it does not use freshwater. Another plant the research facility is using is algae. In order to grow the algae, and produce a lot of it, the lab is using an "open pond" system where algae is grown in a racetrack design promoted to move using waves. When watching the TED talk, Mr. Bomani explains each obstacle the team at GreenLab was faced with, and how they tried to overcome it - a huge obstacle being price. What the Lab has done with research on creating biofuel is amazing, and will hopefully be implemented globally very soon. media type="youtube" key="GCOc31fQi7A" width="448" height="251" TED Talk- Bilal Bomani: Plant fuels that could power a jet

Week One: Sustainable Architecture

This past year, I was privileged to hear about the Kohler Environmental Center, during a visit to a certain school. Unfortunately, we did not have time to actually see the center, but what I heard about this building was exciting. This building might actually be one of the coolest things ever. It is not a form of biomimicry - which is looking to nature to help solve problems - but is sustainable architecture.

media type="custom" key="23070022" align="center"

Basically, students who will be fifth or sixth formers (11th and 12th graders) at Choate Rosemary Hall in Connecticut apply to spend one year in the KEC and base their curriculum off of environmental issues. For example, the standard fifth former English course will be replaced by studying books such as Silent Spring while studying at the KEC. Other courses include Environmental Economics and Nature Photography. This building on Choate's campus has an LEED Platinum Building Certification - meaning that it was built following guidelines to be "green." While living in this building, students learn to live while consuming zero net nonrenewable energy. For example, the eggs they eat are taken from chickens raised on the land next to the KEC. There are solar panels on the roof, and the greenhouse - where the students grow ALL of the vegetables they consume - is powered by waste oil.





The purpose of this is to promote environmentally friendly practices and to teach students about the impact their actions have on the world. To learn more, follow this link: http://www.choate.edu/academics/special_environmentalimmersion.aspx

While the Kohler Environmental Center is extremely cool, and teaches people about the severe problems we have with energy consumption and the environment, many schools do not have the resources to build and maintain this sort of facility. So, my question to you is, is there another way to have a program like this that is more affordable so everyone has this kind of opportunity?

As mentioned above, students grow all of their own vegetables and raise livestock, if people began to do that again, that would be more eco-friendly, but is there a way to integrate that into the lives and homes of people who live in the city? Another thing mentioned in the video was the question of whether sustainable designs increase life quality? In my opinion, living in the KEC would improve life quality because you are growing your own food and learning in a new environment, or living in the Mountain in Copenhagen - a building that houses parking lots and apartment complexes that are in a stair shape - where each floor receives sunlight so inhabitants can have their own gardens even though they are in the middle of the city.

I think that in the next few years sustainable architecture will begin to be evident in every new building being built, and people will have more access to growing gardens among other environmentally-friendly practices.