Friday, April 22nd isn’t just Good Friday. It’s also Earth Day, and in celebration, Vancouver’s youth have organized a parade and festival! I’ll be there with my bicycle and as many dorky treehugging pins as I can dig up. (Find me if you’d like a Vote Environment button with Suzuki’s retro face on it!)
Coincidentally, this is the 41st Earth Day and, on May 2nd, Canada has its 41st federal election. Before you head to the polls as early as this weekend — because you ARE voting (or if you’re a minor, telling your parents to vote), right? — think about how important it is to you to have clean air, clean water and healthy food to eat. Think about what kind of world today’s youth will be facing in the future if climate change isn’t mitigated today, if oil spills continue, and if our precious salmon fail to thrive. If you’re a youth yourself, what do you want the world to look like? We can take many actions ourselves, but Canadians understand the government wields the biggest power to make sweeping changes in the areas where consumers have little influence. And the Canadian government needs to know that we care about our environment.
Saturday night, people around the world will be participating in Earth Hour (8:30 pm local time) and taking a stand against climate change. We participants — over 1 billion last year in 128 countries — recognize that energy conservation and sustainable, clean energy solutions are crucial in making sure we have clean air and clean water now and long into the future. But WWF encourages us to go beyond energy and make everyday positive changes in our lives that, in myriad ways, help the planet just as much as they help us.
The Earth has limits just as our bodies do, and those of us paying close enough attention have noticed over the last few decades the changes that have made our natural systems unhealthy, and us along with it. We don’t have to look far to see it. That also means we don’t have to look far to see solutions. You, your neighbours, and your friends can all have a positive contribution that together adds up big time. Look at what powering off for just an hour can do:
In 2010, energy consumption for that hour dropped 1.4 percent province wide, with Burns Lake, BC, reducing its consumption by a whopping 7 percent. According to BC Hydro’s Team Power Smart, “If British Columbians implemented the same conservation measures (as they did in 2010) for just one hour every evening, the combined savings would be enough to power close to 2,200 homes for an entire year.” — Granville
Yesterday, I bought GOOD Magazine‘s energy issue. I spend a good deal of time drooling over their infographics, and their design in general, and delighting in navigating their information. Fortunately, they grace us with their online versions. (Their latest visualizes where the next earthquake is most likely to hit.)
In the midst of Japan’s disaster, it’s hard to find an item in their website’s environment section that isn’t about that, and given the discussions about nuclear power, I thought this particular interactive infographic not about Japan but about one of the world’s biggest energy consumers, would be relevant.
GOOD breaks down US energy sources and where it gets used. Petroleum, natural gas, and coal are the heavy hitters, with nuclear in fourth place a ways behind, but the government is interested in more nuclear power. It appears more than half of the country’s energy is wasted, which brings me to question why more isn’t being done to mitigate the wastage, and to reduce overall consumption, instead of constantly focussing on extracting and generating more.
While searching for articles more in-depth on the first issue here, I came across some interesting finds. If you can read between the lines, you’ll figure out my headline. (Unintentional cheesy rhyming.)
The nuclear plant explosion caused by Japan’s magnitude 8.9 earthquake, and potential of further danger, reminds us just how risky and costly nuclear power is, says Greenpeace. Writes Ariel Schwartz for GOOD, “Nuclear power plants aren’t cheap, either. Reactors cost billions of dollars to build, which is why there are only 104 operating in the entire country [US] and why they’re all old — all of these plants began construction in 1974 or earlier.” And I think we can all agree a wind or solar farm is far more attractive than a nuclear power plant. Speaking of solar farms, this farmer is harvesting the sun along with his wheat.
I recently wrote about New York City’s transportation and public space plans and progress. (It was written too quickly and wasn’t very thorough unfortunately — a product of daily blogging.) Hot on those heels, today’s Vancouver Sun opinion piece may spur a little competition if not debate over whether NYC does indeed take the green cake in North America. With Vancouver’s plans unfolding, the Big Apple may not hold on to this position, but this kind of competition is good. Among American cities, however, I’m torn between Portland and Manhattan as the greenest. (The author doesn’t mention Mexico.) To be convinced, I’ll be hearing David Owen’s argument at his lecture, Why Manhattan Is the Greenest City in North America, Thursday, March 17. (Vancouver Playhouse, 7:30pm. Free. Register with lzanatta [at] telus.net)
Del Monte has officially gone bananas backwards by introducing individually-wrapped bananas — as if nature hadn’t already done the job. The bags, apparently containing a “Controlled Ripening Technology”, are supposed to extend the shelf life by up to six days.
James Harvey, Del Monte’s UK managing director, told the Fresh Produce Journal: “Del Monte’s new CRT packaging is designed to provide significant carbon footprint savings by reducing the frequency of deliveries and the amount of waste going to landfill. The packaging is also recyclable.” — Mail Online
Uhhh-huh. Funny, I wasn’t aware of this landfill burden that biodegradable bananas are causing. Hmm, wouldn’t it be cheaper and simpler to just buy what you need, solving both the “frequency of deliveries” and “amount of waste” problem and saving the money lost on wasted food and the cost of dealing with the plastic (landfill or otherwise) and avoiding this higher-priced packaged banana? Or, you know, storing your bananas properly and composting? Clearly Del Monte is out to make extra money under the guise of “food waste reduction” in a day and age when people are starting to be critical of excess packaging. (Notice Harvey said recyclable and not biodegradable?) Since when is the banana peel itself not good enough?
As my colleague said, if your bananas are getting too ripe, make some banana bread.
The city is well-known for its cycling culture — 3.9% of residents make their trip by bicycle, beating out Vancouver at 3% (we’re not even in second place!). With the city’s investment in expanding its current 300+ mile network, they’re bound to shoot ahead. (Copenhagen still takes the cake by a long shot.) Bicycle transportation planner Mia Birk from Alta Planning + Design was recently in Vancouver to show us the quick and successful improvements she was involved in to bring more and safer bike lanes to Portland. The results? More cyclists, fewer crashes, less traffic. Their process involved community engagement as well, which isn’t easy. The city’s mayor, Sam Adams, was here a couple years ago to talk about active transportation in Portland. They take it seriously.
It starts out pretty depressing, but the TIME article “Foodies Can Eclipse (and Save) the Green Movement” is an interesting read that shows both our progress and how far we’ve yet to go in achieving a sustainable, healthy food system. Bryan Walsh’s hopeful prediction of success and what it means for the environment as a whole is an interesting perspective with which I generally agree.
The Minister of the Environment oversees the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, which states on its website: “Our role is to provide Canadians with high-quality environmental assessments that contribute to informed decision making, in support of sustainable development.”
The Agency’s commitment to sustainable development (SD) is ensconced in the preamble to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (the Act), established in 1995:
…The Government of Canada seeks to achieve sustainable development by conserving and enhancing environmental quality and by encouraging and promoting economic development that conserves and enhances environmental quality. …Environmental assessment provides an effective means of integrating environmental factors into planning and decision-making processes in a manner that promotes sustainable development.
Sounds great! To BC citizens’ delight, they blocked the Prosperity Mine development in BC (Jim Prentice’s parting gift). But since new Environment Minister Peter Kent’s appointment, all I have heard him do is defend and spew lies about the oil sands.
“I have a feel for the sensibilities of the people, of the environment,” Mr. Kent says, yet he seems clueless that the majority of Canadians are concerned about climate change, something about which his government is clearly not. Otherwise the Conservatives would be taking leadership on greenhouse gas reductions and fighting climate change. Instead, they block international consensus in order to preserve the economy — an economy that cannot function without the environment. And why is the environment the last item on Kent’s website’s quicklinks list?
Does the Minister not know his own ministry’s mandate? Minister Kent is spending more time protecting the economy than the environment, though if he did his homework, he’d understand they aren’t mutually exclusive.
Well, at least there’s some good news, from the United States.
It took me almost four years to find out that in 2007 the US Department of Agriculture approved commercial production of the first genetically modified food crop containing human genes, a “laboratory-created rice [that] produces some of the human proteins found in breast milk and saliva.” In my head, my reaction to this was incredible disgust mingled with angry expletives and a little bit of fear. From what I’ve learned about genetically modified organisms, this paves the way for the seeds to be patented — in other words, effectively patenting human genes. Patenting pig genes was bad enough.
I’m extremely skeptical that the “good intentions” of treating “children with diarrhoea, a major killer in the Third World”, are actually valid. Genetic modification has a history of being touted as a way to solve food shortages, but they wind up leaving GM farmers poor, and organic farmers sued when seeds contaminate their crops. As for these children, attempting to treat them with GM products — any negative consequences of which may be unknown — is akin to us focusing the bulk of our efforts on curing cancer and diabetes and almost completely ignoring prevention. We should be ensuring access to healthy food, clean water, and education. Whatever Monsanto and other GE agribusinesses say about solving developing nations’ problems with their products is complete bullshit.
Coincidentally, this is the 41st Earth Day and, on May 2nd, Canada has its 41st federal election. Before you head to the polls as early as this weekend — because you ARE voting (or if you’re a minor, telling your parents to vote), right? — think about how important it is to you to have clean air, clean water and healthy food to eat. Think about what kind of world today’s youth will be facing in the future if climate change isn’t mitigated today, if oil spills continue, and if our precious salmon fail to thrive. If you’re a youth yourself, what do you want the world to look like? We can take many actions ourselves, but Canadians understand the government wields the biggest power to make sweeping changes in the areas where consumers have little influence. And the Canadian government needs to know that we care about our environment.
Photo by 
Photo by 
Photo by 
Photo by 
Update: The Tyee blog The Hook reports