Voluntary Simplicity is a way of life that will fight affluenza. Our American culture has seismicaly shifted to a consumer culture that has impoverished the meaning of wealth. The word wealth now means materials, aesthetics and intelligence but what it represents trully is what we make of it. Wealth means health, social acceptance, healthy ecology, spiritually connected and intellectual. We must learn to live a simpler, more sustainable life.
In a way wealth is what is left when material is taken away. The raw picture of your life is not represented by money or cars.
We must live a self-sufficient self and learn how to live life to its fullest. The following link describes voluntary simplicity and encourages you, ironically, to buy magazines that can help you determine what is it that makes you happy. http://www.simpleliving.net/
My values are headed in the right direction, I have a man who discourages me from purchasing things I do not need and I love him for that. We enjoy going out and spending money on nice dinners but we enjoy so much just staying home and interacting with each other. I live in the country so I do not have the oportunity to buy many clothes other than when I go to the city for school. I do admit that when I am in the city I get that urge to go buy myself something regardless of what it is I always need something. I usually stop myself, I try to sleep on the idea of if I really need that thing, whether it be shoes or a new jacket. I do know that being surrounded by consumers all the time does give me the urge to want those things too but I know better.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Blog 5- Afflenza
Affluenza is a socially contagious condition of the desire to want more things. There is huge evidence around me that this condition is valid and that it is only becoming worst. When I reflect on the people around (my family) I do not see a lack of time, but I do see connections to things that are irrelevant but are a huge part of their lives. For example, my sister has been working for the last 7 years at the same place, which is dont get me wrong a very good thing, but she has not been able to take a vacation in 5 years. She has worked monday to friday every week for the past 5 years. This is shocking to me because her employment could do without her for a bit but they discourage her to take time off. Work is a very important part of all of our lives but everyone needs to get away and meditate, enjoy themselves, relax, and rejuvenate.
Why do we work so much and why is it never enough?
We all work because life in North America requires many things; we need warm clothes, a home, a car, food, and entertainment. These are basic needs which some we could do without but most of us do have them. In North America there is an image put out that values individualism not relationships, family or communities. This image makes us believe we need to look a certain way, or have certain things, but that feeling of fulfillment only last a certain time, then we need to work, rush and do more and more overtime to feel that fulfillment again. The truth is that feeling cna be filled with family and a sense of belonging to something. In my household we value family greatly, I have two older sisters, whom are both on vacation right now and I miss them dearly. My brother-in-laws are gone and so is my one month niece. When they are around I enjoy spending time with them. I always have questions for my older sisters and they are always there to answer them. I am not a materialistic women, I have a car that gets me from point A to point B, and a job that pays the bills while I'm in school. A very good example to prove that I do not suffer from affluenza is that me and my boyfriend plan on getting married this summer and I told him to not get me a ring, well I did say get me a ring made of bamboo for the significance. The point here is he makes me happy, and a legal document proving we are bonded together would make our lives so much easier.
Affluenza can easily be fought, simply by spending more time well not spending money for one, and being outdoors connecting with life whether it be a person, an animal or the supernatural world you feel when entering a forest. Spending time outdoors reduces stress levels significantly, does not cost any money, and is good for your health since your body is exercising itself.
Why do we work so much and why is it never enough?
We all work because life in North America requires many things; we need warm clothes, a home, a car, food, and entertainment. These are basic needs which some we could do without but most of us do have them. In North America there is an image put out that values individualism not relationships, family or communities. This image makes us believe we need to look a certain way, or have certain things, but that feeling of fulfillment only last a certain time, then we need to work, rush and do more and more overtime to feel that fulfillment again. The truth is that feeling cna be filled with family and a sense of belonging to something. In my household we value family greatly, I have two older sisters, whom are both on vacation right now and I miss them dearly. My brother-in-laws are gone and so is my one month niece. When they are around I enjoy spending time with them. I always have questions for my older sisters and they are always there to answer them. I am not a materialistic women, I have a car that gets me from point A to point B, and a job that pays the bills while I'm in school. A very good example to prove that I do not suffer from affluenza is that me and my boyfriend plan on getting married this summer and I told him to not get me a ring, well I did say get me a ring made of bamboo for the significance. The point here is he makes me happy, and a legal document proving we are bonded together would make our lives so much easier.
Affluenza can easily be fought, simply by spending more time well not spending money for one, and being outdoors connecting with life whether it be a person, an animal or the supernatural world you feel when entering a forest. Spending time outdoors reduces stress levels significantly, does not cost any money, and is good for your health since your body is exercising itself.
Blog 5- Restoring Rivers
Life on Earth is dependent on water. Life on land requires clean, fresh water. 
Nowadays controversial fights over water rights are happening in courtrooms and on battlefields.
In this selection, Margaret A. Palmer, and J. David Allen argue that rivers must be restored because they perform essential ecological and social functions such as mitigating floods, providing clean drinking water, removing excess nutrients, and supports fisheries and oceans. The present efforts are not sufficient or equal to the human dependence on these natural systems.
Restoration of waterways is not a luxury it is a national plea. A time where water shortages are becoming more common even in eastern states, when there used to be an abundance of this resource. Aquatic wildlife is going extinct at a much higher rate than terrestrial organisms.
The National River Restoration Science Synthesis does not include evaluation or assessment of actions being taken.
Since people have always chosen to live and work near water, dilution used to be the solution to pollution.
Damming, cutting down riparian forests and filling in wetlands have all been done to ease transportation on water.
The primary reason why rivers and streams are still being degraded today are poor stewardship, human activities and alterations of the landscapes. When land is cleard and replaced with pavement the water now is moved primarily by runoff and taking longer to soak into the soil. This causes many flash floods.
Urbanization and agriculture, two primary issues with runoff contaminents, are tougher to enforce and fix since they are not point source discharges.
The problem is that there are no policies to support restoration standards, to promote the use of proven methods, or to provide basic data for planning restoration.
The solution to pollution is to reform federal, state, and local policies.
There needs to be a method of tracking restoration projects to learn from past mistakes.
There needs to be a national study to evaluate which restoration projects are effective. This is important to make sure projects are doing what they are set to do and that money is well spent.
Existing funding needs to be more effective, replacing and supplementing current funds. There is a large restoration project that is effective, but since the cumulative cost of smaller projects is higher, better coordination needs to happen.
Along with better funding planning and effectiveness, current funding is not enough compared to the benefits that clean, fresh water provides for the ecosystems.
With this said, rivers and streams can once again flow clear and clean.
Blog 5- Towards Sustainable Development
In 1983, the United Nations established a World's Commission on Environment and Development, which was awarded the responsibility of producing a "global agenda for change". The international effort of this agenda was to address global environmental issues while promoting equal economic development. The term "Sustainable Development" has become somewhat of a catchphrase that appears in most discussions regarding environmental issues.
Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The term contains two important key elements: the "needs" of the worlds poor overriding priority; the limitations of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs. Renewable resources need not be depleted provided the rate of use is within the limits of regeneration and natural growth. Non-renewable resources use reduces the stock for future generations.
Thus the goals of social and economic development must share certain features, and must flow from the basic concept of sustainability. Attention must be paid to changes in access to resources, distributions of costs and benefits equitable between generations. Our world where poverty and inequity is evident, we are prone to ecological crisis. Sustainable development requires meeting the basic needs to extend the opportunity for a better life, it requires economic growth where needs have not yet been met.
High levels of productive activity and poverty are related and both endanger the environment. Technological development may solve some immediate problems but lead to even greater ones.
Minimally, sustainable development must not endanger the natural systems that support life on Earth: the atmosphere, the waters, the soils, and the living beings.
One problem is that growth has no limits in terms of population or resource exploitation which is an ecological disaster.
Development tends to simplify ecosystems and reduce their diversity of species. Species, once extinct, are non-renewable.
Overall, sustainable development is a process change which exploitation of resources, action of investments, technological development, and institutional change are interlinked and include both current and future generations.
Sustainable development can be achieved with education, institutional development on strict liability, and law enforcement.
Everything would be better if everyone took into account the effect their own actions upon others. But each is unwilling to assume that others will behave in this socially advantageous way, therefore all continue in a narrow self-interest.
Since the issue of pollution is beyond borders, there needs to be an international cooperation.
Globally, wealthier nations are better placed with their finances and technologies to cope with possible climate change, hence our undesire to stop social injustice.
The role of public policy is to ensure, through incentives, that organizations find it worthwhile to take account for environmental factors in technologies they develop.
There is a need to integrate economic and ecological considerations in decision making, sustainability needs the environment and economics to merge.
Sustainability requires enforcement on responsibilities of people' s impacts of their decisions. This requires a stricter legal framework. But the law alone cannot enforce common interest. Communities' knowledge and support principles need greater public participation in the decisions that affect the environment.
What matters is that the goals take action on national and international development, and the sincerity and effectiveness of these actions.
Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The term contains two important key elements: the "needs" of the worlds poor overriding priority; the limitations of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs. Renewable resources need not be depleted provided the rate of use is within the limits of regeneration and natural growth. Non-renewable resources use reduces the stock for future generations.
Thus the goals of social and economic development must share certain features, and must flow from the basic concept of sustainability. Attention must be paid to changes in access to resources, distributions of costs and benefits equitable between generations. Our world where poverty and inequity is evident, we are prone to ecological crisis. Sustainable development requires meeting the basic needs to extend the opportunity for a better life, it requires economic growth where needs have not yet been met.
High levels of productive activity and poverty are related and both endanger the environment. Technological development may solve some immediate problems but lead to even greater ones.
Minimally, sustainable development must not endanger the natural systems that support life on Earth: the atmosphere, the waters, the soils, and the living beings.
One problem is that growth has no limits in terms of population or resource exploitation which is an ecological disaster.
Development tends to simplify ecosystems and reduce their diversity of species. Species, once extinct, are non-renewable.
Overall, sustainable development is a process change which exploitation of resources, action of investments, technological development, and institutional change are interlinked and include both current and future generations.
Sustainable development can be achieved with education, institutional development on strict liability, and law enforcement.
Everything would be better if everyone took into account the effect their own actions upon others. But each is unwilling to assume that others will behave in this socially advantageous way, therefore all continue in a narrow self-interest.
Since the issue of pollution is beyond borders, there needs to be an international cooperation.
Globally, wealthier nations are better placed with their finances and technologies to cope with possible climate change, hence our undesire to stop social injustice.
The role of public policy is to ensure, through incentives, that organizations find it worthwhile to take account for environmental factors in technologies they develop.
There is a need to integrate economic and ecological considerations in decision making, sustainability needs the environment and economics to merge.
Sustainability requires enforcement on responsibilities of people' s impacts of their decisions. This requires a stricter legal framework. But the law alone cannot enforce common interest. Communities' knowledge and support principles need greater public participation in the decisions that affect the environment.
What matters is that the goals take action on national and international development, and the sincerity and effectiveness of these actions.
Blog 5- Controversy at Love Canal
In this selection Beverly Paigen speaks about the toxic chemicals being disposed of in open lagoons in the Love Canal located in Niagara Falls, New York.
The controversy at Love Canal with its political and economic factors became serious obstacles and raised serious important ethical questions.
The controversy was predominantly political in nature and it raised a series of questions that had more to do with values than science.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 50,000 hazardous waste sites exist in the United States, and 90% of these are potential health threats. This shows that the hazardous waste problem is large, not only because of the number of sites, it is usually close to where people live and work.
In 1942 Hooker Chemical Corporations began filling a half-mile long canal with 21,000 tons of 200 or more chemicals. The Niagara Falls Board of Education approached Hooker Chemical about purchasing the site for a school. Hooker Chemicals claimed that it warned the Board of Education that the site was not appropriate. Later, an elementary school was built in the center of the site and on the north and south portions were sold to developers who built homes alond the banks of the former canal.
In 1978 primary actions were taken by the state in purchasing 239 homes near the canal due to health complications of the families. The houses ouside this barrier were said to be fine, but the community was not reassured since there was seepage through basement walls, chemical odors in homes, and odors at storm sewer openings. The residents also questioned why there seemed to be multiple miscarriages 3 to 4 blocks from the canal.
When Beverly Paigen plotted results on a map, she revealed a strong geographic clustering of disease that was related to stream beds and low marshy areas. In these areas she found an increase in miscarriages in pregnant women who lived in wet homes compared to those who lived in dry homes. Birth defects were also higher in wet homes, among these were minor and more serious birth defects such as heart defects, kidney problems, mental retardation and deafness. Asthma was also of concern along with various symptoms of central nervous system toxicity. Among the most severe nervous system problems only the most severe were chosen for Berverly's study, only the group who admissioned into a mental health hospital and suicide attempts were chosen.
Beverly suggested to the Health Department that the hypothesis that needed to be tested was adverse pregnancy outcomes were more frequent in wet homes than in dry homes.
Hooker Chemical company claimed they used state-of-the-art technology in burying the waste and that they warned the Board of Education not to build a school on the site. The goal of the Department of Health was to protect health, the salaries of the department's workers come from tax payer's, therefore when the health effects were ignored or minimized this was not acting in a manner with its goals and responsibilities for the community.
The failure to resolve any controversy may be advantageous to one side. In this case the state had much to gain from the delay of the warnings. This issue is ethical, it is not about preserving state resources.
Opponents may not agree on the question that needs to be answered. Reactions were angry when the commisioner announced that fetus were at higher risk and only pregnant women would be evacuated.
In any controversy, not one group should be in control of the information gathering process. There must a way developed in providing communities with access to resources and expertise.
At Love Canal, scientists working for the State who disagreed with the officials were demoted, transferred or harassed. Beverly was among those harassed, her ability to raise funds for her research was tampered. Her professional mail arrived already opened, and her office was entered outside of working hours.
Scientists need a code constructed for the openess of data, peer review and criticism, publication of data, and replication of experiments. Beverly requested for data under the Freedom of Information Act but her request was denied.
In an attempt to resolve a controversy, all parties should agree on what issues need to be resolved. Such a logical understanding rarely occurs. It would be wise to include representatives of the local community in these meetings along with policy makers, scientists, outside scientists.
In the controversy at Love Canal, there were several charges that happened. The manipulation of health data, to minimize risk. Unexplained delays before the State was willing to admit a health problem. Demotion, transfers, and harassment of state employees. An an effort from the State to discourage independent professional health studies.
Scientists should adhere to a code for openess of data. Secondly, community involvement should be looked for and funds should be provided for the community.
Many issues at Love Canal were scientific in nature, but they had ethical roots.
The controversy was predominantly political in nature and it raised a series of questions that had more to do with values than science.
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 50,000 hazardous waste sites exist in the United States, and 90% of these are potential health threats. This shows that the hazardous waste problem is large, not only because of the number of sites, it is usually close to where people live and work.
In 1942 Hooker Chemical Corporations began filling a half-mile long canal with 21,000 tons of 200 or more chemicals. The Niagara Falls Board of Education approached Hooker Chemical about purchasing the site for a school. Hooker Chemicals claimed that it warned the Board of Education that the site was not appropriate. Later, an elementary school was built in the center of the site and on the north and south portions were sold to developers who built homes alond the banks of the former canal.
In 1978 primary actions were taken by the state in purchasing 239 homes near the canal due to health complications of the families. The houses ouside this barrier were said to be fine, but the community was not reassured since there was seepage through basement walls, chemical odors in homes, and odors at storm sewer openings. The residents also questioned why there seemed to be multiple miscarriages 3 to 4 blocks from the canal.
When Beverly Paigen plotted results on a map, she revealed a strong geographic clustering of disease that was related to stream beds and low marshy areas. In these areas she found an increase in miscarriages in pregnant women who lived in wet homes compared to those who lived in dry homes. Birth defects were also higher in wet homes, among these were minor and more serious birth defects such as heart defects, kidney problems, mental retardation and deafness. Asthma was also of concern along with various symptoms of central nervous system toxicity. Among the most severe nervous system problems only the most severe were chosen for Berverly's study, only the group who admissioned into a mental health hospital and suicide attempts were chosen.
Beverly suggested to the Health Department that the hypothesis that needed to be tested was adverse pregnancy outcomes were more frequent in wet homes than in dry homes.
Hooker Chemical company claimed they used state-of-the-art technology in burying the waste and that they warned the Board of Education not to build a school on the site. The goal of the Department of Health was to protect health, the salaries of the department's workers come from tax payer's, therefore when the health effects were ignored or minimized this was not acting in a manner with its goals and responsibilities for the community.
The failure to resolve any controversy may be advantageous to one side. In this case the state had much to gain from the delay of the warnings. This issue is ethical, it is not about preserving state resources.
Opponents may not agree on the question that needs to be answered. Reactions were angry when the commisioner announced that fetus were at higher risk and only pregnant women would be evacuated.
In any controversy, not one group should be in control of the information gathering process. There must a way developed in providing communities with access to resources and expertise.
At Love Canal, scientists working for the State who disagreed with the officials were demoted, transferred or harassed. Beverly was among those harassed, her ability to raise funds for her research was tampered. Her professional mail arrived already opened, and her office was entered outside of working hours.
Scientists need a code constructed for the openess of data, peer review and criticism, publication of data, and replication of experiments. Beverly requested for data under the Freedom of Information Act but her request was denied.
In an attempt to resolve a controversy, all parties should agree on what issues need to be resolved. Such a logical understanding rarely occurs. It would be wise to include representatives of the local community in these meetings along with policy makers, scientists, outside scientists.
In the controversy at Love Canal, there were several charges that happened. The manipulation of health data, to minimize risk. Unexplained delays before the State was willing to admit a health problem. Demotion, transfers, and harassment of state employees. An an effort from the State to discourage independent professional health studies.
Scientists should adhere to a code for openess of data. Secondly, community involvement should be looked for and funds should be provided for the community.
Many issues at Love Canal were scientific in nature, but they had ethical roots.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Blog 5- Living My Politics Weekly Spending
My Weekly Spending
Rank Item Place Price
Friday March 12
Good Groceries Food Market $21.71
Bad Beer Bar $20.50
Ugly Gas Shell $30.00
Bad Book Chapters $18.00
Ugly Drinks Boston Pizza $17.00
Saturday March 13
Bad Food Hotel $28.00
Sunday March 14
Ugly Coffee Second Cup $4.90
Monday March 15
Tuesday March 16
Good Bingo Manor $20.00
Wednesday March 17
Ugly Gas Shell $10.00
Bad Beer Bar $15.00
Ugly Coffee Robins $2.00
Thursday March 18
Ugly Gas Shell $45.00
Ugly Car Wash Wand Wash $7.00
Bad Groceries Superstore $14.00
The totals for good, bad, ugly is as follows:
Good= $69.71
Bad= $53.90
Ugly= $112.50
Total= $236.11
The ugly category is the biggest one, it accounts for half of my spending this week. One of the reasons this category is so big is because of gas. I drive to school three times a week by myself because I do not know anyone who goes to school at the same time. My gas for the week was $80.00 even though I drive a small efficient vehicle.
I also included in the ugly section any huge stores that I know is not doing any good environmentally. These are huge corporations that choose to ignore the fact that their products and choices are harming the environment. I went to Superstore this week for a few grocery items, even though I chose to not use plastic bags I know that this is not enough of an action to reduce waste. It is a start though and every small step counts towards a bigger one. The thing with eating organic and local is that it is expensive and inconvenient when it comes to time. I was in a hurry and I did not have enough money therefore I chose to go to the closes market around to where I was at the time. I encourage the pro-active approach that Superstore is taking when charging people $0.05 per plastic bag. It is a small fee and somewhat of a penalty for forgetting our reusable bags. Also it does encourge people to use less bags, encourages filling up bags and discourages people from double bagging everything. The issue I have with this is that currently Superstore is keeping the money to do who knows what with it. I would encourage Superstore to donate the money to local environmental causes, perhaps to better recycling facilities or decrease the price of reusable bags.
Another thing that struck my eye when reviewing my purchases was that I spent $52.50 on booze this week, I do not think this is alot but when you look at it as being 25% of my spending for the week it is quite a bit. I included booze in the bad categorie and not the ugly because I did try supporting my local hotel in my small bar. When coming from a small town, the bar is often the best place to socialize with members of your community.
Basically, what I learnt from this activity was that I have to watch where I spend my money more. Firstly as a student I do not have much and secondly I want to try to make more of an effort to support things I trully believe in. I am slowly making more conscientious decisions everyday.
Rank Item Place Price
Friday March 12
Good Groceries Food Market $21.71
Bad Beer Bar $20.50
Ugly Gas Shell $30.00
Bad Book Chapters $18.00
Ugly Drinks Boston Pizza $17.00
Saturday March 13
Bad Food Hotel $28.00
Sunday March 14
Ugly Coffee Second Cup $4.90
Monday March 15
Tuesday March 16
Good Bingo Manor $20.00
Wednesday March 17
Ugly Gas Shell $10.00
Bad Beer Bar $15.00
Ugly Coffee Robins $2.00
Thursday March 18
Ugly Gas Shell $45.00
Ugly Car Wash Wand Wash $7.00
Bad Groceries Superstore $14.00
The totals for good, bad, ugly is as follows:
Good= $69.71
Bad= $53.90
Ugly= $112.50
Total= $236.11
The ugly category is the biggest one, it accounts for half of my spending this week. One of the reasons this category is so big is because of gas. I drive to school three times a week by myself because I do not know anyone who goes to school at the same time. My gas for the week was $80.00 even though I drive a small efficient vehicle.
I also included in the ugly section any huge stores that I know is not doing any good environmentally. These are huge corporations that choose to ignore the fact that their products and choices are harming the environment. I went to Superstore this week for a few grocery items, even though I chose to not use plastic bags I know that this is not enough of an action to reduce waste. It is a start though and every small step counts towards a bigger one. The thing with eating organic and local is that it is expensive and inconvenient when it comes to time. I was in a hurry and I did not have enough money therefore I chose to go to the closes market around to where I was at the time. I encourage the pro-active approach that Superstore is taking when charging people $0.05 per plastic bag. It is a small fee and somewhat of a penalty for forgetting our reusable bags. Also it does encourge people to use less bags, encourages filling up bags and discourages people from double bagging everything. The issue I have with this is that currently Superstore is keeping the money to do who knows what with it. I would encourage Superstore to donate the money to local environmental causes, perhaps to better recycling facilities or decrease the price of reusable bags.
Another thing that struck my eye when reviewing my purchases was that I spent $52.50 on booze this week, I do not think this is alot but when you look at it as being 25% of my spending for the week it is quite a bit. I included booze in the bad categorie and not the ugly because I did try supporting my local hotel in my small bar. When coming from a small town, the bar is often the best place to socialize with members of your community.
Basically, what I learnt from this activity was that I have to watch where I spend my money more. Firstly as a student I do not have much and secondly I want to try to make more of an effort to support things I trully believe in. I am slowly making more conscientious decisions everyday.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Blog 4- Food Inc. Online Activity
I watched the film Food inc. this past weekend and I have alot to comment about it.
First, the picture of the farm that this movie gives is a pretty close to what I've seen on farms myself. Although this is in the United States mostly, Canada's farms are not too much better than they portray in the film. The industry doesn't want you to know the truth, this is one of the most powerful industry that is completely hidden from us. The family farm has become a factory, producing mass amounts of meat the fastest way possible. Not only do these farms harm the environment more than they should be, they are unethical when it comes to animal and workers health.
McDonald's is the single most largest corporations purchasing potatoes, apples, beef, pork, and chicken. They train their workers to do one thing all day, so they are easy to replace. The top 4 corporations when it comes to money control 84% of the food industry. Therefore McDonald'ds and the 3 others are encouraging alot of food, small amount of land, low cost. The problem with those are farmers feel controlled, animal rights, family farms are no diminishing, and the widespread use of antibiotics has lead to bacteria resistance. The antibiotics used on chickens to make them grow faster and fatter in the breasts, are linked to reproductive problems in humans, as seen also on Erin Brokovich, my favorite movie of all time.
The food that we feed are cattle has also changed alont with farming practices. Cows are evolved to eat grass nowadays they solely live on corn, genetically modified corn that is.
My friend's farm in Beausejour is alot different than what I've seen explain in this film. Ellen has 4 pastures that she alternates her cattle in. Her cattle gets to eat grass in summer in one pasture while the other 3 pastures regenerate. In this film, it said that feeding a cow grass for only 5 days will reduce E.coli in their bodies by 80%. Instead these farms named in this film use ammonia to cleanse the hamburger meat from E.coli.
The truth is the Government is kissing Corporations ass. Corporations making millions of dollars are more protected that humans.
This type of industry has caused obesity and health problems in many Americans. When a family only has 1$ to spent to feed 2 kids there's a problem with our system, and this is the case for many not only in North America but everywhere across the world. These poor diets slows metabolism, has caused diabetes now in children. This has led many to be disconnected and ignorant. How can so many not care or think about where their nutrients are coming from? Our bodies are sacred and we have to start taking care of them, it is only then that our healthcare costs will diminish.
Another truth is that it is not technology that is making good farms, technology is the one ruining it. Farming has been perfectioned from many generations of farm knowledge.
This industry has become so large and simplified that they now need to import illegal immigrants to work in meat packaging factories. Often these factories are built in remote locations therefore the locals have no other choice but to work there. When for example the Mexicans come in, to work for HUGE corporations and get caught it is them that get arrested and charged not the corporations. That is the justice system.
Second example in this film of a huge corporation would be Walmart. As soon as you graps for that rapid growth you view things differently.
We can make a difference by raising awareness to Corporations that we would like to see more organics in their stores.
Farmers life needs to go back to the way it were, their way of life has been revolutionized too much.
This film also talks about Monsanto- Monsanto is stopping farmers from keeping their own seeds, because they put a patent on the genes of these crops, the ones that were genetically modified to obtain the ideal genes. Monsanto hires private investigators to find local farmers who save seeds. When Monsanto contaminates farmers fields, the crop has to be distroyed. The farmers get caught and are held accountable- they have to prove they didnt violate any laws. Often this cost the farmers thousands of dollars when they already have million dollars debts because famring hasn't been as successful. It is easier to say that you're wrong than you're right. The way our justice system works is that the ones willing to pay more money wins.
When food is cloned for an ideal product- those DNA chromosomes are the age of that original cell. Example would be Doli the sheep clone.
Industries have more money than anyone, and money = Power.
There is a food crisis, not only contamination, but we are running out of food.
A perfect example that policies can be broken would be the tobacco industry. They had started labelling their products with warming, our food that we buy doesn't even have labels telling you where it came form or the harm it can be doing to your body. The slow harm just like cigarettes do.
This film explains that our food economy needs to think of these three things equally; workers, animals and the environment.
First, the picture of the farm that this movie gives is a pretty close to what I've seen on farms myself. Although this is in the United States mostly, Canada's farms are not too much better than they portray in the film. The industry doesn't want you to know the truth, this is one of the most powerful industry that is completely hidden from us. The family farm has become a factory, producing mass amounts of meat the fastest way possible. Not only do these farms harm the environment more than they should be, they are unethical when it comes to animal and workers health.
McDonald's is the single most largest corporations purchasing potatoes, apples, beef, pork, and chicken. They train their workers to do one thing all day, so they are easy to replace. The top 4 corporations when it comes to money control 84% of the food industry. Therefore McDonald'ds and the 3 others are encouraging alot of food, small amount of land, low cost. The problem with those are farmers feel controlled, animal rights, family farms are no diminishing, and the widespread use of antibiotics has lead to bacteria resistance. The antibiotics used on chickens to make them grow faster and fatter in the breasts, are linked to reproductive problems in humans, as seen also on Erin Brokovich, my favorite movie of all time.
The food that we feed are cattle has also changed alont with farming practices. Cows are evolved to eat grass nowadays they solely live on corn, genetically modified corn that is.
My friend's farm in Beausejour is alot different than what I've seen explain in this film. Ellen has 4 pastures that she alternates her cattle in. Her cattle gets to eat grass in summer in one pasture while the other 3 pastures regenerate. In this film, it said that feeding a cow grass for only 5 days will reduce E.coli in their bodies by 80%. Instead these farms named in this film use ammonia to cleanse the hamburger meat from E.coli.
The truth is the Government is kissing Corporations ass. Corporations making millions of dollars are more protected that humans.
This type of industry has caused obesity and health problems in many Americans. When a family only has 1$ to spent to feed 2 kids there's a problem with our system, and this is the case for many not only in North America but everywhere across the world. These poor diets slows metabolism, has caused diabetes now in children. This has led many to be disconnected and ignorant. How can so many not care or think about where their nutrients are coming from? Our bodies are sacred and we have to start taking care of them, it is only then that our healthcare costs will diminish.
Another truth is that it is not technology that is making good farms, technology is the one ruining it. Farming has been perfectioned from many generations of farm knowledge.
This industry has become so large and simplified that they now need to import illegal immigrants to work in meat packaging factories. Often these factories are built in remote locations therefore the locals have no other choice but to work there. When for example the Mexicans come in, to work for HUGE corporations and get caught it is them that get arrested and charged not the corporations. That is the justice system.
Second example in this film of a huge corporation would be Walmart. As soon as you graps for that rapid growth you view things differently.
We can make a difference by raising awareness to Corporations that we would like to see more organics in their stores.
Farmers life needs to go back to the way it were, their way of life has been revolutionized too much.
This film also talks about Monsanto- Monsanto is stopping farmers from keeping their own seeds, because they put a patent on the genes of these crops, the ones that were genetically modified to obtain the ideal genes. Monsanto hires private investigators to find local farmers who save seeds. When Monsanto contaminates farmers fields, the crop has to be distroyed. The farmers get caught and are held accountable- they have to prove they didnt violate any laws. Often this cost the farmers thousands of dollars when they already have million dollars debts because famring hasn't been as successful. It is easier to say that you're wrong than you're right. The way our justice system works is that the ones willing to pay more money wins.
When food is cloned for an ideal product- those DNA chromosomes are the age of that original cell. Example would be Doli the sheep clone.
Industries have more money than anyone, and money = Power.
There is a food crisis, not only contamination, but we are running out of food.
A perfect example that policies can be broken would be the tobacco industry. They had started labelling their products with warming, our food that we buy doesn't even have labels telling you where it came form or the harm it can be doing to your body. The slow harm just like cigarettes do.
This film explains that our food economy needs to think of these three things equally; workers, animals and the environment.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Blog 4- Women's Indigenous Knowledge and Biodiversity Conservation
In this selection, Vandana Shiva emphasises that women's traditional roles in society make them particularly resistant to economically driven policies that threaten to destroy biodiversity. Most ecofeminists believe that their experiences as women in male-dominated societies provides them with a different way of knowing and thinking about environmental issues.Gender and diversity are linked in many ways. The marginalization of women and destruction of biodiversity go hand in hand. Loss of diversity is the price paid in the patriarchial model of progress which pushes towards monocultures, uniformity, and homegeneity.
Diversity is, in many ways, the basis of women's politics and the politics of ecology; gender politics is largely a politics of difference.
There is a general misconception that diversity-based production systems are low-productivity systems. This is not natural, scientific measure but biased towards commercial interests for whom maximizing the one-dimensional output is an economic imperative.
The annual labour requirement in a monoculture of coconut palm is 157 man days per ha, while in a mixed cropping system, it is 960 days per ha. When labour is scarce and costly, labour displacing technologies are productive and efficient, but when labour is abundant, labour displacement is unproductive because it leads to poverty and destruction of livelihoods.
The problems arise not because too few women work, but too many women do too much work of too many different kinds. Their work is also invisible because they are concentrated outside market-related work, and they are normally engaged in multi-tasks.
In forestry too, women's knowledge is crucial to the use of biomass for feed and fertilizer. Knowledge of the feed value of different fodder species, the fuel value of firewood types, and of food products and species is essential to agriculture-related forestry in which women are active.
Women: Custodians of Biodiversity
In common with all other aspects of women's work and knowledge, their role in the development and conservation of biodiversity has been rendered as non-work and non-knowledge.
Biodiversity is ecologically and culturally embedded. Diversity is reproduced and conserved through the reproduction and conservation of culture.
Biotechnology and the Destruction of Biodivesity
Women produce through biodiversity, whereas corporate scientists produce through uniformity. Where hybrids do not force the farmers back to the market, legal patents and intellectual property rights' are used to prevent farmers from saving seed. Seed patents basically imply that corporations treat seed as their creation. Patents prevent others of "making" the patented product, hence patented seed cannot be used for making seed. Royalties have to be paid to the company that gets the patent. It is also unjustified because nature and farmers have made the seed that corporations are attempting to own as their innovation and thair private property. Patents and biotechnology contribute to a two wya theft.
Monsanto, which is now selling itself as Green was telling us that without chemicals, millions would go hungry.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Blog 4- Weblinks- Precautionary Principle...
I invite anyone who reads my blog page to review the following link: http://www.sustainabletable.org/home.php
This website has alot of useful information regarding: laws, dairy, eat local, biodiversity,... and just about anything you need to know about the environment issues we are facing as a planet. I added a couple details to encourage you to read more on this website. Enjoy!
Precautionary Principle: “In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/precautionary/
Politicians and government officials are fond of saying the U.S. has the safest food supply in the world, thanks to the rules and regulations that govern the production, processing and distribution of food. But as the methods of raising animals for food have changed, our laws have not necessarily kept up. Industrial farms produce mountains of manure, creating a waste-management nightmare that often "leaks" into unsuspecting communities by way of water, air and soil pollution. In order to revive a sustainable food system, we must enact policy and legislation that will help keep small family farmers on the land, while curbing the economic and ecological damage these large farms create. http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/policy/
What You Can Do
Food and agriculture corporations are driven by financial profits, often at the cost of public health and environmental protection. But we, as voters and consumers, have the power to challenge them with their very own source of power: profits.
Vote with your food dollar! As consumers, we all have the power to break down agribusiness by buying our food from small farms. Use the Eat Well Guide to find small local farms with which to do business. If nobody buys food from agribusinesses and industrial farms, corporations will no longer have the financial power to sway policymakers and legislators.
Sign up for Food and Water Watch alerts to stay up-to-date on proposed farm legislation and to find out how you can help affect current policy.
Stay informed about campaign contributions. Every candidate is required by federal law to report how much campaign cash they’ve received and from whom. This information is readily available online at www.opensecrets.org, the website for the Center for Responsive Politics, where you can find out if your legislators are beholden to agribusiness interests. http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/policy/
This website has alot of useful information regarding: laws, dairy, eat local, biodiversity,... and just about anything you need to know about the environment issues we are facing as a planet. I added a couple details to encourage you to read more on this website. Enjoy!
Precautionary Principle: “In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/precautionary/
Politicians and government officials are fond of saying the U.S. has the safest food supply in the world, thanks to the rules and regulations that govern the production, processing and distribution of food. But as the methods of raising animals for food have changed, our laws have not necessarily kept up. Industrial farms produce mountains of manure, creating a waste-management nightmare that often "leaks" into unsuspecting communities by way of water, air and soil pollution. In order to revive a sustainable food system, we must enact policy and legislation that will help keep small family farmers on the land, while curbing the economic and ecological damage these large farms create. http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/policy/
What You Can Do
Food and agriculture corporations are driven by financial profits, often at the cost of public health and environmental protection. But we, as voters and consumers, have the power to challenge them with their very own source of power: profits.
Vote with your food dollar! As consumers, we all have the power to break down agribusiness by buying our food from small farms. Use the Eat Well Guide to find small local farms with which to do business. If nobody buys food from agribusinesses and industrial farms, corporations will no longer have the financial power to sway policymakers and legislators.
Sign up for Food and Water Watch alerts to stay up-to-date on proposed farm legislation and to find out how you can help affect current policy.
Stay informed about campaign contributions. Every candidate is required by federal law to report how much campaign cash they’ve received and from whom. This information is readily available online at www.opensecrets.org, the website for the Center for Responsive Politics, where you can find out if your legislators are beholden to agribusiness interests. http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/policy/
Monday, March 8, 2010
Blog #4- The Agricultural Crisis as a Crisis of Culture
Wendell Berry philosophy is we should "act locally, think globally" rather than the reverse. This is a slogan supported by many environmental activists.
In this Selection, he argues for the cultural dimensions that leads to sustainable agriculture.
In the past a farmer could easily market its surplus cream, eggs, old hens, and chicken. These minor markets are now banned due to the name of sanitation. The germs that used to be in our food is now replaced by poisons. The field work power was also mainly horses and mules. Nowadays the farms have become increasingly mechanized and less diversified than they used to be. The land is falling more and more into the hands of speculators and professional people from cities- which still have more money than farmers.
The farm people live less and less from their own produce and more from what they buy. The ideas are goals of leisure, comfort, and entertainment.
Few farmers'children will be able to afford to stay on the farm- perhaps even fewer will wish to do so, it will cost too much, require too much work and worry, and it is hardly a fashionable ambition. Many famers who got big "get big or get out" are now replaced with those who got bigger.
Along with the rest of society, agriculture has shifter its emphasis from quality to quantity, even though the two ideas are inseparable.
Wendell Berry's point of this selecetion is that food is a cultural product; it cannot be produced by technology alone.
A healthy farm culture is based on familiarity with the people and their land, no amount of technology can replace this knowledge.
A competent farmer is his own boss, he has learned the disciplines necessary to go ahead on his own, as required by the economic obligation, loyalty, and pride in his work.
The best kind of farming is a task that calls for a sort of complexity both in the character of the farmer and in his culture. to simplify this is to destroy it. A good farmer is a cultural product, he is made in what his time imposes or demands, and he is also made by generations of experience.
The economy of money has shifted from economies of nature, energy, and the human spirit. Man has become a consumptive machine.
Everything in the Creation is related to everything else and dependant on everything else.
We can have agriculture only within nature, and culture only within agriculture. At certain critical points these systems have to conform with one another or destroy one another.
In this Selection, he argues for the cultural dimensions that leads to sustainable agriculture.
In the past a farmer could easily market its surplus cream, eggs, old hens, and chicken. These minor markets are now banned due to the name of sanitation. The germs that used to be in our food is now replaced by poisons. The field work power was also mainly horses and mules. Nowadays the farms have become increasingly mechanized and less diversified than they used to be. The land is falling more and more into the hands of speculators and professional people from cities- which still have more money than farmers.
The farm people live less and less from their own produce and more from what they buy. The ideas are goals of leisure, comfort, and entertainment.
Few farmers'children will be able to afford to stay on the farm- perhaps even fewer will wish to do so, it will cost too much, require too much work and worry, and it is hardly a fashionable ambition. Many famers who got big "get big or get out" are now replaced with those who got bigger.
Along with the rest of society, agriculture has shifter its emphasis from quality to quantity, even though the two ideas are inseparable.
Wendell Berry's point of this selecetion is that food is a cultural product; it cannot be produced by technology alone.
A healthy farm culture is based on familiarity with the people and their land, no amount of technology can replace this knowledge.
A competent farmer is his own boss, he has learned the disciplines necessary to go ahead on his own, as required by the economic obligation, loyalty, and pride in his work.
The best kind of farming is a task that calls for a sort of complexity both in the character of the farmer and in his culture. to simplify this is to destroy it. A good farmer is a cultural product, he is made in what his time imposes or demands, and he is also made by generations of experience.
The economy of money has shifted from economies of nature, energy, and the human spirit. Man has become a consumptive machine.
Everything in the Creation is related to everything else and dependant on everything else.
We can have agriculture only within nature, and culture only within agriculture. At certain critical points these systems have to conform with one another or destroy one another.
Blog #4 Reflection- Food Meat Production
I was asked as a blog requirement to write down my food intake over the last 48 hours. It goes as follows.
Day 1 Sunday
Day 1 Sunday
- 2 slices of fresh french bread (local bakery)
- 1 bowl of homemade vegetable soup (leftovers)
- lot's water from our own waterwell
- guacamole chips
- 2 kokanee beers (from Crescent, Britsh Columbia)
- baby carrots (from California I think)
- mashed potatoes (Im thinking from Mexico, or last summers growth in MB)
- a bit of beer can chicken (don't eat meat but this was grown on a Mennonite farm close by, and cooked on the barbecue)
Day 2 Monday
- 1 green apple (most likely from California)
- 1 grapefruit (most likely from Florida)
- 1 -12" vegetable sub from Subway
- 1 bowl of vegetable soup
- popcorn
I was asked what kind of foods do I eat regularly. It goes as follows:
Green Apples, Grapefruit, Potatoes, Lettuce, Celery, Onions, Carrots, Tomatoes, Bread, Moose Meat, Deer Meat, Rarely Beef from my sister's farm, Cucumbers, Bananas, Cheese, Homemade Pickles, Cereal, Milk milk milk, Water, Popcorn, Corn, Beer, Vodka, Coffee
My diet is based on vegetables, fruits, grains, and dairy products. When we spoke about Food miles in our February 24 class It really made me think about where my food comes from, I mean how many days in a truck did it spend before arriving to its location to go onto another truck to get distributed to stores in that region. Living in Manitoba we do not have much choice when it comes to eating healthy in the winter. Fruits and vegetables are almost all from accross the borders. Unless we grow gardens ourselves in summer and preserve vegetables over the winter, but this is highly unlikely because most people do not have time plant such a big garden. With our affluent lifestyles an average household needs to have 2 working adults to keep up with bills and other expenses. In cities people don't have any room to grow gardens, they have to rely on markets near by that usually don't sell local food. I have significantly reduced my consumption of meat but I do still need some in my diet. Meat has become the main dish in our meals and in my household as well. When people, including my household, prepare a meal we think about what to cook for meat and then what would go well with this type of meat.
My food contributes to Fossil Fuels energy, to pollution of our water, land and atmosphere. To harmful toxins being released into the air, and alot that is staying in our food. I try hard to be aware of what I consume and I try to bring awareness to the people around me, alot of my family and friends reactions are "oh you environmentalist you". Most of them do not understand why I eat or not eat certain things. My immediate family understands more because they hear me preach as much as they want to hear. My mom even incorporated a Meatless Monday to her meal ideas. One small step at a time, one person at a time, one small decision; we can make a difference.
Blog 4- Meat Matrix- Meatless Monday
I was taking a look at the website:themeatmatrix1.com
This website is a little far fetched, these issues of cows being treated so badly is not the case in most Canadian farms. American farms are larger in size therefore the cows are on average treated worst than Canadian beef.
Going through this website I found a link to site site called meatlessmonday.com
I had to add this on here because earlier in my blog I spoke of my mom incorporating meatlessmonday to her meal ideas. Its quite entertaining that I just happened to run across this site without thinking it would even exist. I sent the link to my mom as well as I added it here as following: http://www.meatlessmonday.com/
There are great meal ideas on this website, and alot of information and links to inform ourselves about what a healthy diet means. Over the last year I have become more aware of what I consume, food and products, I feel healthier and stronger, meantally and physically, than I've ever felt in my life. Due to my healthier diet I felt urged to quit smoking, I smoked for 2 years and Ive quit for 10 months now.
A healthy lifestyle brings balance to your life, changes can be made one step at a time.
A healthy environment brings life, our environment can not help itself, we have to make small changes for it's benefit.
We must bring balance to our lives, balance to our planet, and an overall balance of our health.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Blog #4- Canada's AvaTar Sands
On friday, instead of the usual notes, we had a great surprise. My teacher Kristina Hunter decided to invite her friend a CBC News reporter in the classroom. The reporter, Mychaylo Prystupa, was covering a story about the film Avatar which is being used by environmental activists to slam the oil industry. Questions that we asked to reflect on prior to the filming were as following: 1. Do you think that the film Avatar is meant to relate to the issues facing the world in Canada's Tar Sands? 2. Do you think using this film as a key to display environmental issues is viable? 3. How do you think the film Avatar relates to what is happening in Alberta's Tar Sands?
We were asked to form groups of three to discuss these questions. In my group there was one girl who hadn't seen it yet, and the other male who had. Their opinions were that using this film was a bit on the extreme side. They didnt think that James Cameron would like his film being publicized this way. My opinion was that in this world where everything is extreme and big, that is the only way to get the message through. This movie definately relates to what is happening in Alberta, because in Avatar the military is trying to mine the land for a mineral called "unobtainium". Avatar is fictional, it attracted alot of attention and sold $1.3 billion in theatres. This movie was a huge hit and I think it does make you think about the world digging for fossil fuels. Oil should be a product that is unobtainable but the fact is that with our technology we are extracting this fuel at a rapid rate to a point where we will be running out. As an activist myself for environmental awareness, I think that we should be using any method to bring the message out because that is the only way we will get people to think about these issues. It is important that people start to notice the message of the anthropogenic damage done to our planet. This message is starting to appear everywhere but cannot be told enough.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Local_News/Manitoba/ID=1433027983
We were asked to form groups of three to discuss these questions. In my group there was one girl who hadn't seen it yet, and the other male who had. Their opinions were that using this film was a bit on the extreme side. They didnt think that James Cameron would like his film being publicized this way. My opinion was that in this world where everything is extreme and big, that is the only way to get the message through. This movie definately relates to what is happening in Alberta, because in Avatar the military is trying to mine the land for a mineral called "unobtainium". Avatar is fictional, it attracted alot of attention and sold $1.3 billion in theatres. This movie was a huge hit and I think it does make you think about the world digging for fossil fuels. Oil should be a product that is unobtainable but the fact is that with our technology we are extracting this fuel at a rapid rate to a point where we will be running out. As an activist myself for environmental awareness, I think that we should be using any method to bring the message out because that is the only way we will get people to think about these issues. It is important that people start to notice the message of the anthropogenic damage done to our planet. This message is starting to appear everywhere but cannot be told enough.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Local_News/Manitoba/ID=1433027983
Friday, March 5, 2010
Blog 4- Environmental, Energetic, and Economic Comparisons of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems
There was a time when all farming was organic. Fertilizer was compost or manure, fields were left fallowed to recover soil, crops were rotated, and pesticides were nonexistant. The alternatives to these is usually called organic farming. Organic farming techniques is related to sustainable development.
Heavy reliance on synthetic chemical fertilizers and pesticides is having serious impacts on public health and the environment. Herbicides are used by 90% of US corn farmers. Nutrient loading is associated with deterioration of fisheries and the overall health of lakes and oceans. It is modern agricultural practices that contribute to erosion of soil, environmental and human health. We need to reduce our reliance on agro-chemical inputs; Canada and Sweden hace demonstrated that our use can be reduced by 50% to 65%.
The aim of organic agriculture is to augment ecological processes that foster plant nutrition yet conserve soil and water resources. Organic agriculture is a fast-growing agricultural section in the United States. Organic food sales total more than $7 billion per year, therefore the outlook for organic production is bright. The developing agricultural policies are more in tune with the environment while increasing energy efficiency and economic returns.
The Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial in Pennsylvania, on 6.1 hector has three subplots that are large enough that farm-scale equipment could be used for operations and harvesting.
Conventional Cropping is based on synthetic fertilizer and herbicide use, represents a typical cash grain, row crop farming unit and used a simple 5-year crop rotation that reflects operations in the region.
Organic animal-based cropping grew grain crops that were grown for animal feed, not cash sale. Aged cattle manure was used as a nitrogen source every 2 years out of every 5. The system did not use herbicides for weed control; it relied instead on mechanical cultivation, weed suppressing crop rotations, and relay cropping.
Organic Legume-based cropping system represented a cash grain operation, without livestock. It used no synthetic fertilizers, relying instead on green manure. It also did not use herbicides for weed control.
Crop yields under normal rainfall were similar for all systems.
Crop yields under drought conditions average yields in 5 dry years were significantly higher in the two organic systems. During the extreme droughts organic animal system it had significantly higher corn yields. The measurements showed significantly more water in the soil farmed using the organic legume system than in the conventional system. This accounted for the higher soybean yields in the organic legume system in 1999.
Discussions came to a conclusion that crop yields and economics of organic farming appear to vary based on the crops, regions, and technologies studies. There wwere large amounts of soil organic matter in the organic systems that aided in the tolerance of droughts.
Oil and natural gas inputs In general, the use of less fossil energy by organic agricultural systems reduces the amount of carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere, and therefore the problem of global climate change.
Crop yields Soybeans, and wheat yields were similar in all three systems. There is a higher gross income for conventional than the organic alternative system. The lower yields in organic farming is caused by lower nitrogen-nutrient inputs. In New Zealand, wheat yields are 38% lower than those in the conventional system, but these can be eliminated by raising soil nitrogen throught the use of animal manure or legume cropping systems.
There is a higher gross income for conventional than for the organic however market price for organic food such as corn and soybeans is higher.
Challenges for organic agriculture the two primary problems were nitrogen deficiency and weed competition. The Mechanical weed control is usually more effective than chemical weed control under dry conditions, while the reverse is true under the wet conditions.
Adoptions of organic technologies include 1) off season cover crops 2) extended crop rotation 3) increase level of soil organic matter 4) allow natural biodiversity.
Benefits of Organic Technologies
Heavy reliance on synthetic chemical fertilizers and pesticides is having serious impacts on public health and the environment. Herbicides are used by 90% of US corn farmers. Nutrient loading is associated with deterioration of fisheries and the overall health of lakes and oceans. It is modern agricultural practices that contribute to erosion of soil, environmental and human health. We need to reduce our reliance on agro-chemical inputs; Canada and Sweden hace demonstrated that our use can be reduced by 50% to 65%.
The aim of organic agriculture is to augment ecological processes that foster plant nutrition yet conserve soil and water resources. Organic agriculture is a fast-growing agricultural section in the United States. Organic food sales total more than $7 billion per year, therefore the outlook for organic production is bright. The developing agricultural policies are more in tune with the environment while increasing energy efficiency and economic returns.
The Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial in Pennsylvania, on 6.1 hector has three subplots that are large enough that farm-scale equipment could be used for operations and harvesting.
Conventional Cropping is based on synthetic fertilizer and herbicide use, represents a typical cash grain, row crop farming unit and used a simple 5-year crop rotation that reflects operations in the region.
Organic animal-based cropping grew grain crops that were grown for animal feed, not cash sale. Aged cattle manure was used as a nitrogen source every 2 years out of every 5. The system did not use herbicides for weed control; it relied instead on mechanical cultivation, weed suppressing crop rotations, and relay cropping.
Organic Legume-based cropping system represented a cash grain operation, without livestock. It used no synthetic fertilizers, relying instead on green manure. It also did not use herbicides for weed control.
Crop yields under normal rainfall were similar for all systems.
Crop yields under drought conditions average yields in 5 dry years were significantly higher in the two organic systems. During the extreme droughts organic animal system it had significantly higher corn yields. The measurements showed significantly more water in the soil farmed using the organic legume system than in the conventional system. This accounted for the higher soybean yields in the organic legume system in 1999.
Discussions came to a conclusion that crop yields and economics of organic farming appear to vary based on the crops, regions, and technologies studies. There wwere large amounts of soil organic matter in the organic systems that aided in the tolerance of droughts.
Oil and natural gas inputs In general, the use of less fossil energy by organic agricultural systems reduces the amount of carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere, and therefore the problem of global climate change.
Crop yields Soybeans, and wheat yields were similar in all three systems. There is a higher gross income for conventional than the organic alternative system. The lower yields in organic farming is caused by lower nitrogen-nutrient inputs. In New Zealand, wheat yields are 38% lower than those in the conventional system, but these can be eliminated by raising soil nitrogen throught the use of animal manure or legume cropping systems.
There is a higher gross income for conventional than for the organic however market price for organic food such as corn and soybeans is higher.
Challenges for organic agriculture the two primary problems were nitrogen deficiency and weed competition. The Mechanical weed control is usually more effective than chemical weed control under dry conditions, while the reverse is true under the wet conditions.
Adoptions of organic technologies include 1) off season cover crops 2) extended crop rotation 3) increase level of soil organic matter 4) allow natural biodiversity.
Benefits of Organic Technologies
- soil organic matter were higher
- high levels of soil organic matter serve soil and water prove beneficial during droughts
- fossil energy inputs 30% lower
- labor inputs are evenly distributed over the year
- crop rotation and cover cropping reduce soil erosion, pest problems, and pesticides use
- recycling of livestock waste reduces pollution and benefits organic agriculture
- abundant biomass increases biodiversity
Blog 4- Food Scarcity: An Environmental Wakeup Call
The author of this article, Lester Brown a farmer from New Jersey, is known for being one of the world's most influencial thinkers of global environmental movement. In this selection Brown warns of economic and social disruptions due to food scarcity. He predicts environmental degradation, such as, deforestation, water population, greenhouse gas emissions, will lead to global decline of the food supply. Brown's opinion about obtaining a sustainable development is to stabilize population and climate.
The extensive extraction of resources has affected the world's food economy substantially. The consequences are clear with regards to deforestation leading to more rainfall runoff, and discharging excessive amounts of carbon will eventually lead to economical disruptive climate change. These consequences are also caused by overfishing, overgrazing, soil erosion, loss of plants and animals species, all will eventually lead to a ecosystem collapse.
Agriculture
The food system will be the sector where environmental degradation will lead to economy downfall. With rising grain prices due to commodity prices, this will affect 1.3 billion people to a point where it is life-threatening. Environmental damage will affect fishers and farmers in keeping up with growth and demand will will all lead to political instability.
Heads of household who are unable to feed their families will blame their governments resulting in riots. If food prices keep going up this will negatively affect multinational corporations, stock markets, and the international monetary system.
The consequences that scientists have warned about can be seen everywhere:
In Europe, allowable fish catch has reduced 20%. In Saudi Arabia, there's a 62% grain harvest drop. The burning of the Amazon rainforest has lead to soil degradation resulting in crop abandonment. These situations will multiply, making it more difficult to feed our world population resulting in 800 million people being too poor to buy enough food for hunger satisfaction.
In Search of Land
As the world's population expands, both the area of cropland and amount of irrigation water decline. Drainage of wetlands has opened fertile areas for cultivation. The growth area to plant grain has peaked in 1981 and is since quite slow compared to that of population. The population growth rate is at some 80 million per year, if this goes on the amount of cropland will continue to decline.
In Search of Water
The world's farmers are facing water scarcity. Among China, India, and United States; they are facing extensive aquifer depletion, they collectively account for half of the world's grain supply.
During 1950-1990 the grain harvest has tripled causing the expansion of irrigation methods which intensified production in low-rainfall areas. Most of the world's rice and wheat are produced on irrigated land. The countryside has no competition with the cities when it comes to water supply. Water scarcity is becoming a prevailing issue as was land scarcity.
The Onset of Food Scarcity
Evidence of earth's degradation has accumulated for many years. Our food security is moving from surplus to scarcity, our buffer zones are minimizing. Food scarcity will provide an environmental wake up call the world needs.
An Unprecedented Challenge
Achieving a sustainable future for future generations to have enough food is as much dependant on family planning as on farmers. The two most difficult components in achieving a sustainable economy are stabilizing population and climate. It may be time to reasess population policy restraining families to having 2 children simply to replace themselves. There are 32 countries, all in Europe, who have already taken a small step in the right direction.
Stabilizing our climate means reducing carbon emissions and supporting the efficient technologies emerging. Adoption of a carbon tax would be another step in the right direction.
In a world where food scarcity is the main issue, land scarcity emerges as a central issue. Like land, water is being diverted to nonfarm uses. Providing water free of charge leads to water waste.
Feeding the Future
Securing the food future will affect every part of human existance- from land use, to water use, to how we spend our leisure time. The grain prices growing will result in people eating less grain-intensive livestock products. The world's politicians need to take a current path away from environmental deterioration and economic disruption but toward an economic and demographic path that is environmentally sustainable.
The extensive extraction of resources has affected the world's food economy substantially. The consequences are clear with regards to deforestation leading to more rainfall runoff, and discharging excessive amounts of carbon will eventually lead to economical disruptive climate change. These consequences are also caused by overfishing, overgrazing, soil erosion, loss of plants and animals species, all will eventually lead to a ecosystem collapse.
Agriculture
The food system will be the sector where environmental degradation will lead to economy downfall. With rising grain prices due to commodity prices, this will affect 1.3 billion people to a point where it is life-threatening. Environmental damage will affect fishers and farmers in keeping up with growth and demand will will all lead to political instability.
Heads of household who are unable to feed their families will blame their governments resulting in riots. If food prices keep going up this will negatively affect multinational corporations, stock markets, and the international monetary system.
The consequences that scientists have warned about can be seen everywhere:
In Europe, allowable fish catch has reduced 20%. In Saudi Arabia, there's a 62% grain harvest drop. The burning of the Amazon rainforest has lead to soil degradation resulting in crop abandonment. These situations will multiply, making it more difficult to feed our world population resulting in 800 million people being too poor to buy enough food for hunger satisfaction.
In Search of Land
As the world's population expands, both the area of cropland and amount of irrigation water decline. Drainage of wetlands has opened fertile areas for cultivation. The growth area to plant grain has peaked in 1981 and is since quite slow compared to that of population. The population growth rate is at some 80 million per year, if this goes on the amount of cropland will continue to decline.
In Search of Water
The world's farmers are facing water scarcity. Among China, India, and United States; they are facing extensive aquifer depletion, they collectively account for half of the world's grain supply.
During 1950-1990 the grain harvest has tripled causing the expansion of irrigation methods which intensified production in low-rainfall areas. Most of the world's rice and wheat are produced on irrigated land. The countryside has no competition with the cities when it comes to water supply. Water scarcity is becoming a prevailing issue as was land scarcity.
The Onset of Food Scarcity
Evidence of earth's degradation has accumulated for many years. Our food security is moving from surplus to scarcity, our buffer zones are minimizing. Food scarcity will provide an environmental wake up call the world needs.
An Unprecedented Challenge
Achieving a sustainable future for future generations to have enough food is as much dependant on family planning as on farmers. The two most difficult components in achieving a sustainable economy are stabilizing population and climate. It may be time to reasess population policy restraining families to having 2 children simply to replace themselves. There are 32 countries, all in Europe, who have already taken a small step in the right direction.
Stabilizing our climate means reducing carbon emissions and supporting the efficient technologies emerging. Adoption of a carbon tax would be another step in the right direction.
In a world where food scarcity is the main issue, land scarcity emerges as a central issue. Like land, water is being diverted to nonfarm uses. Providing water free of charge leads to water waste.
Feeding the Future
Securing the food future will affect every part of human existance- from land use, to water use, to how we spend our leisure time. The grain prices growing will result in people eating less grain-intensive livestock products. The world's politicians need to take a current path away from environmental deterioration and economic disruption but toward an economic and demographic path that is environmentally sustainable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
