Green in Cincinnati

Needs no comment

2009-02-07T11:20:00.002-05:00

Good for Arkansas

2009-02-05T07:36:00.000-05:00

Some good news from my home state: animal cruelty is now a first-offense felony.

The world's newest religions

2009-02-04T10:34:00.003-05:00

When I went vegetarian in 2001, the hardest part of the transition was replacing meat. How could I replace the central part of the meal? So I ate a lot of fake-meat products--veggie burgers, tofu dogs, and the like. But I asked the wrong question: going vegetarian doesn't mean replacing meat.

But that's at the heart of the matter when people ask why I'm a vegetarian. "What do you replace meat with?" they ask, unable to imagine how I might answer. A similar question seems to be implied when people learn I'm an atheist. What do I replace God with? The binaries become tofu versus meat, God versus the Void.

Or, in some cases, Religion versus Science. Because movements need war metaphors, religion needs, for fundamentalists, an opposite. But strangely enough, people often define their opposites by the very thing they are. Thus, global warming becomes "a religion." For Cincinnati Enquirer columnist Peter Bronson, the city's suggestion that people eat less meat is "a crusade."

These are old tropes, familiar in the "War on Terror" and Richard Nixon's conquest of cancer. Usually, one drums up support for a cause by attributing a religious aura to one's acts. But I find it ironic that groups associated with religion attempt to denigrate their perceived opposites as religions. Maybe it's easier to tilt at windmills if you see them as false idols rather than separate modes of inquiry or different lifestyles.

All things green

2009-02-03T16:25:00.002-05:00

I'm not a pot smoker, but I'm sympathetic to Michael Phelps. (We have similar body types, you see.) Here's the statement he should have released about his bong photograph.

If Germany can do it

2009-02-03T07:58:00.002-05:00

Re: Eating less meat in Cincinnati

Looks like we're not alone. If Germany can realize the environmental and economic dangers of heavy meat-based diets, maybe the Germanic city of Cincinnati can, too.

How PETA screwed the pooch

2009-02-02T15:48:00.005-05:00

Not that Super Bowl ads are ever that good, but last night's were terrible. And even though I'm not crazy about PETA, I would have loved if they'd gotten an ad in. Not the ad they made, but the ad they should have made.

You're probably aware of the following:

'Veggie Love': PETA's Banned Super Bowl Ad

Yes, PETA made an ad they knew would get banned so they could have a PR round of instant meaningless controversy. They even feigned surprise that the ad was banned. (Though I admit that anything that leads to the phrase "screwing herself with broccoli (fuzzy)" has benefited the world.) But PETA would have done much better to make a good advertisement using the same theme, one that would have made their point as well as the airwaves.

So, free of charge, my case for the ad they should have run, the ad that would have used the "veggie love" theme:

We open at a dining table with a woman chewing her food, licking her lips, etc., and saying how wonderful the meal is. The camera pans back: her dining partner is a guy in a giant broccoli suit. (Fuzzy.) Various shots of romantic dinners with men paired with asparagus-women, women paired with pumpkin men, etc. Then the "studies show that vegetarians have better sex," with some actual effing suggestions about where to find this info so people don't immediately dismiss the claim. Finish with a closed door, moaning sounds, maybe even a joke about how the broccoli gives good head.

I'll admit that what I've described above isn't necessarily a great ad, but it could be aired, it has some wit to it, and it's engaging. What PETA ran (or, rather, made much ado about not running) has none of those things. And as many admirable things as PETA does, their stunts don't make the case for vegetarianism well. Hell, they don't even tap into the potential target market viewing the Super Bowl, unless you believe that the condescending truck and beer ads accurately reflect the viewership.

Eating less meat in Cincinnati

2009-02-02T13:38:00.003-05:00

The city of Cincinnati now has a food task force as part of its Green Cincinnati Action Plan (warning: link goes to pdf). Since the Plan was passed last June, this isn't news. What's news is that our local newspaper, the Cincinnati Enquirer, posted a news item about the Plan's food recommendation with the odd headline "Cincy wants you to eat less meat":

"Yes, even in this city symbolized by a flying pig and once called Porkopolis, officials worry about residents leaving too big of a carbon footprint. So as part of the Green Cincinnati Plan to make the city more environmentally friendly, proponents want you to at least think about choosing fruits and vegetables more, meat less.

"Nobody wants Jeff Ruby to have to take out an ad that says, 'Why are you hurting my restaurant?' " said Daniel Oerther, chairman of the University of Cincinnati's environmental engineering department who leads the city's food task force."

The suggestions laid out in the Action Plan are reasonable, even in a city as meat-centric as Cincinnati. But the Enquirer's comments section provides us the entertainment. To witless:

"Global warming! In a pig's eye! Have you greenie weenie's been in a cave the last week or this winter? Don't suggest or tell me what to eat! It's none of your dam business! It's called freedom you dunder head's! So stick it where the sun don't shine!"

"What a joke. Man made global warming is a HOAX. (http://inconvenienttruth.us), has the data to show what a HOAX it is. Humans are only responsible for less then 1/10th of 1%, so any changes we make have almost no affect on the total amount of co2 in the air. This is more about control and making money then it is about saving the planet."

"how about teaching people to stop eating so much fast food and start eating a bit more healthy. Keep the theme a bit more basic. Meat is an important part of the diet for a human. We do not need to spend money on this program, nor do I need someone telling me what to eat."

"Eating all vegetables and no meat is not healthy as it is not a well balanced diet. Most vegetarians I know out there have very little muscle tone and just look plain sick. On the other hand, eating mostly meat and no vegetables is also very unhealthy. The key here is moderation. Make sure you eat a well balanced diet and there will be no problems."

"I don't trust people who don't eat meat!"

There's no point in taking the time to refute all this, but for one point: meat is not a necessary part of a human diet. Not only are vegetarian and vegan diets perfectly healthy, they're better for you than meat-based diets.

Of course, that's beside the point. What's crucial here is how the Enquirer, our terrible newspaper, angles the story: they take a single recommendation from the Action Plan and skew the story. Cincinnati won't be regulating diets; the city would undertake a relatively inexpensive ad campaign to promote a lifestyle choice that's better for individuals and for the city as a whole. But the responses online reflect paranoia about the city legislating all freedom out of their lives.*

*I'm not aware of any freedom to eat meat, but that's another issue for another post.

My brother is awesome

2009-02-02T11:47:00.000-05:00

Exhibit A:

Hypermiling cartoon from john green on Vimeo.

Carbon footprint

2009-02-02T10:41:00.001-05:00

Ecological footprint or carbon footprint? Granted, these measures are likely about as accurate as a calorie counter on a treadmill*, but here's a good introduction to the varieties of online carbon-footprint calculators. Even if they're only a rough estimate, they're a good test of what we can cut back on.

*if it's warm enough to run or bike outside, avoid the treadmill. Cut down on energy use.

Help bring farms to Cincinnati

2009-02-01T11:17:00.001-05:00

Read the post at Cincinnati Locavore, then sign the petition (Cincinnati residents only).

Snow day

2009-01-27T09:05:00.002-05:00

According to Drudge, it snows, thus global warming is fake. Also:

There was no talking in Buster Keaton's movies. Therefore, he was a mute.
My house caught on fire today. Therefore, my house will catch on fire tomorrow.
A group of Muslims attacked the United States. Therefore, all Muslims are dangerous.
I can't see evolution happen. Therefore, evolution is not real.
Socrates was mortal. All monkeys are mortal. Therefore, Socrates was a monkey.
One time, a gay man was promiscuous. Therefore, all gay men are promiscuous.
Nelly Furtado sang a song called "Promiscuous." Therefore, she is gay.

Proud to be vegetarian. . .

2009-01-26T17:37:00.002-05:00

. . .after seeing this:

(h/t videogum)

I'd love to have an entertaining report, but. . .

2009-01-26T08:55:00.004-05:00

So I was all jazzed to give an entertaining update about the great global-warming debate on the cleanmpg forum, but sadly, the moderators took down the best post ever. In short, my interlocutor compared environmentalists to both Nazis and Stalinists. You can get the flavor in some of the posts here and on the next page, where some of us quoted him. Also, here's his bastardization of Martin Niemöller:

"They asked for the gas guzzling SUV's, but I didn't speak up because I didn't drive a gas guzzling SUV.
They asked for the plastic bags, but I didn't speak up because I didn't use plastic bags.
Then they asked for me, and nobody spoke up because there was nobody else left."

I have to admit, I'm more than a little disappointed that they took down his post. Not only was it bizarrely entertaining, he has every right to say what he believes. Comment moderation is important in forums, but he didn't insult anyone there, as far as I can tell. (Other than the Nazi/Communist comparison, which was so far-fetched I didn't take it seriously as an insult.)

My favorite part: he claimed "The 'green left' is the old 'red left' revised." Not only is that a howler, it turns out it's from George Will. I think someone's bowtie is too tight.

Update: Via Coby Beck's site in a roundabout way, here's a great challenge to global warming deniers.

Global warming: dumb arguments

2009-01-23T09:12:00.005-05:00

I try not to get into pointless arguments online, but this one started in the forums at cleanmpg.com, a website I like. Strangely enough, a contingent of that site's members think the theory of man-made climate change is a hoax. So when one of the site's moderators linked to an article about a survey of scientists who agree that anthropogenic climate change is real and a danger, some people in the forum started making bad arguments.

I jumped in to respond, with the help of Coby Beck's "How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic" series. Some of the responses asked the right questions: what about the planet's longer-term climate, what about recent cold weather. These are all, of course, questions scientists have answered, with broad consensus. But even when I've provided answers and links to detailed explanations, I've changed no minds at all. (At least not among the vocal posters.)

The worst part about it, though, is that a couple of the respondants clearly have no idea what they're talking about. They dispute the current scientific consensus by pointing to unverifiable online petitions and cite people who aren't authorities or researchers. They then claim that, in the 1970s, there was scientific consensus that we were headed for an ice age, but they evidence they provide for that claim doesn't present anything even remotely resembling a consensus. Even in the face of evidence that they're wrong, they keep on swinging.

This problem extends well beyond that forum, a place I would expect people to be better aware of climate-change science. Google the words "global warming," and you get a mix of links to science and utter bunk (the latter of which has often been debunked). A google search for "climate change" fares much better, but clearly we need to speak more loudly and directly about the myths and realities around global climate change. Cory Beck's series, linked to above, does a lot of the hard work of debunking frequently cited (and wrong) objections, but I want to emphasize a few based on the experience I'm having in that forum:

Make clear the difference between weather and climate. "It's cold today" doesn't refute evidence about global warming.
Make clear the difference between media depictions of science and peer-reviewed articles and research. I've been amazed that the people who call The New York Times a left-wing newspaper cite a single article from the 70s as proof of a "global cooling" consensus. (Especially when the first paragraph of the article says there is a major dispute about whether the planet is cooling or warming.)
Explain what a consensus is. Just because the founder of the Weather Channel disputes global warming doesn't mean there's a lack of consensus. It means that a meteorologist who founded a cable network, did no scientific research on climate change, and holds a B.A., doesn't understand climate science.
Cite the most recent research you can. If you show a graph of global temperatures that ends in 2004 or 2005, the response will be along the lines of "but what about the last year?"
Always remain civil. If you can.

That's a start. (And in a great coincidence, I chose the image above the same day as KSK. It isn't planned synergy.)

Inaugural thoughts

2009-01-21T21:25:00.003-05:00

As happy as I am that we can now say President Obama, the whole inauguration seems silly to me. The whole thing smacks of coronation. Also, it produces a lot of garbage.
I try not to take pleasure in the pain of others, but wow: Dick Cheney in a wheelchair. Not only did that lead to Tom Brokaw comparing him to Dr. Strangelove, he also invited comparisons to Blofeld and Mr. Potter from It's a Wonderful Life.
I know Aretha Franklin had a great hat on, but let's not forget about George H. W. Bush. (The H. W. stands for HNanook of the WNorth.)
I'm not religious, but I'd love to spend time in Joseph Lowery's church.

Gaza, torture, and the rule of law

2009-01-20T10:05:00.002-05:00

As I wait for the inauguration of Barack Obama, I have to acknowledge skepticism on my part about the next four years. I campaigned for Obama, and I'm indescribably happy that he is about to become our president. Still, I have some reservations about him, in part because of the signals he's been sending about whether or not to investigate George W. Bush and his administration for their crimes. So the below (very general) essay sets forth a few of my concerns, especially regarding human rights and foreign policy.

******
It’s fitting that Barack Obama suggested that he won’t investigate the Bush Administration for their use of torture, warrantless wiretapping, and other illegal acts. In the recent fighting between Israel and Hamas, Israel committed horrific atrocities in Gaza—over 34% of the dead and injured Palestinians are children, and the rate of death is over 800 in Gaza and 10 in Israel, most of the latter in friendly fire incidents—and the United States has been one of the few countries to demonstrate one-sided political and military support for Israel.

Why would President-Elect Obama neglect justice regarding both Gaza and President Bush? Quite simply, and quite sadly, because in the United States, the rule of law has become so effectively degraded over the years that to actually follow the rule of law would run counter to American practice. Though President Bush’s use of torture, of violence against other nations, and of acts that undermine the Constitution, have been more explicit than those of any other president, they are only novel in their scale. (NB: This does not exonerate Bush; on the contrary, his blatant illegality makes his actions all the more appalling.)

Consider torture: if Obama pursued an investigation of Bush’s use of torture, he would also have to investigate Presidents Clinton, George H. W. Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy. Even himself. (I end the list there a little arbitrarily because members of those administrations are still living and, in some cases, dictating American foreign and domestic policy. Also: I only leave Jimmy Carter off the list because I’m less well-informed about much of his presidency and his relationship to the CIA.) Each of those presidents has employed and supported the CIA to varying degrees, and torture has long been part of official CIA policy. If you find this unbelievable, research Kubark. Moreover, presidents since the establishment of the CIA have been aware, to varying degrees, not only of contemporary CIA practices, but presumably of their past employment as well.

Thus an investigation into President Bush’s crimes would necessitate an open and honest investigation into a long tradition of horrific practices endorsed, overtly or covertly, by the American government. Such an investigation would indict a huge number of individuals who wield a great deal of power in American policy and in discussions of American jurisprudence.

What does this have to do with Israel and Gaza? U.S. foreign policy, implicitly and explicitly, has supported Israel well above all other nations in the Middle East, whether Israel has erred or not in any given instance. (NB again: I don’t condone terrorism or the violence done against innocents in Israel. But I don’t condone terrorism when practiced by a nation, either.) If the United States were to condemn Israel, it would require, as in the case of torture, a monumentally difficult national and legal self-reflection upon American foreign policy and action in the Middle East. Our hands aren’t clean, either.

Vegetarian leftovers

2009-01-19T10:19:00.003-05:00

If you're looking for a good vegetarian cookbook, buy Veganomicon. Yes, it's vegan, not just vegetarian. That means you don't have a pound of cheese in every other recipe. But for those of you scared by the word vegan, I'll say this: anyone would love the recipes in this cookbook. Among my favorites:

The best effing barbecue I've had since I stopped eating meat, and possibly ever. I served the BBQ Seitan on New Year's Eve, and several meat eaters thought it was pulled pork and asked for the recipe. Yes, it's that good.
Three different tomato-based pasta sauces that compete with restaurant-quality Italian food. (No, not Fazoli's quality.) Serious kick, serious flavor.
The best tofu marinades I've found anywhere.

I've loved almost everything I've made from this cookbook. Seriously, buy the damn thing.
******
On a completely different note, I'm reading and re-reading various chapters of the Bible for a course I'm in. I only mention this because of something in Genesis I'd never noticed before. I was aware that some religious groups use Genesis 3 to argue that, in our original, pre-fallen state, human beings were vegetarians. (NB: I'm an atheist; I don't believe in any original, pre-fallen state. I'm just summarizing the argument.)

Here's what's interesting, in terms of the vegetarian Eden argument: as we all know, Adam and Eve clothe themselves with fig leaves after they eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. But notice this, Genesis 3:21: "And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them." (Italics mine; NSRV translation.)

That moment sticks out to me for two reasons. First, what a weird moment of empathy that God shows, making clothing for Adam and Eve on their way out. Strikes me as a complicated parental gesture. Second, and much more interesting for the vegetarians/Christians out there, is that, though Adam and Eve clothe themselves in fig leaves, God creates animal skins for them. It's the first use of animal flesh for any functional purpose, and it's a result of God banishing Adam and Eve from the life of paradise. Bizarre.

Water, water, everywhere, and nada

2009-01-16T09:37:00.003-05:00

I can't voice this strongly enough: CUT WAY DOWN ON YOUR WATER USE NOW!

So, why so strident? Let's start with an easily digestible bullet list:

The earth's population is over six billion; roughly 1.1 billion have no access to clean, safe drinking water.
The average American uses 150 gallons of water every day; the average citizen of a developing country uses about five gallons.
The EPA fails to regulate fifty-one known contaminants in public drinking water.
Over 116,000 man-made chemicals find their way into public water supplies.

(h/t to the documentary Flow and its website for the above facts.)

Water has become a commodity so valuable that wars are fought over access to it (Sudan). Yet in the U.S., many of us act as if water is a natural resource without end. That perception is easy to have, especially in Cincinnati. To get to UC's campus from my house, I travel over one river (the Little Miami) and alongside another (the Ohio). We have oceans of water.

Unfortunately, most of that water is undrinkable. To render much of it suitable for human use, it has to be purified or distilled, a process that creates an incredible amount of chemical waste. So what to do? Here are a few ways you can immediately cut down on your water use. And all of these will save you money. (That's an added bonus, not the primary reason.)

Take shorter showers, and turn off water when you aren't using it. The average five-minute shower uses 40 gallons of water. The water doesn't need to be on while you're lathering your hair or skin; in most cases it doesn't need to be on when you're shaving or brushing your teeth. (Shaving your skin, I mean--not your teeth.)
Stop buying bottled water (and don't steal it, either). If you're drinking bottled water because you don't trust tap water, bad news: bottled water isn't healthier than tap water. But it's worse for the planet. Even if we recycled all the plastic water bottles we bought, the extraction of water damages the planet. Companies like Nestle go into areas like the Great Lakes area of Michigan, drill down into the water aquifers, and extract water from localities and leave waste behind (the CO2 from trucks that ship the water among them). The draining of the underground aquifers shrinks streams and other waterways, which has an incalculable impact on the local ecology. In almost every community that water companies go into, they negotiate prices that are startlingly beneficial to them without any benefit for the community they enter into.
Replace your faucets and shower heads, if possible. Low-flow shower heads can reduce your water use in a shower from as much as eight gallons per minute to less than one gallon per minute. That not only lowers the water you use, it cuts down on your energy use as well--that's less water to heat. (And plenty of money to save.)
Watch the documentary Flow to scare yourself into taking these steps. You can rent it from Netflix. Lackluster Video doesn't seem to have it.

These are all easy steps. You can also sign a petition to add a 31st article to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, one that adds access to clean water as a fundamental human right. Unlike oil, water is necessary to life.

Teaching to the evaluation

2009-01-15T07:54:00.002-05:00

Via The Edge of the American West: Texas A&M, aka The Yale of College Station, will now be giving $10,000 bonuses to faculty based on student evaluations. Generally, I support initiatives to help faculty focus on better classroom practices. I've been a college student an incredibly long time now, and I've had instructors who teach badly, often for a variety of reasons. But I've also taught, and I think most teachers understand why student evaluations are a bad metric for giving away money. Among the more compelling reasons not to do this:

Positive evaluations correspond to higher grades. Classes that frequently reward students with substantial high marks receive higher student evaluations. This is troubling for several reasons. First, and this has been pointed out elsewhere, making student evaluations a sole serious metric for bonuses would lead to grade inflation. And if universities need anything right now, it's less incentive for grade inflation. Second, and this is more crucial, I think, is that teachers who structure their classes around frequently rewarding students will be perceived as better teachers. Classes that grade based on more cumulative criteria--say, for example, freshman composition courses, which measure a student's development as a writer over the span of an entire term--give students less of a grade-based incentive for enjoying the course. So depending on the requirements of a given course within a given department, the timing of grades varies.
Race, gender, and "attractiveness" play a role in student evaluations. Interestingly enough, male teachers that students call "attractive" get better evaluations that female teachers that students call "attractive." Also, the placement of men and women in teaching posts varies from department to department, as does the gender makeup of the students from department to department.
Electives will, on average, fare better among students than required courses. Required courses have a stigma built in before students even enter the first class meeting: they are the lima beans of the university experience. Take these courses before you can take the courses you want.
Student evaluations are arbitrary and vary not only by department, but also by course. When I teach composition, I not only keep regular office hours, I require individual conference meetings with students. I also respond to all class-related emails quickly (in my opinion; and I should note, anecdotes are never great evidence). Still, every quarter a handful of students claim I was unavailable outside the classroom. Yet I received nary a peep from these students during the quarter about needing to meet in my office. From what I can tell, the students who claim I wasn't available outside class are those students whose grades aren't very good.

There's a broader point beyond that anecdote. Departmental evaluations are written to cover a very broad spectrum of courses that serve students in very different ways. Our English department, for example, offers courses (and degrees) in literary study, journalism, rhetoric and composition, creative writing, and editing. How do you objectively compare student evaluations as metrics for rating these courses?

For more on this, follow along at Edge of the American West, which has given Ezra Klein, who supports the bonuses, the corporal punishment he deserves.

Michael Savage, Amateur Psychologist

2009-01-13T23:38:00.004-05:00

I doubt Michael Savage has any respect for psychologists, and I know he has no respect for homosexuals. (I also doubt he knows any psychologists or homosexuals personally.) So why is he psychologizing homosexuals, and in such a stupid, stupid way?

(And you can listen to Savage to hear the phrase "a horsiness of the brazen tart." Man, I need a radio show.)

Welcome me back with open arms

2009-01-12T12:22:00.002-05:00

Thanks to some very impressive nudging on my brother John's part, this blog is coming back to live. Here are the goals:

Semi-regular posts, roughly three or four a week.
Open topics, from politics to lit to religion, but with the primary focus remaining on Cincinnati and its green needs.

So in the spirit of new developments, please head over to the new CincyStreetcar blog to read up on why putting the streetcar in Cincinnati is so important.

Great satire

2008-09-27T19:51:00.001-04:00

Bill Maher usually drives me nuts, but the second half of this is utterly fantastic. (There are some good moments in the first half, too.)

Things I refuse to read: Gregg Easterbrook and Thomas Friedman

2008-09-08T12:21:00.003-04:00

If you've never read Slate, allow me to sum up: what you think is wrong! And here are two anecdotes that prove it!

Okay, a grand overgeneralization. (They do employ some good writers--Dahlia Lithwick comes to mind.) But, inexplicably, they employ Gregg Easterbrook to write about science. This post from my old blog explains why that's a problem.

Today, Gregg Easterbrook has a review of Thomas Friedman's new book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded. (For all you need to know about why Thomas Friedman is a ginormous douchebag, watch this clip from Charlie Rose. Watch all three minutes of it.)

Theoretically, I agree with the central premise of Friedman's new book on the dangers of global warming, inasmuch as I've given roughly ten seconds of awareness to that premise. But when Easterbrook collides with Friedman, the resulting pomposity may split the world in two. But if there's anything amusing and worthwhile in Easterbrook's review, let me know, because I can't bring myself to read it.

Joe Biden can be used as a source of electricity

2008-09-06T08:36:00.001-04:00

The Weekly Word/Phrase: "Dependence on Foreign Oil"

2008-08-30T09:24:00.004-04:00

We've been hearing about our "dependence on foreign oil" since gas prices began rising, but I think the phrase is misleading. It combines two crucial problems of the American economy and treats them as one:

America's heavy dependence on oil and gasoline for our outmoded, single-passenger based transportation system.
The loss of jobs and production from the United States.

First thing first. Since the auto industry destroyed rail lines in the 1940s and 50s, most Americans travel by car. Many see the "freedom" of car ownership as a signal American value. Once you've got a car, you're an adult; you own your destiny.

In fact, owning a car means constantly giving to a larger system run by automakers, oil producers and refiners, the insurance industry, and the government. It's a heavy financial burden that, in turn, takes an enormous toll on the environment as well as communities.

And since the middle part of the twentieth century, American oil finds have decreased and forced us to import the vast majority of our oil supplies. Not only that, but as labor unions have declined, especially since the 1980s, jobs and production have moved overseas. Oil is simply one of many products we import. Communities built around production have largely disappeared in the U.S.; travel grows, imports grow, localities fade.

So our so-called dependence on foreign oil is two dependencies, misunderstood to be one.

The danger of Sarah Palin

2008-08-29T17:08:00.003-04:00

I really didn't want this blog to be too political because I don't think sustainability is, at its heart, a political issue, but I have to mention this: John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as running mate signals a swerve toward dangerous environmental policy. Consider this:

She denies that global warming is man-made. Bear in mind that no professional scientific organization disputes anthropogenic global warming.
Her husband works for the oil company BP.
She supports drilling in ANWR.

And this has less to do with global warming, but she's a creationist. Egads.

McCain's lobbyist friends

2008-08-24T13:42:00.001-04:00

I made this:

Thanks to Progressive Accountability for its main source work in tracking down all of John McCain's lobbyists.

Are Gingrich and Hannity stupid, lying, or insane?

2008-08-20T12:55:00.003-04:00

This clip is a few days old, but behold:

Think Progress has detailed how demonstrably wrong Gingrich is, but I'd like to address a larger question: are they stupid, lying, or completely insane? Consider this:

Obama mentioned tire inflation not because it's his energy plan (it's not--warning, pdf), but because a little personal responsibility with our cars would effect the same change as drilling offshore for oil.
After a few days of poking fun at Obama for mentioning tire inflation, McCain acknowledged that he "doesn't disagree," an odd construction that means, essentially, he agrees.
For Hannity and Gingrich, high oil prices weren't an issue until they became a political issue, one that, unfortunately, most people aren't well informed about. Harping on the tire inflation "gaffe," which wasn't a gaffe, is simply noise that continues misinformation.

How could these wealthy people with immediate access to information possibly not know any of the above? And what's worse: knowing all of the above, as well as facing growing acceptance that global warming is real, they continue to advocate the worst kind of politics and energy ideas.

Hypermiling in a Prius

2008-08-19T18:05:00.002-04:00

In the above video, I get the chance to hypermile in a Prius (my first time behind the wheel of a Prius). Thanks to my brother John for filming and editing the video, and to Becca for letting me drive her car. Enjoy.

The Weekly Word: Convenience

2008-08-18T10:18:00.003-04:00

I'm going to borrow and warp a Stephen Colbert bit. Once a week (I hope), I'm going to write about a word that seems relevant to me about sustainability issues. I won't be as funny or sharp as Colbert; a lot of what I think about the language around sustainability is unclear to me. So I'm starting with this:

Convenience

One of the most common words that comes up in resistance to sustainability measures is convenience. Usually, it's something like this: "why should I have to be inconvenienced to make some change?" Most technological changes in the past half-century--frozen and pre-packaged food, power steering and brakes, increased horsepower, inexpensive incandescent lights, air conditioning--have been changes toward convenience that expend a great deal of energy on the front end. To make these things cheap and convenient for us, industry had to create waste on both the front and back end; when you consume frozen food, you have to throw away a box (only recently recyclable in most places), an unrecyclable wrapper, and the unrecyclable container. But how convenient it is to have food ready and relatively tasty in just five minutes.

But is it really convenient? The implication, at least in the example of cooking, is that food preparation is an inconvenience. If you have kids running around and have been at work all day, it's probably easy to microwave a couple of things and pour a pre-mixed salad into a bowl. But meals used to be one of the essential family experiences, not an inconvenience.

Take cooking. When you make a flavorful meal with fresh ingredients, the effort takes time but rewards with pleasure--the food tastes better and is likely healthier, and you get to savor it with the family. Plus, if you can share the kitchen duties with a partner and with children, you're sharing that work. My neighbor has his children help with some aspects of preparing the meal. They clearly enjoy it, particularly knowing that they helped make the good meals they eat.

It's a strange balance of rewards, convenience versus shared pleasures. When people complain of inconvenience, I wonder what they would miss out on by inconvenience. What are the essential experiences of life these conveniences allow them to have?

Off the subject

2008-08-14T18:58:00.001-04:00

This isn't exactly about sustainability, but it's worth sharing:

Welcome, Enquirer readers

2008-08-14T09:17:00.004-04:00

If you've come here from Margaret McGurk's article on hypermiling in today's Cincinnati Enquirer, welcome. I'm Charlie Green. Cruise around the site for ways to save money on your electric bill, eat better, and do your small part in helping make Cincinnati sustainable. All questions and criticisms are welcome; feel free to leave them in the comments.

Update, 10:35--When I posted this morning, I'd only seen the online article, not the paper itself. So to those of you who hoped to have a nice breakfast with your morning paper but instead saw my bearded grin, sorry about that.

Also, some links about hypermiling:

My video of hypermiling basics
CleanMPG, a forum for discussing hypermiling techniques, dos and don'ts, etc.
Ecomodder's 100+ tips on how to save gas

Energy vampires--what's at stake

2008-08-13T13:42:00.005-04:00

I couldn't help the pun in the title. I'll whip myself mercilessly with a recycled hemp penance rope later.

But for now, a few words about energy. If you live in Cincinnati, you're getting your gas and electric bills from Duke Energy. You may have noticed that your bills have gone up since Duke took over, and you may have heard that Duke wants to raise rates. The good news: using less energy and saving lots of money is super easy. Plus, since Duke creates energy using coal, gas, hydroelectric, and nuclear, lowering your energy use helps the environment out in major ways. Plus, you can pay a little extra to Duke, and they fund alternative energy sources. (You still end up saving money.)

So here are the easy steps:

Slay the Energy Vampires

Even when most electronic devices are off, they're still using passive or active energy. Good Magazine's illustration points this out very clearly. When you're asleep, these things cost you money even if you aren't using them. Even if they're off.

So what to do? Surge protectors. We've got our TV, DVD player, and sound system plugged into the same surge protector, and it's off around 20 hours a day. (We don't watch much TV.) Same with our cable internet and network server and all our computers. We make sure everything's switched off before we go to bed, right after making sure the doors are locked. Becomes an easy habit.

Switch to CFLs or LEDs

Pick the three lights you use most and replace them with compact fluorescent bulbs or LED bulbs. (The former has some mercury, and the latter tend to be more expensive. In the long run, though, they both use an incredibly small amount of power.) The savings are instant. Plus, if you have a series of lights set up to a single switch, replace all those bulbs.

Example: in our kitchen, there are two recessed track lighting features. When bulbs started going out, we had two CFLs and two incandescent bulbs on one track, two CFLs and two incandescents on the other. But we use one track much, much more often than the other, so I switched the CFLs in the little-used row for the incandescents in the other. So four CFLs on a single switch. We saw our electric bill go down.

Don't Dry with Machines

Hang all your clothes out to dry, and set your washing machine to let your dishes drip dry. Drying takes a little longer, but again, the money and emissions savings have been incredible in our house.

Wash Your Clothes in Cold Water

Whether your water is heated by gas or electricity, it's costing you. Thanks to detergents that work well with cold water, we really don't need to wash anything in warm or hot water.

Get Energy Star Appliances

Our furnace and A/C were dying, so we got new ones. Energy Star. (Cue image of Molly Shannon.) You'll see the results below.

********
Here's a screenshot of our gas and electric use for the past twelve months.

You can see in April and May where our gas usage went way down: that's around when we stopped washing clothes in warm and hot water. The electric spike in June had to do with heat, but we actually used our new Energy Star A/C more in July and used less electricity (and we didn't change any of our other electric use).

We can do more, and I'll update in later posts what we're doing. Maybe with video. (Which, of course, means I'll need to clean the house.)

Green in Arkansas--the Natural State isn't big on recycling

2008-08-11T13:07:00.002-04:00

For both of you who've been checking for updates: sorry. I was away in Arkansas for a week, visiting my family and annoying them about hypermiling. A number of interesting sustainability issues stuck out to me, not the least of which being that Little Rock is like a smaller version of Cincinnati--hugely sprawled with few mass transit options, downtown redevelopment with mixed success (though, generally speaking, LR has been more successful than Cincy with the latter).

A note about recycling: my parents live in Maumelle, a suburb of Little Rock and North Little Rock, and the only things they can leave for curbside recycling are newspapers and aluminum cans. There's a drop-off location, which isn't always a great option. Little Rock has much better curbside recycling, much like Cincinnati. They are, in fact, exactly the same (unless my bleary eyes overlooked one or two things):

"Clear/green soda, water and juice bottles; Translucent milk jugs; any plastic item with neck having diameter smaller than base
Newspaper with inserts; Corrugated cardboard boxes, flattened; Brown paper grocery bags, junk mail, magazines
Aluminum cans; Steel beverage & food containers
Clear green or brown food and beverage containers"

The above is quoted from Little Rock's Public Works website. I'm curious how many Little Rockers recycle; Cincy Mayor Mark Mallory's been pushing for greater recycling here. We'll see if it gets traction.

Eating green: some basic principles

2008-07-29T09:18:00.003-04:00

One of the most basic ways to make a positive impact on both the environment and on your personal health is changing the way we eat. Just as global temperatures have risen over the past 20+ years, so have obesity rates in the U.S. Check out the links below.

More time spent in cars and less walking or biking, more time spent indoors watching television and using more energy per household. Adds up quick. So here are some easy ways to start changing your eating habits to help Cincinnati.

Eat local

The average grocery-store produce travels 1,500 miles just to get to the store. So when you get it, its carbon footprint is huge. Plus, sellers must spray produce with chemicals to keep them looking fresh longer.

The good news: buying local gets easier in Cincinnati all the time. The website Local Harvest helps you find nearby farmers' markets, as does Cincinnati Farmers' Markets (the latter has more coverage). so in addition to Findlay Market in OTR, there are lots of great nearby options. For example, my wife and I stop regularly at the Lunken Airport Farmers' Market, where we get blueberries, garlic, onions, tomatoes, summer squash, zucchini (when our garden's empty), scallions, peaches, and potatoes. And that's just the beginning. We also have a nearby Thursday Farmers' Market in Mt. Washington, a Saturday Farmers' Market in Anderson, and a Sunday market in Hyde Park. Good people, good company, good food.

Also, Cincinnati Locavore is a great resource for all things local-food related, including restaurants that source local food.

Choose fresh, not frozen

Frozen food has gotten better tasting over time, and sales have gone way up as well. Plus, thanks to better living through chemistry, much frozen food has the same nutritional content as its fresh counterparts (think of individual items here like blueberries, not Swanson's Angry Man dinners). However, creating meals, freezing them, shipping them across the country, and continuing to store them in freezers causes environmental havoc because it requires so much more energy. I know that frozen foods are time savers for parents with children (the rise in frozen food sales corresponds to the rise in the number of families where both parents work), but fresh food tastes better, sustains local farms, and makes cooking more fun. It's pretty amazing to eat a dinner of salad and herbs from your garden along with potatoes, green beans, and collard greens you bought from a farmer in Northern Kentucky.

Eat organic, and eat green

Bad news about meat: most of the commercially produced beef in the U.S. is full of fat and antibiotics. Same with poultry, though to a lesser extent. The good news: eating vegetarian, or at least cutting your meat habit way down, has never been easier. (Well, at least not in our lifetime.) Great vegetarian cookbooks abound, and more grocery stores sell organic tofu, tempeh, and beans. Cook them well, and they're great. Plus, restaurants offer more and better veggie options all the time.

And about organics: they don't contain pesticide residues, and they just taste better. The following twelve fruits and vegetables are the biggest carriers of pesticides when grown "traditionally":

peaches, apples, sweet bell peppers, celery, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, lettuce, imported grapes, pears, spinach, potatoes

The good news is that I've seen organic options for all these in local bigg's and Kroger stores. They're a little more expensive right now, but greater demand will bring down the prices. Plus, you're not filling yourself with chemicals that damage your body.

So start there. It's easier than you think.

Reusable materials

2008-07-25T16:46:00.003-04:00

New feature: every once in a while, I'm going to post a few things together worth looking at. Links, videos, photos, etc. I'm calling this feature "Reusable materials." I hope you enjoy it.

******************

I'm way behind on this, obviously, but the video of Al Gore's recent challenge is definitely worth watching. The general consensus about his plan seems to be that it's highly unlikely that we could achieve it but that shooting for 100% sustainable energy and reaching 60% would be well worth the effort. It would require quick action from the Federal government along with the agreement of most (if not all) state governments, but that's not too farfetched. And there's no good reason not do follow Gore's plan. Check out the website, too.

****************
This week, CinWeekly features green housing projects in Cincinnati. I don't see many faults in the articles (though I don't think they mention population density and housing density). Check them out. (There are three different links.)

****************
Finally, we forgot to check on one of our zucchini plants this last week. Result below. (Wine bottle for scale.) Not sure what we're going to do with it.

Redundancy

2008-07-24T22:14:00.001-04:00

I admit I've never understood car names (Stanza, for example), but today I saw my new favorite: the Jeep Liberty Freedom Edition! In 2003, Jeep put out a Freedom Edition of each of their vehicles, but nothing can beat the Liberty Freedom for pure redundancy. Other examples I hope to see:

Happiness, Joy Edition
Depression: A Melancholy Tale
The Phantom Menace: Nostalgia Wrecker

Go rent King Corn

2008-07-23T18:21:00.002-04:00

As an experiment, next time you're at the grocery store, read the label of everything you would normally pick out. Check the ingredients for "high fructose corn syrup." If it's there, put it back on the shelf.

The recent documentary King Corn does a whimsical and surprisingly powerful job of exploring how corn came to be the dominant crop in the United States. Two college friends, Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis, move to Greene, Iowa after graduation to grow one acre of corn. They learned, largely by accident, that both their great-grandfathers grew up in the same small county in Iowa, and they both want to connect to their lost heritage. For the sake of the film, the gimmick of growing a single acre of corn sets them on their way.

The tone of the movie is especially impressive for two reasons. One, we watch the two friends encounter their ancestry and discover how distant even Iowa has become from its oldest traditions (for example, one hundred years ago most Iowa farmers ate the crops they produced; now, very few of them can). Two, they approach the issues surrounding agriculture and health with admirable restraint and deftness. Whereas Michael Moore would be aggressive, they are calmly humane. Still, they manage to produce a pretty stunning indictment of corn production in the United States.

The short version: before the 1970s, the U.S. Department of Agriculture paid farmers to underproduce their crops. But in the mid-70s, Nixon's head of Agriculture changed the system; the government began paying farmers to overproduce. That led to an excess of corn production. In turn, the government subsidizes alternate uses of corn, including ethanol production and the creation of high fructose corn syrup, which is a cheap substitute for sugar but adds calories without adding nutrients. (When Ian and Curt make high fructose corn syrup in their home, we see just how vile it is.)

High fructose corn syrup has been linked to the greatly increased incidence of obesity and diabetes in the U.S. Unfortunately, it's in many pre-packaged foods and sodas, and most people have no idea of its effects. Thanks to King Corn, the message is spreading. With any luck, the Department of Agriculture will shift its emphasis on overproduction, and the vast excess of corn can shrink.

Hypermiling basics: the video

2008-07-21T11:43:00.002-04:00

Above is a short movie I made with five basic hypermiling techniques. These are all safe, legal, and efficient. I'll have more video posts about hypermiling later, but there's a lot to think about. I didn't want the video to be overwhelmingly long.

In the meantime, here are some very useful hypermiling links.

Leave suggestions and thoughts in the comments.

Ass transit

2008-07-15T10:33:00.008-04:00

Back in the day, before auto companies convinced the city to rip it up, Cincinnati had a great streetcar system downtown, complete with funiculars that went uphill to great neighborhoods like Mt. Adams. Now, though, Cincinnati has terrible mass transit. Like most major urban areas in the U.S., Cincinnati has seen whites and capital flee the city's center for the suburbs. Ideally, the city would have multimodal mass transit, since downtown hosts many jobs but relatively few homes. Instead, we have a bus system that isn't bad but can't serve as the only mass-transit system for a metro area that serves roughly three-million people. (Only about 300,000 of the people live in the city proper.) Help is on the way, but slowly, as is Cincinnati's wont.

I like riding the Metro system here, especially since its acronym is SORTA, while Northern Kentucky's is TANK. Those seem appropriate, since Northern Kentucky has taken advantage of development possibilities, while Cincinnati has lagged behind. Also, though I live in Mt. Washington, I can walk one block to the bus stop, and route 24 drops me off at UC's campus. For me, that's forty minutes of reading. If I want, I can put my bike on the front of the bus and ride once I get off. It's an effective system but not nearly enough for a city.

Below is a map of Metro's bus routes:

I've overlayed that with an image of Cincinnati's population density:

Set aside for a moment the fact that I suck at Photoshop. (Technically, I don't, since I don't have Photoshop, but still.) It's pretty clear that the bus routes serve the most populous areas but drop off pretty significantly after that. If you don't live near a bus stop, or if you need to transfer, you don't have much choice but to drive. In terms of energy efficiency, we might as well be riding asses. (Hence the title of the post; get your head out of the gutter.)

Imagine rail lines going up and down I-71 and I-75, with Park & Rides that correspond roughly with interstate exits. Imagine a rail that follows the Columbia Parkway, continuing up North through Mariemont and Milford. And a rail that goes along the Norwood lateral. Not only would those cut down on the horrible traffic in the city, but they'd also help people save money on gas and support development throughout the city. Plus, we have a bad smog problem thanks to the river valley; cars only make it worse.

These aren't pipe dreams. (I hope.) But they aren't happening anytime soon, so in my next post, I'll write about how my wife and I are getting the most gas mileage out of our car.

Looking for a green house?

2008-07-15T10:27:00.004-04:00

(As opposed to a greenhouse.) There are two LEED-certified houses in Northside (more on the way), and you can check out the listing for one of them. It’s a beautiful home, inside and out, and not too expensive, especially in the long term, considering energy savings. I don’t live in a LEED-certified home, but I wish I did. If I were moving, I’d put a bid in on this one. Great house, neighborhood with lots to do, nearby buses (a rarity round here).

Welcome to Green in Cincinnati

2008-07-15T10:17:00.000-04:00

Welcome to Green in Cincinnati, one local citizen’s guide to greening your life in a city it’s not always easy being green in. (Cue Kermit.)

Quick about me: I’m a Ph.D. student in English at UC, and I’ve lived here for four years. Recently, my wife and I decided to make our lives more sustainable. More organics, more local, less pollution, etc. I’m not going as far as No Impact Man, though I’d like to get as close to that as possible.

Quick about the blog: This blog exists for two reasons. One, I want to show people what my wife and I are doing so others in Cincinnati (and elsewhere) can take part and green their lives. Two, I know I’ve got lots of room for improvement, and any and all suggestions are welcome. My goal is to post a minimum of twice a week, with one video post every two weeks. I’m aiming for the video posts to make some of what I’m doing more transparent; in other words, I’ve seen some greening blogs that are hard to follow and can be condescending. (Note: I can be a little smug, too, and probably will be in some of the posts. I’m working on it.)

So here we go. Knock on FSC-certified wood.