Shelter

Because humans spend 90 percent of their lives indoors, shelter is something that has become very important to us. We rely on it to protect us from the outdoor elements and help us to live our lives comfortably. More recently however, we have come to realize that “going green” and being sustainable is a way in which we must try to live our lives for the sake of the environment and future generations. Building LEED certified houses and buildings is one way to help the sustainability efforts. Though there are other certification processes throughout the world, LEED is currently the most prevalent assessment method in the United States. There are four levels of certification, platinum, gold, silver, and certified, that a building can be rated as. The nine categories they rate the buildings on is sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, locations and linkages, awareness and education, innovation and design, and regional priority. While the group was presenting on the materials and resources section I found the information on biomimicry very interesting. There are so many things in nature that we could learn from and have yet to understand that could be innovative in the resources we use, and the way in which we build future sustainable buildings. I was also very interested to learn that the McKeown center and the new Centennial apartments are both LEED certified. It is nice to know that our school is doing its best to be sustainable. What is unfortunate about sustainable buildings however, is that it is difficult to for most people to have sustainable houses. Even  though they may want to do want they can to be sustainable and “go green,” to help out our environment, most people do not have the means to do so.

Space

I really enjoyed this presentation because I took a sustainability class in London last semester and we talked a lot about space and the layout of cities. We talked a lot about the difference between European cities, which are built up, and American cities, which are built out. Suburbs are appealing to people, especially families, because it is away from the noisy city life, there is more room for a backyard, the schools are generally better, and it is safer for their children. On the downside, people have to travel further and use more resources to get to where they need to go, and public transportation is less adequate and makes it harder for people without their own car to get around. In many European cities however, not many people own cars because it is not necessary because of the closer proximity and ease of public transportation. I was really surprised by the New Deal they talked about because I had never heard of it before. I think it is a really great idea and will help people get across the country in a much more efficient manner.

I really enjoyed learning more about green spaces as well. That was something else we discussed in our sustainability class, so I knew what they were, but I never knew all of the benefits they provided. Green spaces such as public parks, and community gardens help absorb some of the carbon in the air, are a habitat for wildlife, reduce noise pollution and runoff, and help to counteract the blacktop effect, and cool cities. I was also surprised to learn that there were health benefits of green spaces as well.

Organic Food

I found the presentation on organic foods to be very informative. I thought all organic foods were better for us, but it turns out that as of now, there is no solid evidence to prove that they are more nutritious than inorganic foods. I also learned that while many organic food producers use sustainable energy, sometimes organic foods can be less sustainable than inorganic foods when they are flown in from other countries, when there is much less expensive, locally grown inorganic food options available. Food labeling can also be misleading and confusing in stores. Through “greenwashing” with labels such as authentic or natural, people may think that the food they are buying is organic, when in fact it is not. Organic and healthy foods are so popular right now, that people are willing to pay more for them, so if something says it is natural, people may believe it is organic. Because organic certification is such a long and confusing process, it makes it difficult for farmers to grow organic food, and still maintain their livelihood. It takes about five years for farmers to turn a profit, and it also takes up more land to grow organic food, so they have a lower yield. Because organic foods cost more to produce, they are much more expensive in the store as well. This makes it more difficult for middle and lower class people to buy organic foods that use less pesticides, aren’t genetically modified, and are less processed. They cannot afford the same quality of foods that may be healthier for them than the wealthier population.

While I knew many of the advantages and upsides of organic foods before hearing this presentation, I was unaware of the downsides, so I found it very informative, and think that in the future it will be interesting to see what kinds of changes will be made in the food market.

Grizzly Man

Watching Grizzly man, I found Timothy Treadwell’s personality very interesting. He was a man who lived in the Alaskan wilderness for 13 summers by himself alongside the Grizzly bears, the most dangerous animal in Alaska. You would think that somebody doing this would be the stereotypical burly, masculine man with weapons to protect himself. Timothy, though he described himself as a warrior, did not fit that persona. He was a somewhat scrawny man who carried no weapons with him and wanted to protect the bears from others because he viewed them as his friends. He treated the bears with love and kindness, and took a more eco-feminist approach to saving them. He did not want to use violence (though he sometimes exploded into violent rages), and tried to save the bears by showing everyone else the bears’ soft, loving, and peaceful personalities.

In doing so however, Timothy did not have a very realistic view of nature. He treated the bears like they were his friends and family, and ignored the fact that they are also wild animals who will kill if they feel threatened in any way. He also seemed to think he was invincible, and no harm would come to him even though he often said that if anyone else were doing this they would die. While he loved the bears, I feel he did not have a realistic grasp on how nature works. He talked about nature like everything was happy and perfect, and it was only humans who were doing harm. However, whenever anything bad happened that occurred completely naturally, and would have occurred whether humans had an influence or not, he broke down and could not understand why such a horrible thing would happen in his perfect, untouched, natural world. Grizzly bears are one of many predator species who will do whatever it takes to survive, which includes eating their own young.

While I think he was doing what he thought was right to protect the bears, it may have done more harm than good. He was always getting close to the bears, and after living with them for 13 summers, some of them seemed to be used to his presence, especially the foxes. Assimilating bears to humans is dangerous for both humans and bears, and being killed by a bear created an even greater negative stigma for bears, all of which might have done more harm in the end. Even though Timothy was trying to help the bears, I think he had a somewhat delusional view of the world, and went about trying to help the bears in the wrong way. He could have still educated others about bears without putting himself, Amy, and the bears in danger.

Environmental justice

I found the introduction to the chapter on environmental justice very shocking at first, that someone would suggest we simply dispose of our waste by dumping all of it in a poorer country. Then I realized this is already what we are doing, it’s just that nobody has phrased the reasons for it so bluntly before. When you think about the process, it makes sense logically. We would be paying these poorer countries a lot of money that they can use to help develop their country further, and we would be getting rid of our pollution and waste in the process. They need the money, and they made their own decision and agreed to take our toxic waste from us. From a humanistic perspective however it does not seem right to pay someone off, and exploit their hardships to benefit for yourself, especially when it is potentially harmful to them.

After reading the article about the Goshute’s I was even more torn on the issue. According to federal laws they are allowed to make their own decision about whether or not to store nuclear waste on the land that the rightfully own. Toole county is already one of the “most concentrated areas of pernicious waste in the nation” with a site for biological weapons testing, chemical weapons storage, hazardous waste, a radioactive waste dump, and a corporation that “emitted enough chlorine and sulfur dioxide to earn it the title of the worst air polluter in the nation.” Toole county is clearly not the most pristine area of the nation, and if they have already taken advantage of their desert lands to store hazardous materials and gain extra money from it why shouldn’t the Goshute’s also be able to do the same, and gain some badly needed money of their own. It seems hypocritical of the state of Utah to deny them this right. On the other hand, why should the Goshute’s be taken advantage of, have to risk their own health, and agree to violate their own land because they barely have enough money to support themselves. It seems incredibly unfair and unjust.

Into the Wild

I thought Into the Wild was a very interesting film, but thought that the main character Chris McCandless, aka Alexander Supertramp was a bit foolish. I understood why he wanted to venture off into the wild, to escape from society and enjoy the beauty and pureness of nature. However, I thought that he had this ideal of what his experience was going to be like from reading all of his books, and he went about his adventure in the wrong way. He seemed to think that everyone else in the world had been corrupted by society, and the only way to fix that was to return to the pureness of the wilderness. He seemed to think that the only way to find true happiness was by being completely alone in the wilderness, so he could form his own ideas about the world. When he was traveling he met many people whom he started to become close to, but he seemed to run away from those relationships, as if he was scared that getting too close to people might change his views on how the only way to be happy is to be by himself in the wild. I also thought that he was so determined to have this grand adventure that would change his life that he was a bit unpractical in how he went about it. He burned all of his money and identification, and did not take much time to learn how to properly survive in the wilderness that was much more harsh and unforgiving than Chris had anticipated. While he learned a lot on his adventures, it took him until the very end to realize that true happiness is shared with others.

Another thing I thought was interesting is that Chris was never truly and completely in the “wild”. There is hardly any place in the world that has been untouched by man. Even when Chris was on his own in Alaska he was living in a bus that had been abandoned there. Also, many of the “wild” places that people can venture out into require permits and proper training before people are authorized to explore them. People can’t just climb mountains or raft down rivers anymore, they need permission because the “wild” is now under human control.

The Cove

Before watching The Cove I had no idea that in Taiji Japan, dolphins were being rounded up and sold to aquariums, and that those who did not fit the “flipper” profile were slaughtered for meat. The way they are rounded up and slaughtered can in no way be viewed as ethical. If the people involved thought that it was, they would not be trying so hard to cover up their actions every step of the way. They lied about the way the dolphins were killed, saying it was painless and instantaneous when in actuality they drove around in boats stabbing the dolphins at random. They also said that eating dolphin meat was part of their culture, but when Japanese citizens were interviewed, they said their culture does not eat dolphin meat, and that they had never heard of the situation in Taiji Japan. The fact the dolphin fishing industry and the Japanese government are mislabeling the meat, and selling it to citizens with high levels of mercury is also highly unethical. Even if people do not believe animals deserve rights, most believe that humans do, and the citizens of Japan are unknowingly consuming contaminated dolphin meat that could seriously harm them. If the people in Japan who are part of the dolphin slaughter in Taiji thought that what they were partaking in was in any way ethical, they would not be fighting so hard to hide and cover up what they were doing.

I know that we cannot end the killing of all animals, that different animals will be killed for food, and which animals are killed will always be argued over. However, even if we continue to kill animals for food, I believe that they at least deserve respect, and that they deserve to live out the lives they have with some comfort and decency. There are much more ethical and painless ways to raise and kill animals other than stabbing them at random until they eventually bleed to death while flailing around in their own blood. That is simply ridiculous and unacceptable.