Moustache Wax

Evo cree que EEUU filtró archivos secretos · la-razon.com

2010-12-14T20:59:00.000-07:00

We can't win; Evo Morales believes that Wikileaks is part of a US government plot to sow dischord in the Latin American region.

Evo cree que EEUU filtró archivos secretos · la-razon.com

W.T.O. Upholds U.S. Tariffs on Chinese Tires - NYTimes.com

2010-12-13T15:22:00.000-07:00

Wow... after all that, the WTO rules on our side. I'm really surprised!

W.T.O. Upholds U.S. Tariffs on Chinese Tires - NYTimes.com

AFP: Mogadishu's 'first tourist' puzzles immigration officials

2010-12-10T12:04:00.000-07:00

Hilarious.

AFP: Mogadishu's 'first tourist' puzzles immigration officials

What’s the most effective development intervention we know? – Chris Blattman

2010-12-08T08:43:00.000-07:00

A fascinating and brief post on the role of immigration in promoting economic development.

What’s the most effective development intervention we know? – Chris Blattman

The Fair Trade Challenge to Embedded Liberalism1 - Ehrlich - 2010 - International Studies Quarterly - Wiley Online Library

2010-12-07T16:15:00.000-07:00

An interesting paper here that argues that fair-trade advocates shouldn't be treated as traditional protectionists, because, in fact, they have different concerns from protectionists. Something that intuitively makes a great deal of sense, but which I had never considered very deeply.

The Fair Trade Challenge to Embedded Liberalism1 - Ehrlich - 2010 - International Studies Quarterly - Wiley Online Library

Property Rights and Financial Development: The Legacy of Japanese Colonial Institutions

2010-12-03T11:44:00.000-07:00

An interesting paper here that, like other work by Daron Acemoglu, uses military action--in this case, by the Japanese prior to the second World War--as a natural experiment examining the effects of property rights on later economic development. They find that the creation of formal property rights are associated with economic growth and infrastructure improvements around the Pacific basin.

Property Rights and Financial Development: The Legacy of Japanese Colonial Institutions

New cables reveal frank U.S. views on Latin America, from Argentina to Venezuela | La Plaza | Los Angeles Times

2010-12-02T20:24:00.000-07:00

More incredible revelations about US foreign policy, including:

1. Cuban intelligence has a lot of influence in Venezuela

2. The US is concerned about Iran's influence in Bolivia and Venezuela, and

3. Everybody thinks the Kirchner family is nuts, including the Chileans.

Any actual _news_ coming out of this?

New cables reveal frank U.S. views on Latin America, from Argentina to Venezuela | La Plaza | Los Angeles Times

Santa Cruz será sede del cuartel del ALBA · la-razon.com

2010-12-01T11:17:00.000-07:00

Haven't blogged in a long time, but this seemed worthwhile to highlight; Bolivian newspaper _La Razon_ is reporting that the city of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, will be the military training headquarters for Hugo Chavez's ALBA (Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America) left-wing alliance, including a new military academy.

The irony is that Santa Cruz is the center for right wing anti-Morales types.

We'll have to follow this in the weeks to come.

Santa Cruz será sede del cuartel del ALBA · la-razon.com

Blanning on Coffee

2010-08-31T05:29:00.001-06:00

The percolator is, as we should all know by now, both the foundation and fountainhead of Anglo-American liberty:

As the number of public spaces proliferated during this period, so did opportunities for the exchange of information, ideas and criticism. An exemplar was the coffee-house. Within fifty years of the founding of the first in Europe--in Venice in 1645--it had spread across the continent, reaching London in the early 1650s. By 1659 Samuel Pepys could record that he had been to the Turk's Head coffee-house in New Palace Yard, close to Parliament, and had heard 'exceeding good argument against Mr Harrington's assertion that overbalance of propriety [property] was the foundation of government'. For the price of a cup of coffee (although many other beverages were on offer), anyone decently dressed could join in debating the issues of the day. The newly restored Charles II took a dim view of the freedom expression that prevailed there...

The notion of "public spaces" and the way they permit civil society to function may be the most important part here.

The recent controversy involving Starbucks and the open carry folks (crazies?) may be a good modern example of the ways in which public spaces (though privately owned) can promote political mobilization.

Blanning on the American Revolution

2010-08-30T05:29:00.000-06:00

Another interesting quote from Tim Blanning's book The Pursuit of Glory:

On the American side, there was some confusion, or at least disagreement, as to whether they were conservatives fighting to defend old liberties in the plural or revolutionaries fighting for liberty in the abstract. Sensibly, the Continental Congress put the two together in their Declaration of Rights of 1774, appealing to 'the immutable laws of nature, the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters and compacts'.

So, the American revolution was both religious and secular, and both radical and conservative?

Late 18th century elections in Britain

2010-08-25T11:22:00.000-06:00

Haven't blogged in a long time; intended to start again over the summer, but just haven't had the energy for it. Have been wanting to start again for a couple of weeks or two. Maybe I'll start to get back into it again now. Although I've written that before and not followed through!

My research, this summer, has been about private and public goods provision in Peruvian municipalities, and the democratic dynamics that tend to drive greater or lesser public works spending around the Peruvian countryside.

One of my findings is an interesting interaction effect. What I've found is that greater electoral competition is associated with greater spending in public works, but only when there are substantial checks and balances present in municipal governments. These checks and balances, in Peru, consist of municipal council seats controlled by opposition parties.

My argument is, in effect, that all politicians would prefer to seek the support of voters by targeting reliable supporters with private goods than public goods, and only veto power by opposition groups will keep them from doing so. After all, private goods are easier to provide to supporters while excluding non-supporters. In the presence of a strong opposition, however, politicians will pursue the next best course; they will attempt to provide public goods to win support, even though non-supporters may experience some benefits of their policies.

In Peru, "private goods provision" comes at election time, and generally consists of political hopefuls using private or state funds to buy seed, fertilizer, durable goods, food, and (most often) alcohol for their supporters.

For obvious reasons, then, I was struck by the following quote, which describes British elections to Parliament abound the end of the 18th century in The Pursuit of Glory, a history text I'm working through on Europe before 1815:

When a contest did take place, no holds were barred and no stratagem thought too base in the quest for victory. Treating to food and drink, outright bribery and intimidation were all commonplace, greatly encouraged by the public ballot.

...and later...

Among the innumberable anomalies that could be found, the practice of bringing back registered "freemen" of a borough for the vote, even if they had moved to other parts of the kingdom, deserves a mention. When an officer of marines learnt that a number of sailors had been given special leave to return to their home town of Coventry to vote for the government candidate, he did his friend the Duke of Portland a good turn by having them hastily transferred to a ship outward bound to Guinea.

Indeed, it rather sounds as if modern Peruvian elections are substantially cleaner than their 18th century British counterparts.

Thoughts on Theory of the State

2010-06-01T23:13:00.000-06:00

So, I've finished posting pictures from Emily and my vacation around Austria; if you're interested, you can click the link in the previous post or the picture in the sidebar. Most of the pictures are new, and up since yesterday (earlier today, for you folks in Colorado).

Curtis' take on the Treaty of Westphalia has me sold, but being here and going to history a couple history museums (which has taught me enough that I can develop plausible but totally incorrect ideas) has me thinking…

Is it too simplistic to think of the Treaty of Westphalia as the birth of the modern nation-state? States like the ones we know today existed much earlier. For example, the Imperial state of Rome, the Greek city-states, and feudal states in Europe with strong bureaucratic and military apparatuses, like the Holy Roman Empire and other Hapsburg territories.

Organizations which were not states in the modern sense of the world also controlled territory long after the Treaty of Westphalia. Examples that come to mind include insurgents in Vietnam in the 1960s, groups like the Taliban in Afghanistan in the 1990s (and groups like Villista and Zapatista forces during the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1030) and the "Prince-Bishops of Salzburg," who were evidently bishops who became so wealthy off the nearby salt mines that they came to control substantial amounts of territory (much of Western Austria), build fortresses (including the the impressive Salzburg fortress which was never taken by assault or siege) and control military forces.

Is it more accurate to think of states as simply one of many types of organizations that control territory with greater or lesser degrees of effectiveness?

New pictures up.

2010-05-31T09:50:00.000-06:00

Some of my pictures from Salzburg and Vienna are now up on my Picasa site. you can click on the link in the blog sidebar (the picture), or here.

European Rail Service

2010-05-30T03:00:00.000-06:00

As pretty much everybody knows, European rail systems are very efficient, comfortable, and well-designed. I'm jealous, even though train tickets are way more expensive than I thought they would be. Of course, everything here is more expensive than I thought it would be.

I used to think that European rail service was so much better than rail service (and bus service, and every other kind of US public transport) because US rail carriers (Amtrak) had been subsidized. I learned recently, though, that European and other mass transit systems throughout the developed world are heavily subsidized, which is the only thing that keeps them running. Maybe we need more, not fewer rail subsidies in the US.

Not sure why I didn't assume that European rail was subsidized; only makes sense. Europe = government intervention in economies, right?

The apparent efficiency of these systems seems like proof that subsidized or public systems can provide a quality of service that can be unmatched by the market.

Government intervention in rail markets may help providers coordinate and benefit from economies of scale which are necessary in order for transport systems to work efficiently. If you don't subsidize, using rail transport will cost more, so many fewer people will use rail, so it will be more costly, an so on… Subsidies probably also make it possible for transport providers to provide services to places that wouldn't be economical destinations otherwise; keeping rural communities alive, despite economic inefficiencies, may be an outcome we value intrinsically.

Also, it seems hard to argue that the car-centric US culture is more efficient, even in a purely economic sense, than the fast, clean, convenient, and energy-efficient public transport here, even if it's subsidized.

Of course, private transport is also heavily subsidized in the US (most roads are public, for one thing, and there are many direct and indirect subsidies to auto manufacturing and gasoline production). So our system may well be the result of heavy subsidies to the automotive industry and smaller subsidies to rail. Perhaps we would get something like the European system in a purely market-driven economy where nothing was subsidized at all.

Financial Sanctions on Iran, and missing flights in Europe.

2010-05-21T06:12:00.000-06:00

The NY Times discusses the possibility of financial sanctions against Iran's central bank here.

What I know about this approach is relatively optimistic--sounds like the approach we tried against Sudan during the Clinton administration, after the first World Trade Center bombings--these were the financial sanctions that drove Bin Laden and his cronies from Sudan to Afghanistan. Though it also sounds like there's a lot to be decided here.

Anything I'm missing?

In other news, after nearly missing our connecting flight in Houston, Emily and I made our flight to Frankfurt, then, once in Frankfurt, missed our flight to Vienna. So, we should be in Vienna on a later flight at about 9:30 tonight, unless we can hitch a ride, standby, on a flight that's leaving in about an hour.

I'm no stranger to long flights, but I haven't crossed this many time zones in a single trip ever in my life before, except for once. It's weird. It's 2:15PM here, and I'm just starting to get hungry for breakfast. Feel like I should be a lot more tired than I am.

In other news, Frankfurt is my new least favorite airport. As byzantine and poorly signed as O'Hare or the airport in Mexico City, without the charming modernist architecture of O'Hare or the shininess of D.F.

Will Sanctions Work?

2010-05-18T10:03:00.000-06:00

The New York Times reports a deal on international sanctions on Iran here.

Although the jury is still out on whether or not sanctions "work," (some say yea, some say nay, and for a range of different reasons), one thing that we know is that, if sanctions work, they are most likely to work before they're imposed. That is, sanctions work primarily as a threat, ahead of time. If a target of sanctions--Iran, in this case--is going to cave, they'll do so after threatened with sanctions, but before sanctions are imposed, to avoid the potential costs.

One problem is that countries (like Iran) might be threatened with sanctions in private, ahead of time. So it's often to know if private threats of sanctions work in changing the behavior of targeted countries.

However, if there's one thing that democracies are good at, it's clearly signaling their intentions; in this case, to punish Iran for pursuing nuclear power. Unfortunately, the United States probably isn't the critical player in this case of sanctions, and the most important players--Russia and China--aren't democratic. So we'll see what happens.

For what it's worth, I do think that sanctions work sometimes, and are worth trying before stepping up to something else (like, say, cruise missile strikes or something like that). I would also argue that an important normative consideration is for us to reduce our own nuclear stockpile, which is something we're already doing under the Obama administration. That's probably helpful, if you believe in soft power, the power of persuasion, and the teaching of appropriate norms to "deviant" states.

Academic exploitation?

2010-05-17T17:48:00.000-06:00

Via Chris Blattman, a discussion, here, of how "exploitative" academic job markets exist.

I find this whole discussion laughable. As an academic, even as an adjunct in most places, you still get paid more, and work far less, than even the laziest of public school teachers. Academia is a great deal. End of story.

If I wind up in academia (and I may not--I have this Boren fellowship government service commitment), and if I end up in a low-end job in (say) Leadville, Colorado, it won't be because I've been "socialized" into believing that academia is better than everywhere else. Sure, there are people who believe that. There are also people that believe that the pipeline welding industry is better than everywhere else. It will be because I'm willing to trade off some salary for the benefits of being a full-time college instructor.

It blows my mind that there are so many people out there who are willing to sing the sad song of labor exploitation, even when it's ridiculous, on its face. Emily had a law professor who loved to talk about how exploitative the partnership track law firm jobs were.

Those are the same jobs that start at $125K/year.

Steel yourself to face the revolutionary vanguard of overworked personal injury attorneys.

Elinor Ostrom make it to Jeopardy!

2010-05-17T10:49:00.000-06:00

This is from April 30. A $200 question (which, I think, makes her really famous).

Realists catching up.

2010-05-15T22:47:00.000-06:00

Is Stephen Walt just now discovering that the United States' relative power is in decline? Seriously? This brilliant insight, coming in 2010, could only come from the same people who believe in the stopping power of water.

The X-men and economic development

2010-05-14T09:56:00.000-06:00

It's been a while since I've blogged about anything; I've been leaving it up to my students to do the heavy lifting for a long time. Maybe I'll get back into it a bit now.

The other night, Emily and I watched "X-men: Origins." A copy that I picked up in Peru when I was there. I have a pretty low bar for movies, so although I've heard that it wasn't that good, I really enjoyed it. Movies are escapism for me, so the comic book films really work for me pretty well.

After we finished up the DVD, though, I was thinking about what the world would look like if there really were mutants wandering around with indestructible skeletons and superhuman strength and the ability to self-heal and stop bullets with their hands and stuff like that. Seems unlikely to play out the way the Marvel comic books suggest it would. So, in the style of Dan Drezner (but with more of a comparative twist), I decided to blog about it.

The universe of the X-men resembles our world in most ways, right down to the fact that there is a US presidency with control over the armed forces, etc. If indeed there were mutants with superpowers that were able to prey on humanity, however, it's much more likely that the world would be a lot poorer, there would be a lot less capital-intensive industry, and non-mutant government would play much less of a role than it does in our world.

One thing that political economists know from the work of Barry Weingast, Douglass North, Avner Greif and other institutionalists is that trade, capital accumulation, lending, contracting, and therefore, industrialization and much other economic activity (the activity that makes the wealth of the developed world possible) is due to the presence of institutions--rules--that keep people from taking wealth away from other people. If I'm stronger than you, and you can't trust that I won't take your wealth away if you save it because there are no rules or mechanisms for rule enforcement (such as laws, police forces, and judicial systems to protect my wealth), you simply won't accumulate much wealth for me to take away. Better to spend it as soon as you get it (and probably better to spend it on things that are quickly consumable, like beer, chips, and bottle rockets) than to save it or invest it in some business-building scheme such as new equipment or a new store or other facility.

Likewise, if judicial systems don't work very well because there are people who can use force or corruption to manipulate others (like diamond-hard adamantium talons or rapid healing abilities or the ability to corrupt others through threats or the ability to bend their minds) you get a country that is very poor, crime-ridden, and relatively unstable. One good modern day example is Guatemala, which has an extremely high crime rate, high birth rate, fragmented economy, and high rate of retributive justice.

A high crime rate, because the criminal justice system isn't any good at catching and punishing lawbreakers. A high rate of retributive justice, like lynchings, that are an imperfect substitute for a functioning justice system. A high birth rate, because the absence of unbiased government which might otherwise provide a social safety net leaves the poor with little choice but to have many children who can support them in their old age. And a fragmented economy, because firms are afraid to get too big, lest they become a target for racketeering and other criminal rent-seeking activities.

Finally, we also know that where one group has power or control that another group lacks, like disproportionately large political influence, more arms (weapons) or more arms (grasping rubber tentacles), or the ability to teleport or move metal objects with their minds, they will likely be able to manipulate existing government institutions to their material benefit (like wealthy European elites in resource-extractive economies like Bolivia, Brazil, or Mexico) or become the government, themselves (like early European states).

Further we know that if there are two groups of elites with a great deal of force fighting one another, the weak don't tend to get left out, and they don't tend to get to carry on their lives like usual. Just ask Peruvian rural peasants caught between the shining path and the government, the Sudanese, or rural Mayan Guatemalans during the '80s.

Basically, if there were mutants, our lives would much more likely resemble the lives of poor rural agriculturalists in the developing world.

More on oil spills

2010-05-04T16:35:00.000-06:00

Alexandra Vostrejs

Look at this image first: http://i.imgur.com/bzj89.jpg

Follow these links:

http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USN0121519420100502

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126468782&ft=1&f=1001

Massive oil spills always make headlines. People flock from far and wide to clean up baby birds and animals with Dawn soap. Generally these disasters which have far reaching consequences http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_spill . It is generally assumed that these accidents will be payed for by the company responsible. The Exon Valdez spill for instance was supposed to be payed for by the Exon, but they spent years in court appealing the costs and the charges brought against them.

Worse than not taking full responsibility for these natural disasters is this: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcnow/2010/05/gulf-oil-spill-sarah-palin-still-wants-to-drill-baby-drill.html

Seriously... This type of rhetoric is bad for our national security. It promotes destroying the resources we depend on for life, for no more than petty political gains.

Responsible action should be the name of the game. Not pushing political points for big oil to cover up the tragedy of a massive accident like this one

US Youngsters are too fat to fight, warn generals

2010-05-04T16:32:00.002-06:00

Jose Loera

Every day you probably do not notice the overwhelming number of obese youngsters but our generals have definitely noticed. Two generals in particular have made claims that obesity among our young Americans can undermine the future of the US military. The claim is that more than a quarter of young Americans are now too fat to fight. This claim suggests that military service recruits will have obesity as the overwhelming factor for medical dismissal.

The next step that the generals have taken has been to encourage congress to introduce laws to change the value of nutrition that the students are receiving in school. The generals have also joined a coalition of over 130 generals on this fight to encourage new laws. Two former Joint Chiefs of Staff have been quoted saying, “Obesity rates threaten the overall health of America and the future strength of our military.”

My question to the readers out there is are you one of this kids or is this your brother, sister, or cousin? Do you buy into the claim our future soldiers will not be able to fight because their belly is holding them back? What are your thoughts on the subject considering many school districts have decided to cut out Physical Education (P.E) programs due to budget cuts.

Recycling

2010-05-04T14:54:00.002-06:00

Hannah Weinberger

We are coming upon an age where we need new innovation, and new attitudes towards the way we do things. Watch this clip and see how Hollywood, Florida is changing incentives for recycling, and how much of an impact it is having on the amount of recycling growth in the city.

Other cities around the country should start to think about programs that give incentives to recycling, besides just saving the planet. For many, that is not a worthwhile reason to begin to change their lifestyle.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2010/05/04/ac.zarrella.recycle.bank.cnn?hpt=C2

Massive and Unprecedented

2010-05-04T09:03:00.002-06:00

Christian Eaton

So describes the Deepwater Horizon oil spill by President Obama in a national address this week. An estimated 210,000 to 1,100,000 US Gallons are spilling daily from the leak. (Keep in mind that an oil truck has a carrying capacity of only 9,000 US Gallons.) Back in February of 2009 (just over a year before the environmental disaster), BP – British Petroleum (lessee of the well) filed an environmental impact plan for this particular well that included statements indicating that it was "unlikely that an accidental surface or subsurface oil spill would occur from the proposed activities", and that "due to the distance to shore (48 miles) and the response capabilities that would be implemented, no significant adverse impacts are expected." Whoops! Those assessments were way off! As you read this, oil is continuing to leak from the uncapped well and it doesn’t look promising that it is going to stop any time soon.

BP has been trying and is working on a few options for stopping the oil leak. The immediate action taken by the oil giant is dispersing chemicals over the oil slick. (I know – you are probably asking yourself the same question as me: They are spreading chemicals over an oil spill…how does that help the situation?!?) These “oil dispersants” are composed of harmful toxins and ultimately concentrate oil toxins in the ocean killing fish and allowing the oil to travel large distances (since the oil is broken up into smaller particles, it disperses throughout the ocean.) Who would have thought this to be the solution to the problem: Spread the oil into small quantities throughout the world! Oil booms are also in place to keep it from entering inland waterways and critical and fragile environments. As much as I hate burning fuel, they have set parts of the slick ablaze simply to send the pollution to the atmosphere. This may be the only time that you hear me say, “Burn baby burn!” BP is in the process of constructing metal mechanisms meant to catch the spurting oil and send it to a ship at the surface; yet this system is about 1-3 weeks from being put into place. (Meanwhile the oil keeps coming up.) The last and only real solution to the problem is to cap the well and cut it off already! However, in order for this to happen, two additional wells need to be drilled which are estimated to completion at two to three months. Did you just hear a record scratch? Two to three months!?! (Yes – oil will still be leaking the entire time.)

In the end, when all is done, this will go down as the worst environmental disaster in the United States ever and the greatest oil spill in two decades, greatly surpassing that of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. We don’t even have to go into the impacts to raise some sort of anger and passion inside of you, but I’ll go ahead and skim the surface of the lengthy impact and destruction of this oil spill.
*Destruction of the entire Gulf Coast seafood economy (sea turtles, fish, and birds are already beginning to wash up on shore).
*Louisiana state bird (the Brown Pellican) was just taken off the endangered species list…is it going back on?
*The only breeding ground for the Bluefin Tuna, which is spawning now.
*Incident site being smack in the middle of the North American flyways for migrating birds…where will they rest from their large flights?
*Serious respiratory effects on relief workers.
*Ultimately, the worst of a spill like this unfolds in ten to twenty years down the road when the oil is locked up in the environment and effects on the food chain toxicity and ability to reproduce actually begin to surface.

If these events tend to repeat themselves throughout history as shown, when do individuals begin to ask themselves, “Is driving to work alone today really worth the environmental destruction?” “I realize that biking everywhere can begin to make an impact when individuals band together,” and “The transportation model of today really does perpetuate environmental destruction…doesn’t it?”

The Truth About Glass

2010-04-28T10:44:00.000-06:00

Scott Williams

Obviously our lives are filled with the constant pressure to recycle and in generally be more conscious of the everyday objects that fill our lives. I also understand that it may not be easy to constantly surrender to this pressure given most of our current status as students. Therefore, I am writing this to inform all readers of the absolute need to recycle glass objects- even if nothing else.
When glass finds its way into a landfill, it can take millions of years to break down. However, when glass is recycled in its appropriate manner, it can be processed and found back on the shelf at the grocery store in nearly one month! Now I realize that this is not new information, but for some reason many people (myself included) still have trouble packing our recyclables into bags and taking them to a recycle-friendly location. Another important fact that many know about glass is that it is 100% reusable and therefore contributes to the sustainable world that we all strive to live in.

The recycling of glass products can have a HUGE effect on the environment, which in turn can answer many questions about how we go about creating a sustainable future. For every ton of glass that we recycle, we save more than a ton of raw materials that must be used to create new glass products. These raw materials include sand, soda ash, and limestone. Also, as we all know, the process of melting and forming glass products demands large amounts of energy in order to heat the glass to the necessary temperatures.

Therefore, my question for you readers is- why is it that all governments do not provide incentives for people to recycle. As for many other issues, these incentives have seemed to benefit the public and so I suggest a national push toward these incentives. Whether it is on the state level or a national level, it seems as though there is no plausible excuse for all areas to receive this incentive. In order to better the future of our environment and progress toward a more sustainable tomorrow, we must pay more attention to the simple benefits that can come from something as simple as recycling our glass.

More on Whaling

2010-04-26T21:51:00.002-06:00

Sarah Galligan

Negotiations are now under way to attempt to reduce the number of whales killed and monitor the international trade of whale meat. This new motive of tracking the whales would propose creation of a central registry of whale DNA. This type of tracking has been used on a very limited scale by scientific researchers, as well as producers of the documentary, "The Cove." This process of DNA analysis was used to detect the illegal sale of whale meat at restaurants in Santa Monica and Seoul. Scientists found that the whale meat sold at restaurant "The Hump" its Santa Monica (since closed) was from a sei whale, and had most likely come from the North Pacific under Japans "scientific whaling program."

One main issue inhibiting the detection of illegal trading and capture of whale poachers is the fact that the Japanese government does not share genetic information on the whales that it harvests. Currently a number of activists are calling on the Japanese to provide information on the roughly 1,000 whales it kills each year. Scientist Dr. Baker claims, "“Our ability to use genetics as a tool to monitor whale populations around the world has advanced significantly over the past few years, but unless we have access to all of the data — including those whales killed under Japan’s scientific whaling — we cannot provide resource managers with the best possible science."

Source NY TIMES

Ecological Footprint

2010-04-24T20:17:00.001-06:00

Kevin Peters

The term “ecological footprint” refers to the “resource accounting framework for measuring human demand on the biosphere.” A recent study by Mathis Wackernagel has shown that the global ecological footprint was in overshoot by .4 global hectares per person, or roughly 23%. Of these developing countries, China presents the largest threat. Currently, China is roughly 11 times lower in per capita footprint, however they have a population that is more than 4 times the size of the USA. It is estimated that if China developed to the level of the United States that world consumption rates would roughly double.

The question that is difficult to answer is how do you tell people that they can’t have the same things that we have had or will have? In order for the US to become a leader in the world in the 21st century and beyond, we need to take the lead in the energy sector and more broadly we must set an example of how to live sustainably. The ecological footprint framework is a good rough estimate to determine how much demand the country is placing on its environment. I encourage you to take a look at this website: it not only has a calculator to see what your own footprint is but also has country and city footprints so you can compare different parts of the world.

Recent Push in Anti-Whaling Efforts

2010-04-19T17:24:00.000-06:00

Ryan Cuticelli

Recently, a United States led anti-whaling coalition has been pressuring the International Whaling Commission to adopting an agreement to reduce and regulate whaling across the globe. The “compromise deal” will allow three countries, Japan, Norway and Iceland, to continue whaling however agree to a number of strict regulations. The three countries would be forced to use a “whale DNA registry” which would allow the IWC to track where whale products are shipped throughout the world. Furthermore, they would be forced to place tracking devices on all whaling ships in order to monitor their movement through high whaling areas.

Although traditional whaling practices would be abolished an a new hard line system put in place the three countries do receive some major incentives. In attempt to curb the growing anti-whaling movement, in 1986 the whaling community came together and formed the 1986 international moratorium. This moratorium forbid the practice of whaling in an area called the South Ocean Whale Sanctuary, a “safe zone” for whales. In the new deal this moratorium would be lifted and registered whaling vessels would be allowed to fish in an area that has not been touched in almost 25 years.

Furthermore, by agreeing to this deal the three major whaling countries will have a true monopoly on the whaling industry. With this they will be able to come together and agree on the price of whale on the world market. Because of the increased restrictions, costs associated with outfitting all ships with tracking systems, and increased time in cataloging their catch the price of whale will see a large increase.

Even in 1986 a deal like this would have been unfeasible. However, due to globalization information regarding the severity of the issue would have not been able to circulate worldwide. Things such as the Internet have allowed people around to world to come together and form these coalitions. Furthermore, advances in technology have made the world a smaller place. Global positioning systems will allow the IWC to better regulate standing regulations.

Didymosphenia Geminata in Boulder Creek

2010-04-15T13:30:00.000-06:00

Sarah Walls

Didymospenia geminata is a stalk forming diatom, microscopic algae and invasive nuisance species that has become established in Boulder Creek in the past five to eight years. The commonly called, didymo, can smother entire streambeds with mats as thick as eight inches and can ruin just about any river or creek. The didymo appears as rock snot, it very slimy and unattractive. Little is known about the relationship between didymo and stream conditions.

A study by CU boulder determined that D. geminata abundance is negatively correlated with total dissolved phosphorous concentrations and bed movement. In contrast, D. geminata abundance was not directly correlated with temperature, pH, conductivity, total suspended solids, or dissolved inorganic nitrogen. The potential role of total dissolved phosphorus and bed movement in decreasing D. geminata coverage adds to the limited base of knowledge regarding controls on the growth and distribution of this species, and could be investigated by researchers studying D. geminata blooms in other stream ecosystems.

It seems that one of the most promising control factors of D. geminata is water flow. If controlled stream flow is released flooding of the creek can wash away the didymo. However, the question of where the didymo go, and when they come back is an issue. D. geminata abundance decreased in Boulder Creek after an unusual flood event caused by 3 days of sustained rainfall in the headwaters of the watershed. However, within a week, coverage had been restored to pre-flood levels.

Increased research and education about didymo seems the best solution as of now to control the invasive species. Didymo became invasive through contact and carrying the diatom from one stream to another. Fly-fishing plays a large role in contamination because felt bottom shoes and other gear carry didymo from one stream to another. So far, the only thing known to kill didymo is bleach. So the best way to prevent further spreading of didymo in front range water systems is to educate recreationists to clean all gear to prevent cross-contamination and raise awareness about the issue.

Didymo on a rock and microscopic didymo diatoms…pretty cool!

Livestock and Waste

2010-04-15T13:26:00.002-06:00

Holly Shuss

Large animal feedlots are far from sustainable and each year they get bigger and bigger. Thousands of animals live in densely compacted pens and yards which means massive amounts of waste are being produced that cannot be assimilated onto nearby land. Wastes are kept in large ‘lagoons’ or open-air pits filled with animal urine and manure. Lagoons can be as large as seven acres and contain up to 45 million gallons of waste. Some of this waste acts as a great fertilizer but using too much is actually toxic to plants and animals. State governments and the EPA have set up regulations to limit how much and how often farmers may dispose of this waste from lagoons and into the surrounding environment, particularly into waterways, to prevent pollution.

However, farmers have incentives to cheat and dispose of this waste illegally to decrease private waste disposal costs. Competition to produce cheap protein causes factory farms to take shortcuts and find loopholes to increase their production yields at the lowest cost possible. By reducing their own private costs and dumping wastes into national waterways, factory farms are responsible for increasing pollution mitigation costs and negative impacts to the environment. Clearly, stronger regulations need to be put in place to prevent this sort of pollution and we need to find better waste management strategies if factory farms continue to increase in size and in number.

Cutting the Budget

2010-04-11T19:38:00.003-06:00

Via the Monkey Cage, why it's so hard to cut the federal budget.

ANWR

2010-04-07T11:46:00.000-06:00

Tyler Stapp

Throughout the last several presidential administrations drilling for oil and natural gas in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) region of Alaska has been an issue that has received a lot of attention. Since President Obama took over for President Bush the issue has been in a state of limbo without a clear idea of what the future for drilling in Alaska will be. One main reason for this limbo has been the 60 day comment period that new Secretary of the interior Salazar imposed which was then followed by a scrapping of the 5 year drilling plan of the Minerals Management Service (MMS).

Most recently, President Obama announced his plans and views on the development and drilling of the outer continental shelf (OCS). The President announced plans to allow drilling and exploration in the Mid and South Atlantic states, and the Mid and Easter Gulf states as well in a few regions of Alaska. However, despite this allowance for drilling the President’s plan closed more areas of Alaska to drilling than it opened.

The website ANWR.org strongly supports the idea of responsibly drilling for oil in Alaska and provides countless reasons why this would be a good idea including employment, economic, international relations and even some environmental benefits that would be achieved. I was originally against this idea, but after researching further into the issue I have begun to change my mind and was wondering what everyone else thought on the issue, especially those that have researched it at all.

New Fuel Economy Rules

2010-04-07T10:59:00.000-06:00

Matthew McCathran

Going along with all the discussion about carbon emissions, the Obama administration set the first national regulations targeting climate change, boosting U.S. automobile fuel-economy standards by about 30 percent. The requirements were raised to an average of 35.5 miles per gallon for 2016 model-year cars and light trucks from 27.3 mpg in 2011. The final rule will cost automakers $52 billion to comply and add $926 to the cost of buying a car within five years, according to government estimates. The 5 percent annual increase in fuel mileage over the next five years would save an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of oil and reduce 960 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions by 2016.

While the regulations gained support from President Barack Obama, automakers, union leaders, state officials and environmentalists, there has been some protest from oil and gas companies, stating that “The rule is not just about vehicle efficiency, it’s about EPA overreaching to create an opportunity for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from virtually every firm and business in America, no matter how unwieldy, intrusive and burdensome such regulation might be.” Senators including Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have said EPA rules could hurt the economy and has proposed a “two-year suspension” in EPA action.
A main concern with this policy is that it places the cost of reducing emissions directly onto the consumer. Even with claims that the extra cost for a vehicle will be paid for by reduced fuel costs, does the policy provide enough incentive to be effective?

Colorado Forestry Decentralization

2010-04-06T12:05:00.000-06:00

Some of you might be interested in the recent news, reported by the Denver Post, that the Colorado state government is requesting the right to manage National Forest lands inside of Colorado. This would be a major hand-over in power from the feds to the State.

I'm in favor of this sort of decentralization--it is one potential solution to ecologically inappropriate national-level micromanagement of National Forest lands. Although it isn't the only solution.

Another appropriate solution might be what we would call "deconcentration," in which national government powers are granted to locally-based national government agencies. So, for example, the Dept. of Agriculture would grant the power to make fire suppression decisions to a local Dept. of Ag. office, rather than the state of Colorado (or Dept. of Ag. decision-makers in D.C.).

But either approach is probably preferable to the current approach, which is a pretty terrible system.

Measuring Greenhouse Gas Emissions

2010-04-05T15:28:00.002-06:00

Elise Ridgeway

There’s been a lot of talk lately about solutions for reducing emissions lately, both in class and on this blog. The Cap and Trade program and the Carbon Tax offer two possible solutions proposed to lower emissions in the United States. However, a recent article pointed out the problems with the actual measuring of emissions, which could lead to difficulties for both domestic and international policy making. The Copenhagen Accord states that countries will use a universal way of measuring and reporting emissions, but it is unclear whether these guidelines truly ensure that the reported emissions are accurate. It is estimated that the margin of error for carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel is only about 5%, but the level of uncertainty for other greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxide is much higher, from 25-100%.

In order for an international agreement like a Cap and Trade or Carbon Tax to work, it is necessary that we figure out a way to accurately measure and report emissions. Transparency will be necessary by all of the actors involved, and expensive investments will have to be made to improve standards of measurement and testing.

This is only a small part of the larger picture of reducing harmful emissions, but even this small factor is a huge endeavor that the entire world must deal with, putting the task of enforcing to lower emissions into perspective. Is it possible to overcome the many obstacles and regulate such a large program with efficiency?

UPS Bailout

2010-04-02T13:52:00.000-06:00

Christopher Feagle

Recently there has been controversy between United Parcel Service (UPS) and Fedex Express on whether UPS should get a federal bailout.

Currently, UPS is asking the Government to incorporate a paragraph that would require Fedex Express to change its delivery model. Fedex’s delivery model is composed primarily of an air fleet while UPS is composed of a truck fleet. Under this new law, Fedex could potentially be required to become grounded. Even though UPS makes double the annual revenue than Fedex and delivers five times as many parcels a day, they feel the need to lobby for this bill to pass.

It seems that UPS is trying desperately to make one of the world’s most efficient airlines operate under trucking rules. In an attempt to remain competitive with today’s “need it now” attitude, this 100 year old company needs to update their structure not just eliminate their competition. UPS is trying to use their reputation as the “biggest giver to the U.S. lawmakers” to slip this bailout into legislation.

I currently work for Fedex Express and was just curious on what people thought about this. Is it fair for a company that pulls in more annual revenue and delivers more packages then its competition to try and push congress into demolishing a competitor’s infrastructure? Should UPS redesign their infrastructure or at least update it in order to remain competitive or should they continue being a 100 year old outdated company?

Cap and Trade in Europe

2010-04-02T13:48:00.001-06:00

Harrison Altman

A recent article in The New York Times (published March 25th) discussed the recent loss of standing for cap and trade as the energy policy of choice. The article, written by John Broder, discusses the reasons for cap and trade’s demise, as well as the alternative proposed solutions.

The article states that, in short, cap and trade fell due to “the weak economy, the Wall Street meltdown, determined industry opposition and its own complexity”. However, it seems that political reasons also played a part. Tea Party advocates and conservative Republicans began to call the system “cap and tax”, and while President Obama inserted cap and trade into his first budget proposal, he has since removed it from the budget.

The article mentions a few alternatives that have been proposed by members of Congress. Including:
- Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R- ME) have proposed a bill called cap and dividend where licenses to polluted would be auctioned to producers and wholesalers of fossil fuels, with a portion of the revenue returned to consumers in monthly checks to cover their energy costs.
- John Kerry (D-MA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have begun work on a bill which would include a cap on greenhouse gas emissions only for utilities, a modest tax on gasoline, diesel fuel and aviation fuel, new incentives for oil and gas drilling, nuclear power plant construction, carbon capture and storage, and renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

This brings me to a few questions:
- Do you believe cap and trade was not given a “fair chance” due to a changing political climate or do you think it’s failure to be implemented simply represent a failure in the cap and trade system?
- Do any of the proposed solutions seem like good solutions? (Good in that they would eliminate pollution but also good in the sense that they would be able to be implemented)
- Finally, as discussed in class, would you prefer a cap and trade based system or a simple emissions tax based system?

Cap and Trade Failure in Europe

2010-04-01T21:25:00.000-06:00

You guys are smart--you scooped the NY Times. Too many carbon credits making cap and trade ineffective in Europe.

Ilovemountains.org: Fighting Back Against Mountain Top Removal

2010-03-31T10:41:00.000-06:00

Stephani Freitag

Mountain Top Removal (MTR) is a horribly destructive process in which explosives are used to remove overburden and expose a coal line; in other words the tops of the Appalachian Mountains are being blown off. The overlying rocks along with the chemical explosives pollute streams and bury ecosystems. People living in near by communities are losing their homes, their health, and their happiness.

Up until recently, laws existed that required “restoration of the original contour”, however they were rarely enforced past 1980 due to “king coal’s” influence on the federal government. In 2007, the Bush Administration made it legal to do what was being done for over 30 years. Now the best chance to turn it back is to pass the Clean Water Protection Act (CWPA), which currently sits in congress. For a detailed and interesting history of MTR government corruption, check out Davis & Duffy’s King Coal vs. Reclamation.

It seems whether the laws exist or not, this practice takes place. The people of the region have realized this too, and have organized. Alliance for Appalachia consists of 13 organizations from five states attempting to put a halt to MTR and supporting a sustainable future for Appalachia.

This Alliance has produced a public campaign, Ilovethemountains.org. This site is dedicated to educating people, not only about MTRs harmful effects on Appalachia, but what we can do as concerned citizens to help. It offers opportunities for every American to put their name down as one who opposes the use of MTR. The site also supports alternative energy economies for Appalachia, especially the use of wind farms. One big project is the Coal River Wind Project (http://www.coalriverwind.org), which is actively fighting to stop a future “mine” and set up a sustainable wind farm instead.

As we have discussed in class, sometimes the best way to fight problems of environmental justice is for the communities to organize and support each other. Big business has a lot of interest in domestic, clean sources of coal, and therefore have great influence over policy decisions. The only way MTR will stop is if we show “king coal” we won’t put up with it anymore.

Elephant Conservation and Ivory Sales

2010-03-29T19:38:00.000-06:00

An interesting discussion of international elephant conservation and potentially beneficial ivory sales from The Economist:

Those in favour of such sales (most notably, the countries which seek to make them) say they allow countries to benefit from having elephants, and help to finance elephant conservation and protection. Those against them (some conservation charities and some academics in the field) argue that any sale of ivory will lead to an increase in poaching by stimulating demand, and that little of the money raised actually goes to elephants.

One problem with elephant conservation is that, as large mammal numbers have increased, these same animals that were themselves threatened years ago now have become threatening to local poor populations, both because they're dangerous (think Grizzly Bear, but a lot bigger, and with tusks), and because they can eat an enormous amount of food over a short time--food that might otherwise be used to feed the kids or be sold to buy them clothes, school books, or otherwise improve their standard of living.

Google speculates on withdrawl from China

2010-03-29T15:21:00.001-06:00

Anonymous

A Beijing based newspaper announced today (March 19 2010) Google is planning on withdrawing from the Chinese market as early as April 10. While Google has yet to confirm or deny this claim, such speculation brings to light the potential implications of such a move.

The uncertainty of Google’s future in China arose January 12, when Google announced it had detected cyber attacks on email accounts of Chinese human rights activists, in addition to continued government calls to tighten Google’s internet filter. In response Google has threatened to stop following government censorship rules by dropping its filter, and/or shutting down its google.cn service all together.

The Chinese government denies any involvement in the attacks, whether or not this is true, this is not the first case of Chinese based cyber crime.

Google controls only 30% of the Chinese search market but Chinese internet users and businesses have pleaded for Google not to leave, laying flowers in front of the Google.cn headquarters. While the government continues to say Google is welcome as long as it operates under China’s rules and regulations, which the Chinese government refuses to budge on.

The Chinese market accounts for only 1% of Google’s global revenue, but it is the potential market that might keep Google lingering; China’s population represents 20% of the world’s total population and many future internet users.

The case may be that China is just not be ready for the internet, as its original purpose was sharing and freedom of information. The current version of internet access allowed in China is a perversion of such a philosophy.

This incident comes at a time when U.S. and China relations are already strained from U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and President Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9173418/Google_eyes_departure_from_China_on_April_10_report_says

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704131404575117120385488164.html?mod=rss_com_mostcommentart

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-20000405-2.html

Deforestation in Decline

2010-03-28T12:21:00.000-06:00

According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, deforestation is in decline around the world, although many places have substantial problems still. Latin America and the Caribbean continue to have the largest forest losses. For the report and summary from the FAO, see here, and for a good summary from The Economist, see here.

The Resurgence of Natural Gas

2010-03-26T16:18:00.000-06:00

Justin Holstein

The use of natural gas is experiencing a resurgence around the world. This renaissance has occurred mostly due to the rise in prices for the energy product. Because natural gas has been priced based on trends in oil prices, new techniques have become cost-efficient. Ideas such as fracing, in which hot water in pumped into the ground in order to release natural gas from shale, as well as horizontal drilling have become feasible and opened up large tracts of new gas fields.

Implications for these developments are large and wide-ranging. The United States has changed its energy outlook with the prospect now of becoming a net exporter of natural gas. Some have suggested that the US can become a self-sustaining energy economy on the back of natural gas.

Europe has also been affected. New transports of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) are cheaper than long-term contracts are circumventing Russian pipeline imports as well as new pipeline projects. Countries are discussing bypassing the tantrums of Russia and its fights with Ukraine for more reliable and less belligerent sources of gas.

However, despite all the expected benefits of the new supplies of natural gas are serious environmental concerns. Fracing can cause damage to water tables, and is worried to ruin the encompassing landscape. For these concerns, several states in the US have put a temporary moratorium on shale gas. In order to move forward, lawmakers need to balance the need for natural gas with the concern for the environment. It is also important to recognize what natural gas is most used for: home heating. Some have suggested expanding use of LNG to power transport vehicles and power generation. The downside to this is that use for home heating will rise more than recent trends to accommodate the increase in demand, even with the increase in supply.

Writing Substance

2010-03-26T09:36:00.003-06:00

Folks,

A really good discussion of good substantive writing here.

An excerpt:

In other words, if you are looking for writing advice, I think that you should strongly consider the possibility that your writing problem is not a writing problem. It is a content problem.

The bad writing is just a symptom. Poor paragraph structure? Probably because you don't actually have a strong idea to convey in that paragraph. Flabby prose? It's because you're trying to camouflage the fact that you lack sufficient information to be concrete. Over-reliance on one or two sources that just can't bear the weight? Too little research to confidently synthesize your own structure.

These thoughts bear out my own experience teaching high school, college classes, and reading academic writing and other grad students' work. It really is true that good writing only comes out when you have something to say.

Ethanol Biofuels Getting a Bad Rep?

2010-03-22T13:48:00.002-06:00

Rachel Plavidal

Biofuels, initially thought to be the “cure-all” alternative fuel source, has been getting a bad rep lately among the scientific community. The production of biofuels from ethanol has become the leading alternative to petroleum-derived fuels in the United States. Because it can be produced domestically, alleviating dependence on foreign oil, biofuels have been quickly propelled into gas tanks in the U.S. and across the globe. Proponents anticipated that the adoption of biofuels would not only provide energy security, but also spur rural development through growth and production, reduce the price of energy, and decelerate our carbon footprint. In an age of growing concern over climate change and energy independence, biofuels promised a clean, carbon-neutral fuel that would reduce greenhouse gas emission and lower fuel prices while also placing importance on farmers and the agricultural sector.

Sounds amazing! So where’s the hitch?

According to a recent article published by Science Daily, the increased production of biofuels from corn ethanol will trigger land-use change. The burgeoning of biofuel industries has resulted in the need for increased cropland. In order to meet policy mandates and market demands, natural land is being cleared for biofuel feedstock. The clearing of vast acres of native forests and grasslands for the production of biofuel feedstocks adds much unwanted stress to ecosystems and may contribute to greenhouse gas emissions from indirect land-use change.

What’s more, biofuels have raised much controversy in what’s known as the food versus fuel debate. As the incentives for producing biofuels continue to soar, farms and the agricultural sector will divert more land from food crops (used to feed humans and livestock) to biofuel feedstocks. Many have pointed fingers at biofuels for the spike in food prices and subsequent food riots.

Aside from the bad media rep biofuels have been receiving as of late, the industry shouldn’t be dismissed as all bad. Many are looking with high hopes towards the future and the potential benefits of second-generation biofuels. One example of these potential technologies is the use of cellulosic biomass (algae) for alternative-fuel use. If you haven’t heard of algae for fuel, look it up! It’s pretty amazing!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100311074121.htm

Public Concern About Environmental Issues Hits 20-Year Low

2010-03-22T13:47:00.000-06:00

Peter Kaminski

A new poll from the Gallup shows that Americans are less concerned about the environmental issues than they’ve been in 20 years or more. Some theorists believe that the shift in public attitude could mean people think environmental conditions are improving or simply that economic concerns are outweighing concerns about global warming or water pollution. The poll asked people whether they worry a “great deal” about eight distinct environmental issues, the percentage that answered yes was lower than last year in every category. According to the poll, only about 28 percent of the people viewed global warning as a major concern, that statistic is down from 35 percent in 1989 and 33 percent last year.

In reality, I think Americans have changed their perception on environmental concerns because of a combination of the poor economy and the notion that environmental conditions domestically are improving. When Americans are struggling to make mortgage payments or getting food on the table, I then environment will take a back seat. For example, many poverty stricken third world countries pollute enormous amounts pollution. These citizens are merely trying to survive, not save the environment. With the United States is in the worst economic depression since the 30s, I think American’s have shifted their views on the importance of protecting the environment, particularly if it means higher taxes.

2010-03-22T13:44:00.000-06:00

Taylor Smith

I picked this article that I read in the Sunday paper in the New York Times about a face-off between an archeologist and the development companies.

Just wondering what y'all's thoughts were on this.

Deforestation in Costa Rica

2010-03-22T13:42:00.002-06:00

Steven Magelowitz

Deforestation causes many problems as we all know. There is soil loss, decline in biodiversity, the water cycle is effected due to trees not evaporating water leading to a much drier climate. There are also economic problems involved such as halving the living standards for the poor and reduce global GDP. Costa Rica has many problems, deforestation being one of them, and has trouble fixing them due to some private organizations being richer and sometimes more powerful than local governments.

In Costa Rica, the larger companies are growing and taking over the small, family operated farms. These large companies are just trying to make a profit without any regard to how it is effecting the environment. These large companies are producing only one crop which is extremely problematic to the land below. This one plant, namely banana, is depleting all of the soil's nutrients leaving the land to become useless for farming in the future. Because the good land is all taken by large companies, the small time farmers are forced to farm on less suitable land. They are clearing the forest in areas where it is not even smart to farm on. They have no choice though because of the large companies.

It is thought that the cause of the many environmental crises that are occurring in Costa Rica, such as flooding and desertification, are due to soil depletion and deforestation. The government is currently trying to fix the problem by giving incentives for protecting forests, and also for reforestation. I wonder if this is enough to battle a problem that will surely effect Costa Rica in the long term?

Environmental Urban Planning

2010-03-22T13:41:00.002-06:00

Martin Brotzman

If you have a chance, take a look at this Ted Talks video.

The talk is with Jaime Lerner, former mayor of Curitiba, Brazil. During his term as mayor, Lerner was able to take a struggling city and make it sustainable through careful city planning. One of the greatest accomplishments of the city is the Bus Rapid Transit system. The bus system was more affordable to build than a subway system but works just as effectively. Lerner was also able to clean up the slums of the city by starting an incentive program that traded bags of waste for a bag of groceries. This was an innovative way to build a waste management system in areas where garbage trucks were unable to reach. Lerner really was an innovative mayor, and truly believes in the city's role in economic and environmental sustainability.

Trinity River Restoration Project

2010-03-22T13:40:00.002-06:00

Robert Krebs

The current war waged between agricultural interest groups and environmental interest groups over common resources is perfectly embodied by the delayed implementation of the Trinity River Restoration Program. It demonstrates the distinct advantages that the agricultural industry has in acting to preserve their interests.

In 1962 the Bureau of Reclamation dammed the Trinity River to create the Trinity Reservoir, which meant to be a resource that could be diverted to the Sacramento Valley under the Central Valley Project (CVP). The water to be diverted under the CVP was historically, and continues to be, mainly for agricultural purposes in the Central Valley. The dam and water diversion altered the habitat on the Trinity River that caused the fish population to decline to roughly 20% of predam conditions. The Trinity River Restoration Program was established to restore the fish population through increased flow down the river and mechanical habitat restoration.

The users of CVP’s water have demonstrated the ability to delay the implementation of the restoration program and shown us their organizational and monetary advantage relative to the Trinity River Restoration interest groups. The CVP users are a more unified group, through their large agricultural constituency. Furthermore, the CVP users represent 6 of the top ten agriculture-producing counties in the country. Considering this, it is no surprise they have a vast amount of capital and motivation to fight the Trinity River Restoration Program’s demand for increased Trinity River flow. Their power is reflected in the delay of implementation of the Record of Decision, which would enact the program. Through lobbying, they were able to delay the implementation of the Record of Decision from its creation in 2000 until 2004. Though the outcome ended up in an increased river flow, the delay is a testament to user based interest groups effectiveness in opposing competition environmental interests.

The current parameters of the Trinity River Restoration Program reflect a concession between the Central Valley water users and those that value the Trinity River fish population. Effective lobbying by the former resulted in revision of the Trinity River Restoration Program that guarantees 50% of the Trinity River inflow be diverted to the Central Valley. Essentially, the program demonstrates the view that human ingenuity can compensate for environmentally damaging man made structures without altering the structure and sacrificing its associated values. It remains to be seen whether or not human ingenuity can adequately achieve restoration efforts without drastic measures, and which values will be preserved if restoration fails.

State building and corruption (among other things)

2010-03-18T21:26:00.000-06:00

At Foreign Affairs, here, Berman argues that we should be copying Louis the 14th's methods of state building, and put up with a lot of the corrupt nonsense that's going on in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Berman might be right, but aren't the same techniques used by the Sun King that Berman is citing (like selling public offices to the highest bidder) the same ones that led to the bloodbath that was the French revolution, and eventually, to the Bonaparte dictatorship?

Water in Southeastern Colorado

2010-03-17T15:03:00.000-06:00

Nicholas MacDonnell

The other day in class water, and specifically water in Colorado, came up for discussion. People mostly discussed water rights, which are particularly complicated within our state, and involve many social and political issues. I am from south eastern Colorado, so this is an issue I am very aware of as I know farmers who have both struggled with the issues of lack of water and whether or not to sell their water rights and re-lease them. I have personally known farmers who have made either decision, and it has affected people in many different ways.

The question I wish to raise is what cultural losses our state stands to lose if development and water demands continue to increase in the front range and that ends up in resulting in a demand for sold water, resulting in a loss of livelihood for the said farmers. For many people within this state, Colorado ends at Interstate twenty five, with everything else east of that line seen as the “flat lands” or simply an extension of Kansas. This is an interesting view considering many of the first settlements within this state came from the plains, with Boggsville and Bents Old Fort just a couple of locations that predate much of the rest of the state.

If farmers lose water rights in eastern Colorado, towns like Las Animas, La Junta, Lamar, and many other stand to lose their livelihoods and much of what defines them, and that region of the state as a whole. Farmers who I know often sold their water rights as a result of drought conditions in the early 2000’s, something that they had to do to make it through hard times, but in doing so were they selling out the souls of agricultural Colorado. What will be the cost if Colorado loses its plain communities? Development in the front range is invaluable for the state as a whole, but if they call their water rights out, what will be the answer for eastern Colorado, the “flat lands”?

Disasters and the US

2010-03-17T14:54:00.000-06:00

Folks, this post was current when Ariana sent it to me, but I've been a little slow the last week or so getting these things up--though this is still of interest!

Ariana Gradow

So lets bring it a little closer to home: Yesterday, Monday March 8, 2010, there was a huge rockslide on Interstate 70 in the Glenwood Canyon. The rockslide smashed through a bridge and dumped boulders the size of tractor trailers on the highway. The Colorado Department of Transportation said the highway could be closed for days or weeks, before the 17-mile stretch of interstate re-opens. There is no way around this section of highway, except a detour of up to 200 miles around the state of Colorado. But I am not worried!

Gov. Bill Ritter declared a disaster emergency yesterday morning in order to ask for money from the Federal Highway Administration to help pay for repairs. A similar slide in the same area in 2004 cost $700,000 to repair. "The immediate repair and reconstruction of the damaged highway is vital to the security, well-being, and health of the citizens of the state of Colorado," Ritter stated in his emergency declaration.

Within hours of the slide, engineers, government officials, news reporters, photographers, planners, builders, and developers were at the scene of the slide evaluating the situation and trying to create a method to help all the travelers that take this stretch of highway. I have no doubt that Gov. Ritter and developers at the scene of the slide will have the highway up and running again soon. I know that they will work hard to get it fixed as soon as possible and I, as an American, can trust the government to do so. I do not think this type of immediate action of government relief for natural disasters is the same in countries that have either an aristocratic or communistic form of government. Do you? For me, this type of immediate action is what makes our country so great. Good job America! Coming to save the day!

I will keep you updated on the status of the highway and we will see how long it takes to repair the damage. If it takes more than a month, then obviously everything I have said about America is false and I am moving to India.

For more information on the rockslide:
http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-rockslide-i70-030810,0,23888.story

http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20100308/NEWS/100309809/1078&ParentProfile=1055

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=134155&catid=339

Side note:
Before we even built the highway, we knew this would happen. According to Jon White, an engineering geologist, “these rocks are very old and were bound to fall down at some point.” But what were our choices? We could have either built a giant tunnel through the whole mountain and totally destroyed the environmental health of the mountain or gone on horseback. The road is necessary in order to reach Glenwood Springs and beyond.

Ayers Rock – A climbing debate

2010-03-17T14:44:00.002-06:00

Ian Mallams

Climbing on the Vatican or Buddhist Temples is certainly illegal for religious reasons; however climbing Ayers Rock, a famous Australian geographic feature sacred to the Anangu (indigenous people of Australia), is not illegal. Europeans colonized this area in the early 1900’s using the land for raising livestock. This caused food shortages for the Anangu but Europeans decided to help them by providing food and resources. After this event Europeans felt a sense of control and turned Ayers Rock into an Australian National Park against the will of the Anangu.

This National Park is economically key in the tourism industry of Australia with an annual 400,000 visitors and a $25 park entrance fee. Of the 400,000 visitors around 100,000 people scamper up the half-mile long slick rock trail to the top of Ayers Rock every year to enjoy the views and cultural heritage of the Australian Outback. Climbing Ayers rocks is important to many tourists both nationally and internationally, but the land originally belonged the Anangu and they request people do not climb it for religious and sacred reasons. Currently their values here are not being taken into account.

Values are very important in this issue. Ayers Rock is culturally important to both sides here. Ayers Rock is a natural geographic feature, making it different from man made temples and churches but is that reason enough to not respect the Anangu’s values and requests? Who has a better claim to the land? Should it be legal to climb Ayers Rock?

Beetle epidemic

2010-03-17T14:30:00.002-06:00

Tyler Hoffman

The current mountain pine beetle infestation is one of epidemic proportions. Colorado possesses 1.7 million acres of lodgepole pine forests. As of 2003, state officials estimated that 1.5 millions acres of lodgepole pine forests have been infested with mountain pine beetle populations. Therefore, the vast majority of the states lodgepole pine forests are on the brink of destruction. Mitigation efforts have been widespread, in particular stand thinning and prescribed burns. Studies have shown that stand thinning is the most affective way to mitigate the impacts of the mountain pine beetle. However, what is being done with the harvested beetle kill?

Recently, efforts have been made to create bio-ethanol from mountain pine beetle killed trees. In comparison to conventional bio-fuel made from grain feedstock, bio-fuel produced from beetle kill has been shown to be similar in productions costs, being able to compete with existing feedstock resources. However, few companies have utilized this immense renewable resource that is associated with mountain pine beetle kill. Therefore, to help propagate the production of alternative fuels from beetle kill, I feel that environmental policies must be installed on the state level in order to provide incentives for companies that utilize mountain pine beetle kill. Whether they receive carbon credits that they could sell for using these dead trees that currently serve as a net carbon source or are provided tax cut incentives, this undersized market needs a reason to expand. Thinning efforts are already being performed by national and state forest services’, which means the feedstock is already there. Why aren’t we using this renewable resource to provide clean, alternative fuel sources?

US high-speed rail

2010-03-17T14:11:00.000-06:00

Tim Shanahan

As part of the latest State of the Union address, President Obama proclaimed the necessity for expanding the United State’s High-speed rail system. Many agree with President Obama that investing in this project will create a number of Green jobs, cut back on carbon emissions, use less land when compared to streets and highways, and move towards a more sustainable energy economy. High-speed rail systems are currently being highly utilized in China, Japan, Russia and a number of European countries. Comparatively, the United States currently has only one high-speed rail line in service, and its average speed is 68 mph.

The efficiency of high-speed rail pertains to its potential speed (361 mph, Japan), the quieter and smoother transit, and the relatively low energy consumption of the whole system. President Obama correctly noted that if other countries can benefit from this technology, there is no reason the United States should not. The first of these projects is the construction of a rail-line in Florida, between Tampa and Orlando. Florida is said to be the ideal launch pad for HSR, considering that the area is a nexus for tourism and Americans from around the country are likely to use the service. If the system expands to the national level, it is projected that oil consumption would be reduced by 125 million barrels per year.

Another state slated to receive large appropriations for HSR is California. According to the California High-Speed Rail Authority, the initiation of these projects will create 600,000 construction jobs and an additional 450,000 permanent jobs to control and maintain the service. It is also projected that the regions implementing rail initiatives will see an economic boom due to a decrease in travel time and ease of access between businesses.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1957575,00.html
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

Ethanol Biofuels Getting a Bad Rep?

2010-03-17T13:33:00.000-06:00

Global Warming

2010-03-17T13:30:00.000-06:00

Thanks, Doug!

Markets.

2010-03-17T10:20:00.002-06:00

Sean Murphy

To what extent is a market able to explain the price of goods? As a country that supposedly thrived off of pure capitalism there is a lot of bashing of communism and socialism, and we like to say “let the free market decide”. We all have learned through out our lives that many parts of our country do not run on a free market system. When people make this claim I can’t help but think they are either in denial or unaware. If we wanted to make everything a private good than we should probably get rid of the government and just let everyone fend for their own lives. The whole idea behind our government is that it is able to protect its citizen’s rights, enforce laws, and punish those who harm others. If we didn’t have government intervention and regulation on some level our markets wouldn’t work. People cannot invest in an economy where they are not guaranteed things such as property rights. This is a common theme in developing nations (issues of property rights) where people can’t invest in the economy because they do not have a title to their land, or any other rights under the law. Hopefully this sparks some ideas about how much intervention is too much, and how much a free market do we really have, (when we think about things such as agriculture subsidies, etc.) and where should it go in the future?

Dolphin Slaughter and the Documentary The Cove

2010-03-14T21:09:00.000-06:00

Andrea Price

The documentary, The Cove, which recently won an Academy Award for Best Documentary of 2009 is one that I highly recommend everybody see in order to understand the wrongdoings committed against dolphins. The film follows a dolphin activist, Richard O’Barry, as he carries out a secret mission to expose the dolphin slaughter that takes place in a secret cove in Taiji, Japan. While this documentary was highly entertaining, it was also extremely informative in exposing the environmentally harmful practices of dolphin slaughter.

While many are very familiar with the whale killings all over the world, this film exposed the fact that the annual death of dolphins is much higher than that of whales. However, the real environmental impact this issue is causing is not the disgusting methods of killing dolphins, it is the unethical sale of dolphin meat and the depletion of the ocean.

During the film, an employee for Ocean Alliance named Roger Payne explained the harm this practice is causing the ocean. He explained that, “seventy percent of human beings, seven out of ten people, rely as a principal protein on seafood. If we lose access to fish in the sea we will be causing the biggest public health problem human beings have ever faced” (The Cove's Website). Clearly, if fishermen continue to deplete the ocean with harmful practices, especially to those higher on the food chain – dolphins and whales – the world will be faced with a very severe environmental problem.

Another environmental issue this film touched on was the highly unethical practice of mislabeling dolphin meat for other types of seafood. This is a major problem because dolphin meat often contains nearly five times the safe limit of mercury. When the dolphin meat is labeled properly, it is rather inexpensive to purchase. Due to the fact that it is relatively cheap, Taiji and surrounding areas were thinking of including dolphin meat in school lunches. This is obviously incredibly harmful to young children and people in general.

I highly suggest watching The Cove as my summary does not encompass even half of the issues touched on in the film. It exposes a very disturbing issue that many are truly unaware of.

Building “Green” Mansions: Can luxury meet sustainability?

2010-03-12T13:47:00.000-07:00

Lyndia McGauhey

Ideally, sustainable development is a nexus melding the progressive nature of traditional development structures and the consciousness of environmental conservation. At the very least, sustainable development is a step toward a future that considers the long-term availability of resources while celebrating cultural and technological growth. Given our recent discussions concerning development, it is pertinent to discuss the role of the green building market.

In the recent New York Times article “How Green is My Mansion” (March 10, 2010), Berkley planners, architects, lawyers, and neighbors discuss philanthropist Mitch Kapor’s desire to build a 10,000 square foot mansion that qualifies as “green,” according to the Berkley eco-credit scale. While it has features, including water-saving, low-flow showerheads, the raw materials required to build the house quadruple that of a reasonably large sized house of 2,500 square feet.

Some call it “absurd” to build a new, enormous house and call it “green,” since Kapor likely already has a perfectly functioning house. Gary Earl Parsons of the Landmarks Preservation Commission calls the “green” title of Kapor’s monster mansion greenwashing, limiting Berkley’s credibility by diminishing the meaning of sustainability in that community. Others think Kapor is catalyzing a trend among the wealthy, making it hip and sexy to build houses with low-energy features. Beyond that, others argue that the wealthy need to invest in green technology, since the upper class citizens are the people who can afford new technology. Theoretically, the demand for greener features will eventually lower the prices of sustainable household features.

I am no genius on the nuances of complex markets; however, I am not a person in pursuit of a lavish lifestyle. Though I am content to live simply, not everyone is. It is very difficult to change people’s values, and if the wealthy value luxury goods, then they will likely continue to invest in new houses. Creating a market for green building seems as forward thinking as investing in renewable energy. In essence, I am not advocating a new burst of green mansions; rather, if millionaires want mansions, they better be green mansions.

Rwanda and Economic Growth

2010-03-08T17:11:00.000-07:00

I thought it might be worthwhile to note that, in my embarrassed state post-class today, I did a little reading on Rwanda. Wes is quite right that it has experienced very high growth rates since the mid-'90s. 18th fastest growth rate in the world last year, according to the CIA, very close to India and China.

This might be the result of Jeff Sachs-like conservative economic policies put in place in the wake of the Rwandan genocide, although it might be more a story of infrastructure development in the wake of US and European economic intervention there.

Even the most conservative agree that you need things like roads to have economic growth.

I would be interested to learn more about these issues--possibly a paper or blog topic for some interested student?

Animal Welfare and Organic Food

2010-03-07T19:13:00.001-07:00

Kate Hormel

When people think of organic, especially “organic” applied to meat, poultry, and fish, they likely think of how the animal was fed before slaughter/catch and not how it was treated. All too often the “welfare” of an animal is not considered. I’m not a vegetarian, but I do see the connection between the health of the animal, which factors into its overall well-being, and my own health in my choices to consume meat and fish. For organic farmers and ranchers to become USDA certified organic, they must abide by a specific set of regulations. Producers must run their operations in accordance with regulations set forth by the Organic Food Productions Act of 1991 and enforced by the USDA Organic Program and its executive National Organic Standards Board. These regulations oblige farmers to give animals “access” to the outdoors and no antibiotics or hormones can be given to the animal. Yet, the size of an organic farm is essentially unlimited and as corporate involvement in the organic market increases, small farms are decreasing in numbers as larger farms buy them out.

The problem with these regulations is their interpretation. Providing animals with access to the outdoors can mean a variety of things. Especially for large corporate organic farms and dairies, it can mean close confinement of cows for example, whose access consists of a small door leading onto a cement patio. Is this animal much healthier than one living in a factory farm? By no means am I saying that organic farms are no better than the rest; however, I should point out that “organic” does not always equal “sustainable”. True sustainability implies that food travels the shortest distance possible from producer to consumer and that animals actually get to graze or in some way live naturally in an open and free environment. It’s been proven that these animals will no doubt be healthier and less prone to disease and pain. The best we can do is buy from small, local, and sustainable farms which consider a more comprehensive set of factors when producing food.

For more info on animal welfare and organic agriculture:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/mar05/stress0305.htm
http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/animalwelfare/
http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/animalwelfare/#whatyoucando

Sustainable Development

2010-03-07T19:12:00.000-07:00

Wesley Kay

When we think about development in the developing world, what really comes to mind? We can take into account the two paradigms discussed in class (clean/green vs. traditional development), but what are really driving these incentives? China says that the US got to develop with coal, so why can’t they?

Can the developed world incentivize the developing through some sort of aid? What if, while a developing country did something that increased its economy while decreasing its carbon emissions, the developed nations were able to purchase the difference in carbon saved from the developing nations?

This system is already in place and has been since the Kyoto Protocol was initiated. It is called Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). There are programs now in China that, by building a hydroelectric dam, the carbon not emitted from building an equivalent coal plant is sold as credit to the UK, allowing her majesty to meet her emission targets. This sounds like a great idea. Developed nations get carbon credit, while developing nations can continue to develop cleanly. But there are problems to this system. Namely, the worldwide emissions will not decrease, since developed nations are still allowed to emit ghg’s. Yes, by purchasing carbon credits, certain economic mechanism ensure that efficiencies are produced, and perhaps emissions are lowered. But that is hard to measure.

Another problem is if there really is enough money coming in to have an extremely poor nation, lets say Haiti, be able to develop sustainably. Haiti needs some serious redevelopment. So, do you think that Haiti can redevelop sustainably with help from CDM?

Food prices, industrialization, and the global poor

2010-03-06T15:52:00.000-07:00

This paper, which you can get to for free on campus or with the VPN, has some implications for yesterday's in-class discussion about industrialization and economic development.

The paper argues (with some convincing evidence) that rising food prices hurt poor rural families that grow their own food, because they still usually buy some food. But the effects of rising prices are actually pretty modest compared to what you would think, because of the cushioning effect of home food production.

There are a lot of interesting implications that come out of this, but one is that the rural poor are better off than the industrial working class in urban areas, which supports what many of you have argued--that industrialization shouldn't be a one-sized-all solution to economic development in the developing world.

There has also been some political science work in this area that suggests that the political effects of such a crisis might be felt because of its impacts on the urban, not the rural poor. Political scientists have often argued that political leaders are more apt to respond to concerns of urban populations because they're generally better organized, and are more likely to protest, burn things down, and string up political leaders.

It is true, for example, that two Bolivian politicians have been hung from the same lamppost in the main plaza in La Paz by protesting La Paz urban populations. We've talked about the Cochabamba water war in class, but there's also a history of urban workers doing things like burning down the national bank.

On the other hand, the Cuban government was overthrown mostly by rural populations in the '59 revolution, and revolutionary movements generally only succeed with the support of rural people (shades of Ed Abbey and wilderness as the last refuge of the black helicopter people and radical environmental terrorists).

How Do You Like Me Now? George W. Bush ☺

2010-03-04T12:03:00.001-07:00

Michael R. McHugh

Can we get a recount on Bush’s approval rating? As the Obama Administration continues to make the Bush Administration look good by resigning multiple policies in which at the time of original signing were highly scrutinized by the media and then the public; we can use the destruction of one party to the public’s advantage. Our current governmental system is failing from both sides of the aisle, we need to look at destroying the two party system. Voters are currently electing officials based on values that they cannot change, they are not going to take your guns away nor are they going to stop abortions. As someone concerned with the environment I believe that by the democrats “labeling” the environment as their issue they are driving away support on many issues.

What I am suggesting is using a seven (arbitrary) party system in which peoples values can be better represented by elected officials. By providing more options the public’s values both for and against can be expressed. By setting a cap on campaign spending, parties like Obama’s won’t be able to buy their way into the White House. There are reasons way we no longer see commercials and billboards promoting cigarettes, they work on the youth (Tricky Obama). By reducing spending voters are forced to actually research what their candidates stand for and perhaps their experience in politics.

What are your feelings on ridding the two party system? What do you think about placing a cap on campaigns? By placing a cap would that force multiple parties? Are either of these possible?

Poverty falling in Africa...

2010-03-04T10:28:00.000-07:00

...according to a paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), via the Overseas Development Institute. Although the findings are controversial, they are a good sign.

So, as I was discussing in class on Tuesday, economic development has important implications for environmental protection--the process of development can be very dirty, but development itself allows people to become concerned about many more abstract environmental issues that are unlikely to impact their own lives over the short term--like climate change.

And as you all know, I think the human impact economic development is more important than environmental issues anyways--indeed, the reason I care about environmental issues is because of the way they are likely to impact peoples' lives--particularly poor peoples' lives in the developing world. Though, as always, I welcome disagreement...

Bundanoon, NSW: Bottled Water Free

2010-03-03T15:43:00.000-07:00

Christina Johnson

For all the policy-makers and activists out there, here’s a story to whet your appetite for change:

The small town of Bundanoon in New South Wales, Australia has become bottled water-free.

Its citizens voluntarily chose to ban bottled water in response to a bottling company’s desire to extract millions of liters of water from the local aquifer. The initiative for a bottled water-free town was proposed by local businessman Huw Kingston and carried out by the grassroots organization, Bundy On Tap.

In a community meeting of 356 of the town’s 2,500 residents, all but one voted in favor of the ban. According to Bundy On Tap, the organization responsible for proposing and passing the new law, it is now illegal to sell or give away bottled water within the town precinct.

Bundanoon’s six supermarkets have removed bottled water from their stock. The town now offers public drinking fountains and filtered water dispensers where people can fill up reusable water bottles. The reusable bottles are sold in place of bottled water in the local stores for a cheap price. Bundanoon’s bold stand against bottled water’s damaging effects on the environment and on communities has thrust it into a global spotlight. Bundy On Tap has caught the attention of many other cities around the world who could soon have similar policies.

The bottled water industry in Australia is worth approximately $400 million per year. But access to drinking water in Bundanoon is now greater than before Bundy On Tap began. It seems the citizens of this town recognize that the convenience of bottled water is not necessarily worth its cost.

Bundy On Tap has done well in bringing a major environmental issue to the forefront, and sparking new conversations about human impact on the environment. They have proven that it is possible for people to collectively help the environment of their own accord.

References:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CEFDC133FF934A25754C0A96F9C8B63
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/16/world/asia/16iht-water.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=bundanoon&st=cse
http://www.bundyontap.com.au/
planthttp://www.bundyontap.com.au/history.html

Reduced Impact Logging vs Carbon Credits for Deforestation Solutions…

2010-03-03T15:41:00.000-07:00

Jennifer Carter

Proximate drivers for deforestation include timber extraction, colonization of small farms, and infrastructural expansion. In turn, about 20% of the Amazon has been deforested or impacted by deforestation. There have been a lot of initiatives to stop/slow down this process. Two in particular are Reduced Impact Logging and Carbon Offset Credits. As always, there are both pros and cons to these ideas.

Reduced Impact Logging reduces the impact on the forest by pre-harvesting inventory (mapping timber species), planning of roads/skid trails to minimize erosion/damage, having more sophisticated falling techniques that prevent damages of unwanted trees, decreasing the number of roads needed by winching trees to a main road, and post-harvesting inventory. Also, trees under a certain size cannot be removed; however, larger trees are chronically removed leading to more open canopy, loss of timber species, and changes in forest composition/structure. In addition, RIL companies pay their employees a salary, which cannot compete with other companies who can pay more by over-harvesting forests.

Carbon offset credits were established to give farmers an initiative to either conserve their forest or have tree plantations. In return, farmers receive $800/ha over five years to have tree plantations or $65/hecteare over five years to keep untouched forests. This is beneficial because more landowners are either saving forests or reusing old deserted land to grow tree plantations, which will stop loggers from cutting new forests down for wood. Unfortunately, for plantations, farmers only receive the funds for the first five years and, therefore, tend to abandon the land or turn the plantation into a more profitable crop like pineapples. Alternatively, receiving $65/hectare for untouched forests cannot compete with payment options to cut it down. Also, this program is not well regulated and in many cases introduces exotic species into plantations.

Environmental Justice

2010-03-03T15:39:00.000-07:00

Charlotte Dennis

Environmental justice is a historic issue that has been widely discussed yet has yielded negligible actions nationwide. The unequal distribution of environmental burdens has been prevalent nationwide for decades. Generally, the worst burdens have been laid upon racial minorities, residents of developing countries and low-income neighborhoods. The revolution that began in the mid-sixties and gained strength in the seventies strongly questioned the government’s role in the lives of Americans. Unfortunately, like most issues, the government was not concerned of the well-being of every individual nationwide. With the rise of questioning the government came the notion of environmental justice across the country. By the eighties environmentally concerned groups were speaking up loudly about the disproportionate distribution of filthy, polluting, and contaminating power plants. The general population slowly began to gain knowledge of the truth behind the chemicals being released and the hazardous disposal of waste. While the United States government has aided in making progress environmental equality is far from being achieved.

Why is it that certain members of society must bear the burdens of these highly unsafe environmental hazards? Environmental injustices continue to occur every day, even in 2010. Groups across the nation have made radical efforts to inform, educate and instill action. However, there is still progress needed for fair environmental treatment for all individuals regardless of “race, color, national origin, or income” (EPA). I do not personally know the answer to such an overwhelming issue, but I do think that is a one that deserves a high level of attention and action.

Faith-based development aid

2010-03-02T21:20:00.000-07:00

An interesting discussion of faith-based aid thanks to Chris Blattman here and here.

My own experience with faith-based aid has been generally positive, but most of the small faith-based groups I've had experience with are very critical of many of the large faith-based groups, like World Vision International, that Blattman talks about in his post.

Health care, environmentalism, and _The Economist_

2010-03-02T15:52:00.002-07:00

Nowadays, The Economist usually makes me mad. But the tag line on this one, "The best way to make hospitals green is to keep people out of them" is brilliant.

GMOs in Europe!

2010-03-02T09:41:00.000-07:00

If you're interested in GMOs, European persistent opposition to them, or the related trade dispute between the US and EU (we want to sell our GMOs there and they won't let us, so we sue them in the World Trade Organization, and we win, and they still won't let us, so we sue them again...) you might want to take a look at this article in the New York times.

They're allowing genetically modified potatoes created by a German firm.

Coincidence?

I suppose if you're going to allow any genetically modified food, it might as well be the venerable potato.

Bet y'all thought that the potato was from Europe. Nope. Peru. Now there's one from Europe, though. It is sad, in my opinion, that the Europeans imported potatoes as a food source, but neglected the mighty guinea pig.

Clean Water

2010-03-01T14:14:00.000-07:00

Meaghan McGrath

I recently read an article about The Clean Water Act that I thought would be incredibly relevant to our course. The article describes the failings of policy writing and implementation. Basically the issue is that many of the nation's waterways are exempt from EPA regulations because of small technicalities, and supreme court decisions have been and are being made to exacerbate the situation. The Clean Water Act covers 'navigable' waterways, which is proving to be a very ambiguous term in court. Right now, polluters are getting away with dumping because they are not polluting directly into the protected river, they are dumping into a smaller tributary which has been deemed 'unnavigable.' But the pollution is still making its way to the water that is regulated by EPA, so it would seem logical that dumping into tributaries should have some repercussions.

A major issue facing water protection is this country is the logistical organization it would take to ensure our waters are clean. This is especially relevant now as there are many battles over who has jurisdiction over what waterways and who does not; the EPA is trying to avoid fighting jurisdiction battles all together to save its resources.

Opposition to updating the policy is of course coming from big industry that is being scared into thinking that government will regulate every drop of water coming from or landing on their property including gutters, reserve pools etc... To me, this just seems ridiculous from many standpoints. The EPA already has enough trouble controlling major rivers why would anyone think it would possibly have the resources to go inspect every farming operation in the country. Proponents of this argument are only serving to delay discussion and prevent any legislation changes. This is just an environmental issue, many of these unregulated waters go straight to our water supply which could have major health implications for the public.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/us/01water.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th

Films and the Prisoners' Dilemma

2010-02-28T14:18:00.000-07:00

Sean sends me this link, about Disney's decision to release Alice in Wonderland on DVD early, describing theaters' incentives as a prisoners' dilemma.

An interesting read, though I have to be honest about a total lack of interest on my part in movies in general and this movie in particular. But put the phrase "collective action" or such things in any topic and you'll catch my eye.

One might wonder if any collective action by movie theaters might provoke a lawsuit from Disney, claiming "unfair practices" or "collusion" or the like. If so, they would be right, of course. But would this "collusion" be a bad thing?

Turkey and the EU

2010-02-27T20:30:00.000-07:00

Ryan Slater

Recently, Turkey has been fighting very hard in order to become a member of the European Union. However, there are some big issues that are preventing Turkey from joining the EU most notable are the continued disputes over Cyprus, the denial of the Armenian holocaust, and just the mere size of Turkey. I picked this policy because we have been talking a lot lately about collective action problems and this is certainly an important one to look at. Even though, joining the EU might be beneficial to Turkey it might not be beneficial to other European countries as they face benefits and costs.

Turkey as of right now does a lot of trading already with the European Union but remains to be very dependent on agriculture. Turkey is a very large country and with a population of over 72 million people it would have a very large effect on the European Union. Under the current rules, Turkey would become the largest recipient of transfers from the EU budget and mass labor migration not just from Turkey but even from countries such as Iran, Iraq, and Syria could pose major problems for a European Union which is already struggling with very high unemployment rates. Furthermore, under the Lisbon treaty Turkey would have the 2nd highest number of representatives in the European parliament because just like the House of Representatives in the United States it is based on population. Finally, there is the fact that the European Union is already a huge entity and it is already very hard as of right now to get anything done in the European Union. There is a very big collective action problem in the EU because the members of the EU represent their country and therefore they fight to protect and enhance their countries’ interests rather than fighting for the collective good of the EU.

The other European Union countries face what I would call short term costs, which are preventing Turkey from being able to join the EU. Even though, in the long run Turkey joining the EU would most likely be beneficial to the European Union because it is such a big market and a gateway to the Middle East, the costs that the other European countries think they will face are enough to block Turkish accession. Turkey has fought hard over the last couple decades in order to fulfill all the guidelines set by the European Union, but until the costs of Turkey joining the EU are brought to a minimum the accession of Turkey to the EU will remain not very likely.

Fair Trade

2010-02-27T20:28:00.000-07:00

Rachael Toll

In regards to my ridiculously-bad coffee addiction, I found the article, “Does Fair Trade Coffee Lift Growers Out of Poverty or Simply Ease Our Guilty Conscience?” extremely interesting. With growing trends in buying/eating organic, “going green,” and buying things Fair Trade, it is important for consumers to be intentional in investigating where the products they buy, come from, despite what the labeling says. Fair Trade can be, and sometimes has been, used as a marketing scheme for companies. Fair Trade labeling can be arbitrary or ambiguous in how they actually render an improved life for the farmers and growers. What quantifies an improved life for farmers can vary from country to country, and in what form coffee is purchased, can affect the prices received by coffee growers and harvesters.

Fair Trade ensures that growers receive a price above the market price for the coffee that they grow. The coffee growers involved with Fair Trade also benefit from being a part of cooperatives, which put money back into schools and clinics. Cheap credit is easily accessed by Fair Trade growers and can also be seen as a positive to Fair Trade coffee. Buying Fair Trade has few negative consequences, but it is important to be discerning about the actual thought behind the labeling. Companies may sell some of the products under the Fair Trade label, while the majority of their products remain un-certified. If companies do not require all of their products to be Fair Trade certified, do they truly believe in the reasoning behind Fair Trade, or are they using Fair Trade as a marketing scheme for people who want to feel good about their purchases? Some companies also use labels with very weak ethical standards in order to undercut the Fair Trade movement. Fair Trade really does improve the lives of many, but it is important to take into consideration the companies that use Fair Trade labeling, and their motives, and be discerning about other types of labels that could be used solely for marketing.

United States’ Environmental Policy During Military Actions

2010-02-26T13:33:00.000-07:00

Ron Castro

During President Barack Obama’s inaugural speech, he stated “To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders, nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect.” With two ongoing foreign engagements, the United States’ Environmental Policy during Military Actions is rarely evaluated because the images of Iraq and Afghanistan display destruction and devastation. With that being said, the United States is a member of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) which establishes the United States’ Environmental Policy during Military Actions. The policy denounces conducting military actions that create long-term or severe damage to either conflicting country’s natural environments, restore, replenish the natural environments damaged during conflict, and educate countries that mismanage their natural resources.

Foreign military actions are always a heated debate. In an attempt to restore and replenish the conflicting country’s natural environment, the United States provides education and the resources to the conflicting populous following military actions. A prime example, the Iraq Marshlands Program launched in 2004 aimed to restore Iraqi Marshlands in order to restore a clean source of water, manage fisheries, promote livestock, and most importantly reconstructs Iraq’s agriculture to better manage the country’s natural resources. The problem examined is whether the program goals are not being achieved because water and irrigation systems are a common pool resource so in turn many citizens rather free-ride because they will garner the benefits without any contribution.

http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/env-sec-un-doctrin-for-env-2.pdf
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_marshlands.pdf
http://marshlands.unep.or.jp/

2010-02-26T11:08:00.002-07:00

GM is closing Hummer. About damn time. From the NY Times.

Let's rock!

2010-02-23T20:22:00.000-07:00

Amanda sent me the link to this cartoon on climate change legislation, over on the Economist web site.

The frequency of impressive moustaches in the global coalition to fight climate change was not lost on me, by the way.

Whaling

2010-02-22T14:22:00.000-07:00

Dana sends me a link to this article by the BBC on whaling and the IWC, related to our discussion today--several countries have cooperated with the IWC in seeking a compro:

Over the last few years I've regularly documented the "peace process" aimed at finding such a compromise; and the current proposals, prepared by a group of 12 countries including strongly pro Japan, strongly anti Australia and lukewarm US, constitute the latest and most detailed contribution.

If implemented, the draft would usher in a 10-year period where all hunting for the "great whales" would come "under the control of the IWC". That means the commission would set ceilings on quotas, mandate and monitor a programme of international observers on some vessels, require DNA sampling of meat from markets, and so on.

There is much more--this might be of interest to those of you interested in this topic. The article includes information on how a potential agreement would be enforced.

If its legal, it must be safe. Right?

2010-02-22T09:54:00.000-07:00

Anika Norheim

Refilling my water-filter is a reminder of what contaminants the filter is trying
to remove. Taking a closer look at the toxicity of U.S. water supplies is alarming
to say the least. Studies revealed that the 35-year old federal law regulating
tap water (Safe Drinking Water Act) is so out of date that the ‘water Americans
drink can pose what scientists say are serious health risks – and still be legal’.

The divide between what is under the legal limit, or the health guidelines is
surprising. Data collected by the Environmental Working Group, use the stricter
guidelines by the E.P.A. to determine the toxic concentrations of water.

Some water systems are only required to test for some contaminants every five
years; in comparison the law requires daily observations of some air pollutants.
Multiple reviews suggest that ‘millions of Americans become sick each year from
drinking contaminated water with maladies from upset stomachs to cancer and
birth defects.’

It comes down to whether or not we want to drink certified quality water, if
that’s the case then there will be costs. In removing parts per billion of
contaminants is possible but highly cost intensive. Yes people want cleaner
water, yet in comparison to the world our level of contaminants is minimal.
Contaminants will continue to exist and increase in our water supplies unless
amendments are made, preferably on the state level if the Safe Drinking Water
Act will not be improved. Given the costs of purifying water after the fact it is
obvious that the contaminants should be eliminated at the source. Focus on
the doers, not those who clean up after them.

Maybe we will ask the same question, what am I drinking today?

http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters/contaminants/about

http://www.ewg.org/

Eminent Domain

2010-02-22T09:51:00.002-07:00

Brian Mead

The government coercion policy of eminent domain has come up in the readings and in the news lately. Eminent domain is a policy where the government can take your land as long as it is for the good of the general public. The government must pay you for the land in which it takes but in the end you have no choice but to give up your land.

Eminent domain is often used to build public roadways and can cause huge collective action problems. Each person who is forced to give up their land knows that the whole project will be on hold until they reach an agreement on the amount of money they want for their property. Each person will want to charge a price much greater than the actual value of the land because they know that the road can’t be built until the government pays them for their land.

Eminent domain seems to be a policy which is unlike most American politics in that the government has the ultimate power over the freedom of landowner rights to do what it pleases. I often wonder who makes the final decision about what is best for the public as a whole, and is it of such great importance that the government really needs to take private land from its citizens? Yes-a payment must be given to the landowner, but what if money isn’t the issue at the heart of the coercive government policy?

The National Park Ideal in Africa

2010-02-22T09:47:00.000-07:00

Dana Hayward

National parks in Africa exist as a result of cultural constructs rather than ecological units (yes, the animals cross in and out of park boundaries as they please). It is important to recognize the crucial contradiction between consumption and conservation present in these parks and to identify how their very existence is a manifestation of western thought played out in both a physical and ideological African landscape; this situation creates tension.

American and European ideas of nature often characterize it as a landscape absent of people, a landscape that is sublime and pristine. As a result, western interpretations of nature suggest that national parks in part represent nostalgia for pre-industrial interactions with the land; they are seen as preserved remnants of the past. The way many Africans live and go about their livelihoods implies a very different, and more integrated, type of interaction with nature. By removing the notion that any human role played a part in creating the nature areas we observe in Africa today (such as the Massai Mara park in Kenya or the Ngorongoro crater) the western concept of conservation isolates the land demarcated as National Parks both from the entirety of the African landscape and from the African agency that both created and helps maintain them. As a result of western choice to ignore a long history of human use of and interaction with the African landscape, Western ideals of nature in Africa are constructed and distorted.

The creation of National Parks and wildlife reserves in Africa is a type of top-down resource management that pits western scientific thought against traditional African knowledge and denies human agency. These places serve as landscapes of consumption for privileged Westerners and therefore represent elevated culture and status, as nature is set-aside for these visitors; this phenomenon thereby effects how Africans define progress and modernity. The resulting understanding often contrasts greatly with native concepts of human-environment interaction and further perpetuates class distinctions, othering, and cultural miscues. It is important to consider the social implications of a public policy like National Park creation, especially when the policy originates from a different public (and within a different paradigm) than the one it directly affects.

Model Transportation

2010-02-22T09:46:00.000-07:00

Kyle Stines

One of the leading places for transportation and the bus system in the world is in Brazil. The town of Curitiba has the model transportation for the rest of the world. In looking at what makes the system successful is how versatile the system is. One of the highlights of the system is the ability that the system is run not on how far the person travels but it is a one time fee. This allows for the people to reach further out then the traditional transportation areas in the world today. One of the other features that the new systems was able to provide is that the other types of current system is that it is run by many private different companies. This is new and cutting edge type of system because it allows for the competition among the companies who are providing the transit. One of the other great features they are offered recycling incentives for the people. If they recycle they are able to get a token that is used for a trip of on the bus system. I think that this can be looked at as a model for everyone in the world on how to make a system that is not only affordable but gives the people extra incentive to ride it. It is such a high tech system from the way it is set up the busses it uses and also the way people get on and off. I think by a close inspection of the success of the transportation in Curitiba could really lend a hand in public transportation of the rest of the world.

Japanese Fishing Policy

2010-02-20T08:06:00.000-07:00

This seems relevant to our simulation the other day.

The position of Japan, which consumes about 80 percent of the bluefin tuna caught in the Mediterranean, “is very simple,” Mr. Miyahara said. He said Japan believed that a different organization, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, known as Iccat, should manage bluefin tuna catches and protection.

Mr. Miyahara said Japan acknowledged that the bluefin tuna needed protection, but the endangered-species convention was “quite inflexible,” he said.

Historically, he said, almost no species added to the Cites endangered species list had ever been removed. “We don’t believe the bluefin tuna is endangered to that extent,” he said.

Oh, they're endangered all right. Just not so endangered that we want to give them up.

Agricultural degradation in China...

2010-02-19T11:18:00.000-07:00

You'll need to be on campus or hooked up to a VPN for this to work, but a good article on the acidification of agricultural land in China here.

More on food crises...

2010-02-19T11:16:00.000-07:00

Kate makes a good point...

The most efficient "grow our own" campaign in a time of high food prices is probably no policy at all--let the market take over and incentivize the production of food with high prices.

But this isn't a solution for the urban poor who, over the short term, often have no way of growing a garden or otherwise producing food.

Another policy that encourages domestic production would be long-term subsidies for agricultural producers. As we talked about in class a week ago on Monday, we have very high agricultural subsidies in the US, as do many developed countries (including most of Europe). But this produces its own problems (over-production of corn with the resultant over-consumption of charming products like high fructose corn syrup.)

I've been reading a lot about these issues recently--it's part of my dissertation research, which deals with agricultural and forestry policy, as many of you know--and it's interesting that countries which depend less on agriculture economically, as a source of income and employment (like the United States) tend to subsidize agricultural production, while countries in which agriculture is a major source of employment and income tend to suppress agriculture through taxation.

Perhaps the best outcome would be to remove all subsidies and taxes altogether, or to structure subsidies in different ways, but these types of policies are difficult to produce because agricultural producers in poor countries--who are poor, undereducated, and large in number--face greater barriers to collective action than agricultural producers in rich countries--who tend to be large agricultural firms which are wealthy and few in number (like Cargill, Con-Agra, etc...). It's a lot easier for a small number of agricultural firms to organize themselves to pressure politicians for subsidies than it is for a large number of rural farmers to do the same.

So, the policy question becomes not "what type of policy should be pursue?" but "how can we get small-scale agricultural producers organized?"

Any ideas?

Food Price Crises

2010-02-19T08:16:00.000-07:00

An interesting discussion of the policies pursued by governments of developing countries in the wake of the food-price crises of last year:

When world food prices rise, governments have three basic approaches they can use to soften the blow for ordinary people. First, they can try to keep their own national food prices down, for example through trade measures and subsidies. Second, they can give a helping hand to the poorest and worst-affected people – for example through increased welfare payments, employment schemes or food handouts. Or third, they can start a quick ‘grow-our-own’ campaign to increase national food production, help some families feed themselves, and hopefully bring food prices back down.

Their conclusions are here.

If any of my students are interested, this would be a very interesting topic for a paper or in-class analysis.

The Economist on Copenhagen

2010-02-18T20:38:00.000-07:00

A useful discussion of the results of the Copenhagen conference here. This might not be accessible unless you create an id--I'm not sure--but it should be free. Might be worthwhile if you're interested in climate change.

One interesting point:

Another of the accord’s purposes was to provide a way for the world to move beyond the besetting problem of the Kyoto protocol. That protocol requires developed countries that have ratified it to reduce their emissions while imposing no such strictures on the rest of the world, and politicians from the rich world who are critical of Kyoto make much of this iniquity. They may be surprised, then, to learn that the bulk of the commitments to reduced emissions in the Copenhagen accord come from developing countries.

...and later...

The developing world has increased its commitment by two-thirds since Copenhagen. The developed world has cut its by about a quarter, from 1.1 billion tonnes to 800m tonnes.

This is far from what I would expect. I would have anticipated the opposite. Anyone have an explanation? I simply don't believe that people in the developed world are more or less selfish than people in the developing would--I think we're all equally self-interested. So what's an alternative explanation?

Abbey on Automobiles

2010-02-17T20:23:00.001-07:00

One of the great things about Ed Abbey is that his writing is so polemical, it's easy to find stuff to get angry about (or really excited about: "Man, he's right on!").

A pretty good example:

Industrial Tourism is a threat to the national parks. But the chief victims of the system are the motorized tourists. They are being robbed and robbing themselves. So long as they are unwilling to crawl out of their cars they will not discover the treasures of the national parks and will never escape the stress and turmoil of the urban-suburban complexes which they had hoped, presumably, to leave behind for a while.

That's from Desert Solitaire.

A part of me agrees with Abbey. Cars in national parks? What a waste. We should all walk through the parks, or at worst, bike them. But seeing them from an automobile is a travesty.

When I was just out of high school, I walked most of the Appalachian Trail--tried to through hike it, but only did about 1800 miles in roughly five months. Walking through the Shenandoahs, I learned that only about 15% of the visitors to the national park get out of their cars at all, and less than 5% get more than twenty feet from their vehicle.

On the other hand, I'm as guilty as auto-tourism as anybody. I've done a lot of hiking in national parks: backpacking and hiking in the Shenandoahs, Rocky, Arches, the Black Hills, Denali, Wrangell-St. Elias, and Waterton Lakes, Banff and Jasper and Kluane in Canada, among others. But I've spent a lot more time seeing the parks from my car than from the trail. Probably most of us have.

Certainly, Abbey spent a lot of time driving--as did Hayduke and company.

Politically, auto-tourism does one thing that hiking probably couldn't do--it makes the outdoors accessible to a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise bother. This creates a constituency that will want to protect it. The more people fighting for national parks, the more likely they will survive budget cuts, libertarians, OPEC and W.

Is that enough of a reason to pave the roads and allow in the Cadillacs? I'm not sure.

Corruption, Democracy, and Hawaii

2010-02-17T19:56:00.002-07:00

Alex Morris

Corruption wins the negative association with aristocracy because the single ruler can abuse their power. Democracy envisioned a change to governmental structure where people theoretically have the power thus control against a corrupt system. Our book refers to this as the “principals controlling the agents.” The truth of corruption can be much different. Corruption takes form as shirking because an agent benefits at the principles expense. The incentive for shirking benefits the agent, most formally connecting to their personal business interest.

The best example of a democracy being more corrupt then an aristocracy includes personal business interest at the core. Sanford Dole, Lorrin A. Thurston and John L. Stevens the leading conspirators against Queen Lili’uokalani within a cabal of American citizens in written communication with the secretary of state; they found success in controlling Hawai’i. This was during the Presidency of Grover Cleveland who supported Hawaiian sovereignty, along with the other leading imperialist nations of Germany and Great Brittan. The conspiracy style of the “safety committee” was confirmed by an executive report called the Blount Report that concluded the Queen’s removal illegal.

Imperialism connects preeminently to capitalism. The main agents on the American “safety committee” acted for power and profit. Being landholders, American trade policies cashed out in their favor. Sanford Dole became the president of the territory, also extending his selfish gains to his family, namely James Dole founder of Hawai’ian Pineapple Company now known as Dole Food Company, Inc. After starting the first pineapple plantation around 1851, the produce became much more profitable after the overthrow, mainly due to the halt of tariffs because of the new relationship with America. Despite tribunals and many well-supported petitions, Hawai’ians persist only as a permanent minority due to personal business interest. African exploitation for labor also caused Personal business interest to force a permanent minority. The damage that this corporation has done also includes: owning with Chiquita Company nearly 60% of agriculture land in Honduras, being cited for exploiting workers of developing nations, and Illegal pesticide (Nemagon) use in Nicaragua. Finally, their unethical practices illustrate shortcomings in laissez-faire policy. Although I agree government has no capacity for price setting like price floors or ceilings and subsidies, but policy is essential for human rights and environmental protection.

Writing in the social sciences

2010-02-17T13:45:00.002-07:00

A really good guide to writing in the Social Sciences here. It's a bit long for a blog post, but well worth the read.

Let's Talk Sustainability.

2010-02-17T07:27:00.002-07:00

Sara Weisberg

When you hear the word sustainability, what comes to mind? Wikipedia describes it as “responsible use” in regard to human concerns. However, I disagree. I believe that use is the problem, not the answer, and that the best method for achieving sustainability lies in adopting non-use mentality.

Sustainability refers to conservation and preservation. Responsible use, or any other kind of use, will not accomplish this goal without serious lifestyle reform. First of all, people have different ideas of what is responsible or not. Can we cut down a forest if we replant it? Can we over fish a region if we introduce new individuals? The answer is no. This mentality is how we have arrived at the ecological crises that scientists are currently battling. We simply lack the informational grasp to confidently replace what we use without seriously altering critical habitats.

Modern consumerism, particularly American consumerism is largely to blame for these crises. Marketing schemes are so successful at pushing the newest technology, which recently entails energy efficiency. I am all for energy efficient light bulbs or washing machines or cars, but they encourage people to give themselves a big green pat on the back and become complacent.

The real steps that need to be taken to care for the environment do not involve buying anything. The real steps mean turning off a light bulb, whether it is an energy efficient bulb or not. The real steps meaning fixing an old appliance, not buying a shiny new one because the energy and resources that go into that shiny new machine cost the environment more than it can save over its lifespan. The real steps mean carpooling or biking to work.

Even though it is difficult for many of us to take a step back from what we have been socially trained to contribute in respect to American economic values, the answer to a sustainable future lies in our own resourcefulness. We must learn to use what we have rather than rely on new things to save us from that harmful habits we have developed over the last 40-50 years. We hold our own fate in our hands and we are capable of caring for it if we can just change our mentality of what is really best for the environment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability

http://www.colorado.edu/news/r/44ecae7402a768e281a2c1db33f4f249.html
Article on CU being named #1 green campus. Do we really live up to the standard?

Nicaragua, 1972, and Haiti, 2010

2010-02-15T20:25:00.001-07:00

Although I'm risking beating a dead horse here, this is a long, but great story about how earthquakes can bring down regimes.

The earthquake in Managua, Nicaragua that was the beginning of the end for the Somoza regime in Nicaragua, and the beginning of the Sandinista rise.

Via Two Weeks Notice.

Western Water Crisis

2010-02-15T11:31:00.000-07:00

Nina Russell

Many would argue that we are facing or will be facing a global water crisis in the near future. I turn on my tap to grab a glass of water, run my dishwasher and washing machine with little to no thought about where my water is coming from or what environmental damage I am doing. A water crisis doesn’t seem like something that would affect me. When I think of water crisis I think of Africa and other developing countries without the resources and money we have here in the US.

The west, however does have a water problem. The policy surrounding water laws in the west is outdated. Right now, our system is based on senior and junior water rights. The first people to put water to beneficial use acquired the rights to that water. These early rights are considered senior rights. Rights acquired later in time are junior rights. There is a list of water rights from most senior to most junior and these rights are fulfilled in that order every year. This means that if one year is particularly dry, the people at the bottom of the list will not receive their water. These rights can be bought and sold, but at incredibly high prices.

I believe that this system needs to be re-evaluated and revamped. Our political system, demand for water, and water uses have completely changed from when this water policy was put into place.

Anyone have any ideas for how we could fix this outdated system?

Check out these sites for more information:

http://cwcb.state.co.us/IWMD/

http://www.crwcd.org/

http://www.ncwcd.org/

Copenhagen Climate Conference: Is There Hope for a Legally-Binding Agreement?

2010-02-15T11:20:00.003-07:00

Teghan Binnings

In the weeks following the Copenhagen Climate Conference there has been a lot of discussion about the conference, many citing it as a failure. Fifty-five nations attended the summit where they made pledges to either reduce their carbon footprint or to restrict its growth. However many argue that these pledges do not go far enough and that without a legally-binding agreement there will not be significant change in the future.

But is a legally-binding agreement a reasonable expectation? Probably not. Because each country attending the conference is a sovereign nation there is no way to require these countries to adhere to any policies; in our international community there is not an overseeing body that can make laws and hold countries to them. While there are organizations like the United Nations, these groups are little more than a loose configuration of states, and even the organization cannot really hold member countries accountable. This is an unfortunate truth but without an overseeing body, or a way to hold countries accountable, summits like Copenhagen will continue to be a time for countries to make pledges, not write or adhere to laws. But hopefully the nations that attended the conference will stick to their promises, and we will see a change in their carbon footprints in the future.

Eco-Friendly Olympic Venue

2010-02-15T11:19:00.000-07:00

Sarah Gonzalez

For the 2010 Winter Olympics, Canada is giving athletes from around the world the opportunity to compete in their newly built, eco-friendly Richmond Olympic Oval. The enormous building was completed in December 2008 and is not only modern and aesthetically pleasing, it is also equip with numerous eco-friendly amenities. The venue was built to qualify for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Scale) silver certification.

The roof of the building is designed in the shape of a wave, a design that will help collect rainwater, which is recycled and used to make ice for the arena and to also flush the toilets; remaining rainwater is drained into a nearby pond and is used to irrigate nearby land. The elaborate “wood wave” roof was constructed using British Colombian wood that had been damaged by pine beetles. The oval also has a refrigeration plant that converts excess energy extracted from the water and uses it in other parts of the building.

The Richmond Olympic Oval will get much media attention during the 2010 Winter Olympic games; serving as an excellent example to nations around the world that environmental design is feasible, even on such a large scale. Canada is putting their green foot forward for this year’s Winter Olympics with their incredible, sustainable, eco-friendly, design- GO CANADA!

Sources: Stein, Larry. Olympic Green Arena Lives Up to Gold Standard. Reuters Online. 12 February 2010 < http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61B0HX20100212>

Immigration abuses in Boulder

2010-02-12T20:56:00.000-07:00

It's frustrating to hear of immigration abuses like this. Right here in Boulder. Even legal immigrants on temporary work visas often have no recourse when mistreated by employers, because losing their job means losing their visa.

Our immigration laws need reform, no matter what side of the aisle you happen to sit on.

China Plans Renewable Energy Center

2010-02-12T15:35:00.001-07:00

Lucie Klimes

Currently China’s rapid industrial growth has taken an extreme toll on the county’s environment. There is has been an increase in pollution, smog, and degradation of natural resources. Water pollution is an issue of great concern. Roughly 70 percent of the country’s lakes and rivers are polluted. China’s air pollution levels are among the worlds highest, causing thousands of premature deaths a year.

China announced plans last Tuesday to build a national renewable energy center aimed at supporting future development in the sector. Responsibilities of the center include policymaking, key project and program management, market and industrial operations, and a database and information platform establishment.

The Danish government is partnering up with China and is investing 18.5 million into the program. It is estimated that the advancement of renewable energy will provide 1.12 million new jobs. By 2020, China hopes to generate 8 percent of its electricity generation from wind, solar, and biomass. This is significantly lower than the recent prediction by the Department of Energy. It is predicted that 20 percent of the U.S. energy generation could be from wind power by 2030. It is important to note that China is the third-largest producer of wind power in the world and is responsible for 40 percent of the output of the world’s solar photovoltaics. Should we be expecting higher percentages from China by 2020?

Sources:
“China Plans Renewable Energy Center.” Energy Resources. UPI.com 10 Feb 2010.
“Increasing Wind Energy’s Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply.” 20% Wind Energy by 2030. 20percentwind.org 10 Feb 2010.