Uncategorized

Vegetarians are ruining our bad headline

It was a headline many took personally: "Vegetarians Are Ruining the Planet."

As we know from the source article for our news blurb -- and from the many readers who wrote in to emphasize this particular point -- about 80 percent of the world's soy goes to feed livestock, much of which is then eaten by non-vegetarians.

So yes, meat-eaters, dog-food purchasers, leather-jacket wearers, and other sundry livestock end-users thus are about four-fifths at fault for destroying the soy-deadened parts of the Amazon.

But chew on this: inadvertently helping to destroy even 20 percent of these vast Amazonian tracts is still helping to destroy the planet, is it not? Alas, we're all playing a part -- though veggies less so than meat-eaters in this instance (particularly ones who make sure their soy patties and tofu nuggets are certified organic).

Anyhow, we are sincerely sorry that the headline offended many of you, dear readers. We thought, in our innocence, that it was such a clearly ridiculous assertion that it would be taken in jest. We've nothing against vegetarians, we swear -- in fact, we've even let some of them infiltrate our ranks.

Polar Apposites

U.S.-Russia treaty will protect polar bears A polar-bear-protecting treaty between the U.S. and Russia was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives this week. It would prohibit the possession, sale, and purchase of polar bears or parts thereof (ew!), and also set quotas on hunting by Native populations. Currently, Native Americans are allowed to hunt […]

Can a suburban mom survive without a car?

When Christine Gardner proposed a story about going car-free for a month, we hesitated -- until we found out she lives in Normal, Ill. How could we resist? Halfway through her experiment, and a world away from the life she temporarily left behind, the journalist and suburban mom reports on how things are going so far. Watch for a full report in Grist later this summer, and visit Christine's blog in the meantime to keep an eye on her travels and travails.

She finally talked to me.

The Orange H bus driver, the friendly one with the nice voice, finally spoke directly to me.

"I'd like to have your hours," she said.

I was returning home from an interview about the new performing arts center, a four-mile round trip that was taking three hours. In a lapse of judgment, I'd sat toward the front of the bus, and told the driver I occasionally wrote for the local paper.

That was enough for her to hear. Among other things, she told me about the pond by Kmart that was a breeding ground for mosquitoes and West Nile virus. I needed to write a story about that, she said.

An obese woman who smelled like old underwear sat next to me, even closer to our white-haired driver. She piped up to say that her doctor had found blood clots.

With a baby, a toddler, a stroller, and a bus pass, I've given up driving this month to see if it can be done. People have told me I'm crazy -- and lugging an economy-sized box of diapers down my quiet suburban street has brought that point home well enough.

Now, more than halfway through the month, I realize I'm not only crazy, I'm all alone.

Beach Oys

Beach contamination is costly; chlorinated pools may elevate asthma risk As many as 1.5 million swimmers and surfers get sick every year from bacterial pollution at Southern California beaches, according to a new study by researchers at UCLA and Stanford. The chief cause of dirty ocean water is storm runoff laden with oil, pesticides, and […]

Repeat after me: Humans are part of the environment

The new article on the environmental paradox of biking, which says that the net environmental benefits are zero because bikers live longer and therefore consume more resources, is an example of the absolute worst scholarship. The real environmental insult is that trees are being used and coal burned to print such nonsense.

Humans are part of the environment -- not separate from it -- so anything that benefits human welfare is by definition an environmental improvement!

For too long, environmentalists have created a dichotomy between humans and the environment, and hopefully, with this paper and its absurd conclusions, we can all finally lay it to rest. If not, then stop reducing stress or exercising or eating well because you might actually live longer. In fact, the best thing for the environment, according to this perverse school of thought, is for everyone to kill themselves!

The libertarian West and environmentalism

OK, one more before I go.

Libertarians are, for obvious reasons, disillusioned with the contemporary Republican party, which has done more to expand the executive power of the federal government than any regime in the last 50 years.

Will they get fed up and leave the party? Vote for Dems?

The American West has a particular concentration of libertarian sentiment (which, by the way, I share, particularly on social matters). What's stopped them from voting Dem in the past: gun control, big government, and environmentalism. Dems have largely dropped the gun thing, Republicans have taken over the big-government mantle, and ... environmentalism? Can the new environmentalism -- focused more on market mechanisms, public-private partnerships, land conservancies, etc. -- win over Western libertarians?

The inimitable Jim Henley discusses.

Vacay

I'm leaving in a few hours for a red-eye flight (with two small kids! nice knowing you) to Tennessee for what I used to call a "vacation," before I had children. Now it's called "parading the children before the relatives like show ponies."

I'll be back next week. Until then, I leave you in the capable hands of our other posters. Peace.

A challenge to all of those enamored with common property ownership

It seems like almost everyone who commented on my piece "The 4 E's for environmental improvement" took issue with point #2 -- that we establish property rights for all resources that are open access. (While I stand by this point, please also take some time to digest the other 3.)

Love the earth? Die.

The TerraPass blog points to a new study out from U. Penn professor Karl Ulrich called "The Environmental Paradox of Biking" (PDF). The rather jarring conclusion is that switching people over from cars to bicycles has, at present, no net environmental benefit.

"Wha ...?!" you say.

Well, here's the thing. Just by being alive, you're sucking up resources. In particular, lots and lots of fossil fuels are required to transport food to you. If you stop driving everywhere and bike instead, you'll live longer. So you'll suck up more resources. So it's a wash.

If you really love the environment, you'll drive your car ... off a bridge.

Ouch.

She will rap the critics’ knuckles

You know a company is eager to improve its public image when it starts hiring nuns.