Just this morning I saw a great tweet on the feed for Beyond Coal–the Sierra Club’s initiative to phase out coal fired power plants and stop new ones from developing–about new exercise equipment being tested for gyms. The “Green System” ellipticals and bikes will A) feed energy back to the grid and B) Show exercisers how many watts they are producing. Similar products in existence are inverters that can be attached to various stationary bikes. This set up, which includes both the bike/elliptical and the inverter, will increase system efficiency by 40%, allowing for up to 70% of the energy created by exercisers to be returned to the grid. Additionally, programs to incentivize maximum energy production are in the works. Discounts on gym memberships and other prizes will be awarded to those who perform, which is of course why we are at the gym in the first place.  The pilot is set to launch at the Hotel Grand Pacific in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada this February.  But I think this could work in our over-achieving, competitive, vanity obsessed, future thinking city as well.

There are of course micro-scale examples of translating this energy into use. Occupy Wall Street campers were using bicycle power generators–only after the NYPD confiscated their gas fueled ones. The annual Coachella music festival has the Energy FACTory DJ Mixer, which is a power-cordless stage where musicians play their sets powered by the see-saws, bikes, and a human-hamster wheel that power the equipment. (Note, the video linked there talks about a whole slew of sustainability projects that people engage with at Coachella. Watch it!) And  on a similar note, there is the green dance floor that captures the energy of the party people upon it.  NYC apparently has a few of these. I have yet to encounter one, but let us know if you have!

The initiative to accept food stamps at Grow NYC markets began in 2007 and at that time, these transactions amounted to a few thousand dollars. By 2009, it was $251,000. In 2010 we were up to $505,000. And in 2011, $620,000 worth of food stamps was spent at participating Grow NYC markets. Note, there are other markets that accept food stamps that are not affiliated with Grow NYC. A map of them can be seen here.

Nationwide, low-income Americans spent about .01 of their foodstamps in Green Markets. GOOD has a nice map showing which states have signed on to make this type of transaction more convenient for their food consumers and they kindly outline which states continuously hold out. Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.  I’d be interested in seeing  a map that highlights overlap between big agribusiness turf and the program deniers.

We still have a long way to go in getting fresh food to all Americans. But it took many steps for the food system to change, to the point where the Crop Life Association came out against Michelle Obama for declaring the White House Garden as organic. For some seriously mind-blowing reading, take a look at the association’s call to arms for a letter writing campaign to tell the First Lady that the garden should not be organic.  For a more indepth discussion of that whole escapade, you can listen to Michael Pollan’s Illustrated Food Rules on the January 2nd, 2012 Leonard Lopate show.

Ultimately, every step taken to bring us to our current food system status-quo, every bill signed, every food pyramid created, every subsidy awarded, every cultural norm established, will need to be replaced by steps in a different direction, supported by a vision to take us there. I’d like to think that $620,000 worth of food stamps spent at  Grow NYC markets in 2011 is one of those steps.    [image via year of plenty]

My favorite response was found on Tree Hugger, who very simply said: “You Are Now One of 7 Billion People on Planet Earth.  Our recommendation: Live accordingly.” There is of course a more in-depth discussion of what this all means for limited resources paired with growing appetites for them over at Dot Earth.

I guess I would probably say the same thing to these babies as I would to any other one: You were born into exciting and amazing times, but they are also full of anxieties and concern that a lot of things need to be fixed. So you will have to work hard to contribute to the cause of betterment. Also, that is not going to get any easier for you, so you will have to be innovative, but you will have tools and talent beyond measure to make that happen. You will also have to learn about the role of lobbying in politics if you want all of your efforts to go anywhere. Live in a city. Be close to the people you care about. And yes, you will survive your teenage years.

In the time I wrote this, many more babies were born. And we now have 7,000,274,589 people on the planet. What do you you want to tell them?

[image via World Population Day]

Maathai dedicated her life to building active civic societies that could address both economic and environmental destruction with simple yet impacting solutions.  The Green Belt Movement, which she founded and led until her passing, started with a simple idea that has profound meaning, both symbolically and in reality.  They began by planting trees as a means of economic development, women’s empowerment, environmental restoration and the securing of sustainability for future generations.  Think the Million Trees NYC campaign is impressive? (it is!) The Green Belt Movement wants to plant a billion and they have already planted 40 million.

I would highly recommend that anyone who might need some pep in their step regarding our global state of affairs read her book: Unbowed. She seamlessly makes the connections between human rights, environmental health, and economic equality; she exemplified the idea of thinking globally and acting locally. Her courage is awe inspiring and she spent plenty of time in a jail cell while fighting for what she believed in.  And really folks, just look at that smile.  RIP Wangari Maathai. We will try to make you proud! [image courtesy of The Green Belt Movement]

City Atlas, a digital platform developed by the City University of New York (CUNY) Institute for Sustainable Cities at Hunter College and Artist As Citizen, launches this Thursday at www.thecityatlas.org. Generously supported by a 2010 Rockefeller Foundation Cultural Innovation award, City Atlas guides and inspires New Yorkers to participate in building a more sustainable future. An optimistic, relevant, and accessible hub of daily resources and ideas, the Atlas creates new and larger audiences for sustainability by mapping the important work being done by members of New York’s rich cultural, scientific, political and grassroots communities. City Atlas consists of the following components:

Explore | A collection of interactive maps tracing New York’s changing present and possible future

Lifestyle | A daily feed of events, tips, new ideas, and  ‘     NY Back’ volunteer opportunities

People | We ask New Yorkers–everyday people and experts alike–to share their thoughts on the city’s present and future.

Lab | Our very own micro funding initiative supporting innovative, participatory, and on the ground sustainability work in NYC

Archive | A collection of recent creative projects about the city

The weekly ‘Atlas Beat,’ which is pictured above, will feature a map of our top listings for the week, including current events,  new ideas, and fun facts.

###

Although the event seems to be well received and extremely well produced, full with celebrities of both the Holly Wood kind and the academic, and includes an exceptionally well made and disturbing video clip linking the methods of big tobacco lawyers and scientists to the practices of our contemporary contrarians, I still wonder whether this event can be the game changer it wants to be. Gore made a statement to NPR that got me thinking that before I even tuned into the live broadcast for a little while. Going off the statistic that 98% of climate scientists believe in anthropogenic climate change (which prompted the title of this post), he says, “If 98 doctors told you you had a heart condition that required you to make some changes and two doctors say, ‘Don’t worry about it,’ … hopefully you’d go with the 98.”

But what if those 2 doctors were paid by people who continuously invaded your frequently viewed television, print media, and blogosphere outlets and kept saying, there’s more than 2 of us who believe this? What if they were employed to keep selling you products that would ensure their salaries and their ability to provide for their families, even if it meant, you as an individual would keep suffering? What if those 2 doctors managed to make you think that the stuff that the 98 doctors said and believed was still not entirely confirmed? What if you are just pretty comfortable with your lifestyle and fear that making lots of changes is going to be too hard–because the 2 doctors told you it would be or because you actually really enjoy those foods and no exercise. And finally, what if you decided to actually make those changes, to heed the warning of the 98 doctors, but it seemed that every thing you did paled in comparison to the larger changes (in your environment, your job, etc) that needed to be made in order to see results?

While of course an analogy is not meant to be taken entirely literally, I believe this one is a particularly good example of how we still may be failing in our communication and ultimately in our mitigation tactics. Coming off of a summer of extreme weather events, we may have more peoples attention on the issue. But ultimately the lack of regulation from a federal and international level (the external factors that you can’t control, unless in you’re in the government) suppresses the efforts, actions, and political will of believers.  Don’t get me wrong. I am still all about creating an informed populous who can remind their political constituents that they want to see action on climate change. But without a lobby as powerful as that of the 2%–that 2% that has effectively altered reality–we are still on a constant defensive to reclaim it.

Simultaneous to the relative sparing of our densely populated coastal city (this time) and the survey of wreckage and emergency situations in other parts of the North East, there are two troubling and connected conversations going on in Washington. One–the debate on how necessary federal emergency assistance is and how we will pay for it in a time of tight budgets. And two–more disturbingly, the climate-science-denying agendas of front running Republican contenders for the White House. Jon Huntsman, who is not a front-runner, has gone so far to start calling his own party the, “anti-science party.” This is partially in response to Texas Governor Rick Perry falsely reminding people that climate scientists are coming out on a weekly–no, on a DAILY basis–to decry the fundamental concept that the earth is warming and that humans likely have something to do with this.  Meanwhile, in the world of truth, 97-98% of climate scientists believe in anthropogenic climate change.

Most people have by now noticed that weather events have been, well, sort of insane this summer. On the American front, deadly tornadoes and hurricanes are not new. But deadly tornadoes and hurricanes, mixed with wild fires, ravaging drought and violent floods should probably alarm people that extreme weather is the new black. These impacts that we feel here in the U.S. are of course being experienced globally, with the highest vulnerability in the developing world. I was feeling very privileged to have the opportunity to over-do my preparations for Irene. Those exercises in preparation are going to get more frequent, not less. So, now would be a good time to bring climate science into the conversation about defending and protecting citizens. The Department of Defense is on board and takes into account the realities of climate science when they look at national security interests.  Let the irony not be lost then, that all this anti-science rhetoric and the void of climate change mitigation it has fostered, can metaphorically be likened to a homegrown enemy. Except in this case, we aren’t quite sure there is a budget to help people recover in the wake of its destruction…

What prompted me to write this post was some reading I was doing on Colorado’s impressive growth in the renewable energy sector. The cleantech industry has grown by 32.7% in 2010, which was three times the national average. Nearly 20,000 people are employed by 1,600 companies. So, clearly the outlook in Colorado is pretty good for those in this budding industry.  But as I read this article, I got pulled into another post about the slight shift to mainstreaming the concept of a no-growth economy. It would in effect, be a stable, stagnant economy; concepts which are currently anathema to free market capitalism as we know it.  Without going too deep into this new macro-economic model (which is outlined in Prosperity Without Growth), George Monbiot’s explains in his article, that its not too much different than our current system, “people will still spend and save, companies will still produce goods and services, governments will still raise taxes and spend money.” But he also does mention restrictions on advertising and more government intervention, two ideas that might not float that well in this here democracy.

But back to what prompted me to write this blog entry: I couldn’t help but think about how these two ideas relate to each other. In a no-growth economy, is there still room for growth in the renewable energy sector? Would it just take the place of the existing carbon-based energy economy? Or does the growth in the renewables sector simply enable continuous, conspicuous, consumption? And how does any of this alleviate the growing (or non-growing) pains we may experience as the eternal promise of the free market dissipates?

I have a lot of questions. Maybe you do too?  Clearly I am not a trained economist. Just an eternal optimist. Curious as to how we are going to recreate something out of the bubble that finally burst.

(image above: word cloud from Obama’s recovery and reinvestment speech in 2009. Courtesy of McNitt)

Panelists:
Babette Audant
Lecturer, Culinary Arts Program and Urban Farm Faculty Project Manager, Kingsborough, Community College

Ari Fainchtien
PhD Candidate, Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy, Murdoch University
CTO of Stakeware

Deborah Greig
Urban Agriculture Coordinator, East New York Farms

Laura Lawson
Author of City Bountiful: A Century of Community Gardening in America
Chair, Landscape Architecture Department, Rutgers University

Moderated by Michael Menser, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Brooklyn College