I thought of this speech today while watching this month’s installment of Currents, in the New Yorker. In it, Paul Goldberger, the magazine’s architecture critic sat with Richard Cook, a partner at Cook+Fox Architects. These are the guys that brought us the Bank of America Leed Platinum building. At one point, while Cook is discussing the variety of nature that he watched blossom outside his window atop a green roof, he says nature is complex but it is simply “life following life,” and that this is a guiding force in the new architecture that they are thinking about. An architecture where the distinctions between the built and natural are blurring.

It is a 25 minute video, which seems like hours in our rapid media world, but it covers logistical issues: LEED standards have been criticized, are they enough? And more conceptual ideas: How do we start to build things, en masse, that are as beautiful as natural things? Cook alludes to a project they are working on in Syracuse called Live | Work | Home, a house that mimics the light that penetrates the floor of a rainforest through its canopy.  He discusses biophilia, E.O. Wilson’s idea that, simply put, humans are intrinsically drawn to other living systems. And this is precisely what made me think of the Paul Hawken speech that I initially alluded to. In it, he reminds us that we are all here because one cell, said yes, to another. “Life creates conditions that are conducive to more life.” Now, its time to get the built “life” of the planet, our cities, on board in this exercise in reciprocity and resilience.

Via NY Times

An opinion piece in the Times, Disaster at the Top of the World by Thomas Homer-Dixon, a prominent thinker on resource scarcity and rising conflict–reminds us that it will be nearly impossible to mobilize people on the issue of climate change legislation because our identities and how we see ourselves in the world is more important than the truth of what is happening, or in other words, our identities shape how we react to the severity of the issue. But eventually, we will have a clear, present and dangerous crisis that will be directly linked to climate change. 2010, shaping up to be the hottest year on record, full with drought, fire, and flooding is perhaps still not enough. Dixon reminds us that a, “key lesson of the recent financial crisis: when powerful special interests have convinced much of the public that what they’re doing isn’t dangerous, only a disaster that discredits those interests will provide an opportunity for comprehensive policy change like the Dodd-Frank financial regulations…Policy makers need to accept that societies won’t make drastic changes to address climate change until such a crisis hits.”

So, what are we to do? Wait for the disaster and have a plan for it? Essentially, yes.  It seems like a nice compromise between proactivity and reactivity: Be prepared to react. He cites a Harvard publication from 2009, Responding to Threats of Climate Change Mega-Catastrophes, but says that this report and others like it are the exception and not the norm and efforts remain uncoordinated.

Most climate scientists believe that we have a shrinking window of time to address this issue. But this think piece almost recommends that we let the window close and figure out how to hack it after. Scale the wall, climb the fire escape, etc. The biggest question then is, do we really need to enter into the crisis era before anything actually changes? I believe there are countless opportunities to use environmental challenges as democracy building exercises and opportunities, invoking crowd sourcing technologies and the like. But on this issue, I might actually be okay with the benevolent dictator who has all of our best interests in mind when the crisis, whatever it may be, actually hits.  In the meantime, we can and should continue to do the work we do to look at the decisions of our lives as potential landscapes for sustainability. Let this, define us. And let this, be our identity.

Via Solutions

Full with a lesson on the basics of David Ricardo’s Comparative Advantage theory to a discussion of the vision for a more sustainable Appalachia, this article outlines how it came to be that Appalachia became synonymous with mountain top mining, rapid environmental destruction and risk with limited return, that somehow gives the allusion of infinite return, and of course, how this place can be and is being saved. The key concepts from the piece are below, but I would highly recommend a full reading.

via huffington post.

We know that sustainability as a concept has remained nebulous. Save for the idea that it implies an equitable distribution and consumption of resources, that will not compromise future generations use of said resources, we have little else to agree on about what sustainability looks like in action, in day to day existence.

I recently read an essay in Grist, Environmentalism’ can never address climate change, written by David Robert, who literally opens his piece by saying, “I’m not an environmentalist and these aren’t environmental challenges.” It made me think about what exactly the challenge is then. What kind of challenge is the climate change (and related sustainability) challenge then?  The idea that framing matters is not new; communication scholars have long been studying the fallout—both positive and negative—from the way in which we talk about certain issues.  Somehow though, we in the climate movement seem to have thought we were exempt from this phenomenon for far too long; that somehow data would speak for itself.  Don’t get me wrong, there were plenty of people thinking about how to talk about this stuff before; artists, scientists, policy makers, students, but to make an impact, to have a critical mass, we all need to have a shared vocabulary and clear vision about what we want, when we want it, how we get there and most importantly how we talk about it.

I see the new blog as an opportunity to showcase and discuss living proof of sustainability, of people working towards a clear vision, and not always through novel technology (although, yes, sometimes we will discuss this), but more importantly, a reading between the lines of where we are and where we want to be. In Robert’s essay, he argues that if we succeed at the sustainability challenge (a big if, he points out), it will be a groundbreaking, revolutionary new model. “…it will be a tidal shift in human history on par with the agriculture, industrialization, or democracy itself.”

The difference is, those that lived through these histories only had a slight understanding of the massive impact they were about to have on the physical and social operating systems of the planet. We, on the other hand, with our science and blogs (and science blogs), living in the data explosion era, know better, maybe.  So, let’s get to it. We have a lot of re-making to do.

I took some of our fabulous CISC interns on a kayaking voyage up the Bronx River a few weeks ago. And this is what they had to say about it.

“New Yorkers tend to think inwards and underground about their city: Central Park and the subway. But lately, this has been changing.  Boating organizations and environmental groups have sprung up in the past half-century to increase awareness of the waterways critical condition and importance to the City.  As summer outreach and planning interns, we decided to take a kayak trip with one of these organizations, the Bronx River Alliance, to experience hands on the effects of the City on our waterways.

The Bronx River, New York City’s only freshwater river, runs 23 miles long from the Kensico Dam in upper Westchester County through 13 Westchester municipalities to where the East River converges with Long Island Sound. This once beautiful and thriving body of water is now a contaminated conduit for industrial and residential wastes.

The Bronx River Alliance formed in 1974, has taken remarkable strides in trying to restore this river back to its original serenity. This organization develops community outreach initiatives, conducts research on the River’s ecology and serves as an advocate for the River and its surrounding community. BRA’s work illustrates how dedicated citizens who are adamant about preserving our environment can and do make a difference.

However, their hard work is not immediately evident upon emerging from the Hunt’s Point subway station. We had never been to Hunts Point, but we were aware of the controversial developments of Robert Moses and their devastating toll it  had on the Bronx.  As we walked toward the Bruckner Expressway overpass, it wasn’t hard to see that the area is plagued with social ills. In a city as wealthy as New York, the hard truth is that poor communities bare the brunt of environmental ravages. The built environment of Hunts Point is a veritable death trap. The expressway is at least 5 lanes across, with no pedestrian walkway to be spoken of; truck after truck barrel down the road, amidst incessant car honking and exhaust fumes. Walking up the crumbling steps to cross the gritty overpass, was not welcoming. In lieu of shrubs and flowers, the overpass offered only concrete and graffiti.

Crossing the bare concrete overpass, we entered Concrete Plant Park. With parched grass, a lack of trees and no real social gathering point, the “park” falls desperately short of being an inviting public space. It would be hard to imagine a similar scene anywhere in Manhattan. In Hunt’s Point and other parts of the Bronx, the environmental inequity that exists between those communities that receive waste and those that produce it – those that dump and those that get dumped on – is hard to miss.

As we set off in our kayaks, we saw a garbage dump, a scrap metal recycling center, and parking lots lining a good portion of both riverbanks.  As we passed, we noticed a certain stench.  It would be simple to conclude that the smell originated from these concrete yards of the industrial age.  However, even in areas where trees line the river, the smell lingered.  Why?  The smell didn’t come from the dump; it came from the water itself.

In theory, the water shouldn’t be polluted.  The City’s fourteen water purification centers can process all the water used and release a purified form back into its estuaries.  So why is there sewage in the water?  Because of NYC’s antiquated sewage planning.  The city uses a combined sewage overflow system (CSO) to handle both human waste and regular runoff water.  This type of system accounts for 70% of the NYC sewage system according to the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP). On a normal, rainless day, the system is able to collect and process all of the fluids running through the system.  However, when it rains, there is too much water for the system to handle, and thus the overflow water is redirected straight to the estuaries, untreated.  That means raw sewage –shoots straight into the river.  To contextualize, Hunt’s Point’s largest CSO, CSO 007, collects an estimated 1.7 million floatables (garbage and solid matter) each year.

Despite the smell, and the murky water filled with human biproducts, we paddled along. Our guide Miguel began pointing things out to us, that the river is an ecological home, not a deserted wasteland and that there is a vibrant ecological community regenerating along the Bronx River in Hunt’s Point. The contaminated and brackish waters are home to unusual species of edible plants and a host of wildlife. Along the banks of the river rare conifers, fruit trees and medicinal plants such as Mugwort thrive.  Japanese Knotwood grows rampant-a vestige of a naturalist’s planting from the 1850s and indicative of the rich biological history of the area.

We saw Egret and Heron that nest along the river. Striped Bass and Blue Fish are indigenous, and although not advisable to eat, neighborhood fishermen cannot be dissuaded.  We witnessed a gentleman bathing en plein air just a stone’s throw from the ominous CS007, and a rope swing was rigged up in a tree where kids jump into the river to swim. Community youth were also exploring the River along with us. Miguel introduced them as youth from, Rock the Boat - an organization that trains youth in traditional boat building and water ecology.

Wrapping up the three and a half hour trip, we emerge tired and with mixed feelings.  On one hand, it’s pretty depressing to see the state of the river due to the lack of foresight when creating the sewage system, and how we haven’t moved to significantly clean up the area.  Also, people shouldn’t have to live around these conditions. But on the other hand, organizations like the Bronx River Alliance and Rock the Boat increase exposure to these issues so that they don’t go unnoticed.  And at the same time, young people out on the water are gaining valuable skills while they hopefully, become more engaged in solutions and the restoration of  these important places.

As part of its 25th anniversary, Summer Stage has branched out from its home base in Central Park, with over 100 events at venues across the city, in all five boroughs. For a full line up, visit the Summer Stage site.

The events to be held at the East River Park venue will offer free bike valet parking, as the foundation has partnered with the wonderful folks over at Transportation Alternatives. The idea behind the collaboration is to “give greater access to cyclists…and to provide an incentive to utilize alternative means of transportation, and promote the use of green spaces in the Lower East Side.”

The service begins at the event on Tuesday, August 4th and will continue for the duration of the 13 days of free public programming at that venue. Roll on over and hand your bike off to the experts.

One way to keep perspective amid all the Beltway cogitation over how  to keep a climate component in an energy bill is to pay attention to the global coal industry.  Coal is the prime factor determining the pace of growth in emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide as human populations and appetites crest in the next few decades. And regardless of what happens in the United States, the industry’s leaders see nothing but bright prospects ahead. We’re still stuck on the coal rung of  Loren Eiseley’s heat ladder.

Some energy specialists will explain below why the global coal boom renders the legislative debate on climate somewhat moot from the standpoint of the shared global atmosphere, where the source of emissions is irrelevant to their ultimate heating influence.

Here’s the latest signal from the coal industry. Addressing potential investors in Manhattan on Thursday, Gregory Boyce, the chairman and chief executive officer of the world’s biggest coal company,  Peabody Energy, simply gushed as he described how the company is ideally positioned to take advantage of “a long-term supercycle for coal,” driven by rapidly growing demand in Asia. (The company keeps a fast-moving ticker on its Web site tracking coal sales at roughly 8 tons a second or so.) This is how his talk was described in a company news release…

Read more

Hydroponics and the City: New Food for a New Age
1-3:30PM, Saturday June 26th, 2010

Creating sustainable local food systems might mean changing how we grow food. Learn how some New Yorkers are growing local food with local resources. See The Science Barge — the only fully-functioning demonstration of renewable energy supporting sustainable hydroponic agriculture in NY — and all its green glory. Hear about Gotham Greens, the first commercial hydroponic greenhouse in NYC. Make a Window Farm so you can Research and Do It Yourself.

Featuring:
Jenn Nelkin-Greenhouse Director, Gotham Greens
Ted Ullrich- Window Farmsand DoTank: Brooklyn

Location:
The Science Barge, 99 Dock Street, Yonkers,
located on the Hudson River, just north of the Yonkers Pier.
Take the MetroNorth Railroad to Yonkers station.
Limited metered parking is available as well.
1PM, Saturday June 26th, 2010
This event is free but you must RSVP
to cmolnar@hunter.cuny.edu Limited to 30 People!!!!!

But now we seem to be back to a different argument: not how we should regulate carbon, but if we should at all. Tomorrow the senate will vote on a resolution of disapproval from Senator Lisa Murkowski, which would essentially ban the regulation of carbon dioxide under the clean air act. For a full write up and information about who is backing it and why, see the NY Times article.  Essentially the disapproval, if passed will veto the endangerment finding, which was a “scientific determination that green house gasses are bad for public health and welfare.”

It appears that this summer’s climate debate might be heavier than we at first thought, with the lingering weight of the “why should we regulate” question added to the “how.” From a sustainability perspective (not partisan) the White House issued a Statement of Administration Policy saying they strongly oppose the resolution. And most importantly, there is language stipulating that a veto would likely be recommended by administration senior advisers if the President is presented with the resolution.

So…all hope is not lost. But it is going to be a hot, political, summer.

Last Friday, Harry Reid sent a letter to various Senate committee chairmen telling them he wanted to get an energy bill rolling in July. BP’s poisoning of the Gulf has apparently made energy reform look a lot more palatable than it did a few months ago. But Reid’s letter was blurry on the details: He never said whether he wanted legislation that capped carbon emissions. An “energy bill,” after all, could mean anything from the big Kerry-Lieberman climate bill to a scaled-down bill that just cracked down on oil companies and maybe added some funds for alternative energy sources. A more modest approach might give Dems a nice, tidy political win. But it wouldn’t do nearly as much for the planet.

And now it’s starting to look like a smaller bill may, in fact, be in the offing. Earlier today, Chuck Schumer was on MSNBC and said that the legislation Reid was assembling would resemble the (weak) energy-only bill passed by Jeff Bingaman’s committee back in June. In other words, there’d be some renewable-power mandates, some incentives for nuclear, some funds to kick-start new transmission lines, and some new regulations on oil companies. If Kerry and Lieberman want to tack on a cap-and-trade scheme on top of all that, Schumer said, they’ll “get a chance to add it in the form of an amendment.”

Read more…