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]

Grow NYC has a hurricane relief donation set up on their site for NY farmers who have experienced significant damage and impacts from Irene. As they say, the full extent of damage won’t be known for a few weeks, but right now, things are not looking pretty.  Governor Cuomo expects the damage to be in the range of $1 billion.

Interestingly enough, I was going to be doing a cooking demo this weekend with zucchini flowers at the Greenpoint Farmers market. And that may turn into more of an exercise in improvisation based on what is there. Delicate flowers may not have weathered the storm so well. But I will be there starting at 11 AM on Saturday. And I hope to see a packed, anxiety-inducing crowded market, full of New Yorkers supporting fellow New Yorkers.

Really people, if you enjoy our vast network of Greenmarkets and the stewardship that comes with their work, and all of the wonderful services they provide to both us and the larger NY economy, get out there this week to support our farmers. There’s never been a better time. And if you can’t quite make it, give what you can to the relief fund.

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…

Not to go too far down this road, but the movie “The Corporation,” was a provocative expose of how multi-national corporations are actually viewed as people–often sociopathic ones–with regard to certain rights and responsibilities. How, I wonder, might Mother Nature be judged? Surely she is not entirely innocent and can actually be viewed as somewhat of a wrecking ball through natural disasters. It is sticky logistics like this that make me curious as to how exactly this will play out. Social-ecological systems are intricately linked and to pretend otherwise would be a dangerous downplay of the complexity we find ourselves dealing with on a daily basis. But the basic ideas that the environment deserves attention, protection and other rights we generally believe (not always acted upon) humans should have, is a noble approach. I personally hold that framing and a different approach to teaching people about ecosystems, their services, and operations is a huge part of this paradigm-shifting challenge.  But it remains to be seen as to how this will be accomplished, in Bolivia or elsewhere.

From The Guardian’s coverage: (watch the video if you visit the site!)

“The law, which is part of a complete restructuring of the Bolivian legal system following a change of constitution in 2009, has been heavily influenced by a resurgent indigenous Andean spiritual world view which places the environment and the earth deity known as the Pachamama at the centre of all life. Humans are considered equal to all other entities.

But the abstract new laws are not expected to stop industry in its tracks. While it is not clear yet what actual protection the new rights will give in court to bugs, insects and ecosystems, the government is expected to establish a ministry of mother earth and to appoint an ombudsman. It is also committed to giving communities new legal powers to monitor and control polluting industries.”

Image via Orion magazine.

The first two strengths however are extremely relevant in rebuilding. Wealth and technological skill mean that the surge of aid sent to Japan can be utilized by native professionals, who were on the ground before and during the quake and tsunami, and will be there after. Humanitarian aid will certainly be important, but it will likely be front-loaded and largely present during  immediate relief efforts. Japan will have the capacity and workforce to rebuild.

In line with this thinking, a letter from Architecture for Humanity yesterday stated:  “Here at Architecture for Humanity we’ve have received an outpouring of emails, calls and donations from concerned folks who want to help. We thought we would send you an update letting you know how we are responding.  We are in contact with design professionals and Architecture for Humanity volunteers in Osaka, Kyoto and Tokyo. We are working with them to identify needs and next steps in the short- and long-term. We will continue to update you on the needs as we work to develop partnerships and projects.  If you would like to aid this effort, please consider donating. If you have already made a donation, thank you. In the near term, these funds will support local Japanese professionals as they provide damage assessments during the emergency and transitional phase. Further down the road, funds will go toward aiding local agencies in providing housing and the reconstruction of social and cultural infrastructure, such as schools, clinics and cultural centers.”

If you are thinking of how to help, there is of course the Red Cross and other immediate relief efforts that need support, but funding to support Architecture for Humanity’s initiative to get money to local professionals so that THEY can assess what is needed, is extremely valuable. (picture via National Geographic)

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.

Resilience. via: http://maryjaneryan.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/resilience.jpg

SEED Magazine has an excellent article on urban resilience. Its header reads: Merging complex systems science and ecology, resilience scientists have broken new ground on understanding—and preserving—natural ecosystems. Now, as more and more people move into urban hubs, they are bringing this novel science to the city.

Discussing examples that range from the loss of wetlands around New Orleans–that ironically were destroyed during the construction of the levees as well as natural gas exploration–that ultimately helped contribute to the tragedy of Katrina’s effect, to the spoiling of 25 million liters of raw milk in Australia when natural gas power supply was knocked out, the article discusses the concept of resilience on an urban scale. And while of course there are parallels between ecosystem design and urban design, the fundamental basis of resilience is diversity, redundancy, and variety. These things are often seen as “inefficient” on an urban scale.

This might seem theory heavy to you, but it really was one of the most fascinating articles I have read in a long time. And real life applications–contemporary and existent–examples are used for every sub-heading. So, yes, while there are lofty concepts, the reality of our urban world is the basis for discussion.

And of course the question of climate change is never far removed. A brief excerpt reads:

“A key feature of complex adaptive systems is that they can settle into a number of different equilibria. A lake, for example, will stabilize in either an oxygen-rich, clear state or algae-dominated, murky one. A financial market can float on a housing bubble or settle into a basin of recession. Historically, we’ve tended to view the transition between such states as gradual. But there is increasing evidence that systems often don’t respond to change that way: The clear lake seems hardly affected by fertilizer runoff until a critical threshold is passed, at which point the water abruptly goes turbid.

Resilience science focuses on these sorts of tipping points. It looks at gradual stresses, such as climate change, as well as chance events—things like storms, fires, even stock market crashes—that can tip a system into another equilibrium state from which it is difficult, if not impossible, to recover. How much shock can a system absorb before it transforms into something fundamentally different? That, in a nutshell, is the essence of resilience.”

Take time to read this article. I promise you will be thinking about synergies afterward as well.

The tragedy of “natural” disasters of course is that they aren’t necessarily natural in their damage.  Yes, in the Siberian tundra or the middle of the ocean, bad storms can happen, trees will fall, but once there are heavily populated areas involved, the exponential destruction stemming from that single natural event becomes the real issue. Multiply population density by existing socio-economic conditions that have at times led to less than sound construction (and inhumane living conditions before a quake) and your disaster seems like the opposite of natural. It is beyond belief.

There has been no shortage of opportunities to witness the situation on the ground. Photoblogs, articles, even google-earth have allowed the most distant onlooker to see the events unfold. But once the debris is cleared, services are somewhat restored and mourning for the lives lost becomes tangible through tributes, memorials and other initiatives, Haiti has an opportunity to rebuild itself the way it could have been.  Much of the built environment was lacking structurally sound components. Buildings with too much sand in the concrete mix were the norm. Reinforcement beams were scarce. Architecture for Humanity has started a fund raising campaign to bring their design services to the country once it is ready to reconstruct. But for now, there are a few signs of (solar) light shining.

The British Government recently released a map that forecasts the disastrous scenarios that could play out with a 4 degree (C) rise in temperature across the globe.  It features nine categories of effects (including drought, sea-level rise, and permafrost) which can be toggled on and off.  The selected category tab displays a “hot spot” on the map that comes accompanied with some explanatory text.

The graphics of the map may not be super sleek and the data behind it may not be groundbreaking, but the real significance of the release lies in the official shift in discourse which it represents.  The Guardian reports that until recently politicians have been unwilling to entertain the prospect of failing to stop global warming at the 2 degree mark.  With the Copenhagen talks looming near–talks which Foreign Secretary Miliband described as “the most complicated international negotiations ever attempted”–this release should be understood as an attempt to turn up the heat (sorry, I couldn’t resist!) on Copenhagen.

From Delft University of Technology

Here at the Institute, sea-level rise is way up there on our list of pressing climate-related problems facing cities like New York (our director has a great little interview on the subject and co-chairs the Mayors Panel on Climate Change that just released this report).  It’s no coincedence then, that this story on Dutch designs for floating cities caught our eye.  Green Inc. reports:

Under DeltaSync’s plan for a floating city, large blocks of polystyrene foam connected by a frame of special, high-strength concrete would be used as floating devices, allowing the cities to be located in shallow waters. Dome-like structures would be linked to one another by floating pedestrian bridges.

A floating highway would connect with existing cities.

Heat could be drawn from the surface water and stored in the ground either under the floating city or onshore before being used to heat buildings.

“Not only does this reduce the surface water temperature, leveling out the temperature increase caused by climate change, it also significantly reduces carbon dioxide emissions,” Mr. de Graaf said.