Filed under: Food + Health, Waste + Recycling | Tags: chemical-free, compost, fertilizer, food waste, landfill, life-cycle, natural fertilizer, organic waste, trash, vermicompost, waste, worm, worms
My kitchen trashcan stinks. Fruit and vegetable cores, the food that collects on my floor during haphazard meal prep, dinner leftovers too meager to warrant space in the fridge—they mix and mingle with their discarded packaging, together again. What stinks the most is that it all has energy and nutrients it’s ready to share. Instead of fulfilling any real purpose, however, it ends up in my little white wastebasket.
There is an alternative and it comes in the form of our wiggly, slimy worm friends. Vermicomposting, or worm composting, is a way to compost kitchen scraps quickly and effectively, and can be done inside of your home.
When worms get a hold of kitchen scraps, a highly complex chain of chemical, biochemical and biological interactions and reactions occur. The result is nutrient-rich excrement that is a valuable fertilizer. The worms provide an element that ordinary composting cannot. Worm mucous slows the release of nutrients so they won’t wash away when watering. Your Tylenol comes in time-release capsules, and your fertilizer can, too. The worms are also good little trash compactors, reducing waste volume as much as 60 percent.
While recycling nutrients may be as nature intended, I won’t tell you that inviting a pound of worms into your humble home will feel entirely natural. The set-up includes a worm composting bin of some kind. You can order one online or build your own.
I’m not one to trade one stinky problem for another, so the good news is that the worm bin is practically odor-free. The worms actually eat the odor-causing bacteria (not the food). After digesting the material, the worms produce the nutrient-packed end product, or castings. Although it is just a fancy word for poop, castings smell very much like soil or store-bought fertilizer. Little is known about just what makes worm digestion so fortifying.
Because the worms feast on the bacteria, fungi and protozoans that naturally decompose waste, the process is quicker than ordinary composting and the end product is more sterile. However, vermicomposting can be used in addition to, not as a replacement for backyard composting.
It’s kind of a heart-warming (-worming? Too much?) fairy tale: Rumplestilskin spins straw into gold, worms make trash into useful fertilizer. Even if your garden consists of a single houseplant, it beats sending the food scraps to a landfill, where they can’t breakdown and will live inorganically ever after. For more information on vermicomposting, including how-to’s and troubleshooting, visit BeSmart.org.
Check out my Podcast featuring an interview with Recycling Specialist Cassandra Ford about her Can O Worms vermicomposter.
Filed under: Society + Media | Tags: class, critical thinking, environment, J500, journalism, KU, oprah, Simran Sethi
I first met Simran at a poetry reading. She was wearing a wig and a smile and mentioned her course on the environment. When she walked away, something happened that I’m sure is far more common than Simran would guess. My girlfriend leaned over to me and said quietly, “She’s been on Oprah.”
At the time, I was fighting to get into an honors course on climate change, but a schedule conflict was holding me back. The “J500″ listing was only slightly less intimidating than working with Oprah, once removed, was intriguing. I dropped my Strategic Communication class and enrolled in one of the last spots of J500.
Ironic now, looking back to the class I swapped. In my head, looking at what I learned in this class is like a web of ideas, all interlinked, meta tagged and growing among leafy green vines. When I try to untangle all that and find a single root, I see that my takeaway has a great deal to do with strategic communication.
Each week, I squeezed in to take a seat at the table with some amazing Thinkers. My exposure to you all and your questions and ideas has inspired introspection. Early on, I saw that I’m a lousy critical thinker. What an upsetting discovery! Although our group tendency to question everything could be exhausting at times—
Communities living with the future in mind
What do you mean by communities?
And what do we mean by living?
Can we define our “future”
Saying “in mind” isn’t action-oriented enough
Why did you utilize “the” in that definition?
What was the question?
Why do you ask??
– I definitely learned how useful it is. I know I believe that we’re all in this together. What I didn’t let that entail is that we can all be learning as we go. Even the author of a cool article in Rolling Stone (Thanks, Travis). Even Oprah. Even the IPCC. Adam Werbach. NBC. Maybe not Adam Bowman. The strategic communication I learned here was about consuming information. Thinking past what I formerly considered to be the endpoint, a claim from a reliable source.
I’m hating how hyperbolic this is coming off, but I’ll risk it to take the opportunity to let you all (my classmates, Simran) know that I gained something from you that I value very much.
The satisfaction I gained from my weekly “a-ha” moments, the wonderful people I had the pleasure of interacting with, and learning a great deal about environmental issues far far far outweighs my disappointment that Oprah was never a digital visitor.
Filed under: Business + Politics | Tags: econ, economics, limited, natural resources, resources, textbook
Sunday night: The hours disappeared one by one, slowly ushering my 8 am economics test into my near future.
My tattered economics notebook taught me many things that night. I learned about unemployment and national income accounting. Debt and equity finance. On one page I learned that I forgot about some textbook reading. It was when I opened to the assigned article that I learned the most shocking information of all:
Natural resources are not running out.
I would love to include the entire article but I don’t know if that’s legal and I do know that a 2,000-word blog would be a hard sell. It starts by presenting population growth as a potential concern with regards to natural resources. He briefly entertains this viewpoint of “many commentators” and “conservationists” of the past. Then, he acknowledges kindly that “at first, this argument may seem hard to ignore.” And finally, he shows us the light.
It seems that our concern over limited resources stems from our lack of intimacy with the market economy. You see, scarcity is reflected in market prices.
If the world were running out of resources, then the prices of those resources would be rising over time. But in fact, the opposite is more nearly true. The prices of most natural resources (adjusted for overall inflation) are stable or falling. It appears that our ability to conserve these resources is growing more rapidly than their supplies are dwindling. Market prices give no reason to believe that natural resources are a limit to economic growth.
To be fair, my book was copy-written in 2006, so this article came before the price of oil topped $100/barrel.
And he’s not saying resources aren’t limited, he just believes in our ability to conserve.
…Eh, I doubt it. Economists aren’t exactly known for their rose-colored spectacles.
Of course, I do think our class’s ability to meet with shared enthusiasm is a direct result of our belief that we can figure out a way to conserve our way to a sustainable future. However, we see a long road of informing the public and changing public policies. We see transforming a wasteful society as an obstacle.
And Mankiw’s Don’-Worry-Abah-Dit philosophy didn’t strike me as a step in the right direction.
Note: I am happy to report, there were no questions about cheap’n'easy resources on the test.
Filed under: Science + Tech | Tags: argo, argo system, cooling, global warming, Josh Willis, morning edition, oceans
Riddle me this: If, in theory, global warming should affect temperatures in the ocean even more drastically than in the atmosphere, why does recent data show that the oceans have cooled in the last five years?
Be not misled, you will not find the answer to this riddle in this post, nor any Highlights magazine. Scientists are asking the same question after Josh Willis, of NASA’s jet propulsion laboratory, distributed a fleet of 3,000 temperature-tracking devices into the oceans, only to record a slight decrease in temperatures over the last four or five years, according to NPR’s Morning Edition.
I bet a scientist who has studied climate change could pick out the flaw in this fairly easily (and please accept this as a personal invitation to do so), but the drop in temperatures fits right into how global warming goes in my head. If enough glaciers are melting to cause a rise in sea level, then wouldn’t there be enough freshly melted ice in the ocean to cool them a touch?
We’ve discussed the need to fight people’s (journalists and consumers of news alike) natural tendency to seek out an endpoint. Scientists are full of maybes, while we look to journalists to deliver conclusive facts. NPR’s update on the Argo system (the fleet’s functioning name) is just one more step in trying to understand our Earth.
However, I was not surprised to find an article or two that took NPR’s reporting and ran with it. I was surprised that the headline wasn’t, “See? Global warming’s not real!”
The only thing these numbers prove is that is that real “proof” is hard to come by. I like reading about the latest findings, but it’s a shame that public perception often equates new information with radical new truths.
Science is a work in progress. It’s an easy thing to know, but it’s difficult to believe.
Filed under: Business + Politics, Food + Health, Waste + Recycling | Tags: Business, disposable, environment, paper, plastic, recycle, recycling, to go, waste, waste management
“First Watch on College, this is Sonya, what can I get for you today?”
“Alright, I have a To-Go order of a triple stack of blueberry pancakes, a three cheese omelette and an extra side of potatoes. Would we get you anything else?”
She didn’t even have to ask.
With that order will come disposable styrofoam boxes, disposable plastic silverware, a disposable paper menu, disposable single serving jellies, ketchups and syrups, and plenty of extra paper napkins. It’s all complementary. Complements of your ecosystem.
I know what you’re thinking: this is almost overwhelming.
But don’t you worry– it all comes in a convenient, giant plastic sack. Maybe even two if it’s necessary (and sometimes when it’s not!). We even give you a disposable 3 oz paper cup for your coffee while you wait.
To-Go practices is hardly the first thing that comes to mind when I think of wasteful practices at First Watch. And whether this strikes you as good news or bad news, I can tell you that the company is not evil and not unusual.
It is delicious. Our orange juice is unbeatable. We go through at least five jugs each Sunday. When we finish one off, we toss it in the trash. It joins the glass apple juice jugs, plastic milk cartons and countless other packaging materials that are tossed each and every day.
It will not join the cardboard boxes in which they are delivered.
No, of course. We recycle cardboard.
I would love to see Chris Jordan do a piece on how much waste reduction could result from a nifty, space-saving tower of recycle bins being placed in each First Watch throughout the country. In fact, every restaurant I’ve worked for could use one. Could it become as standard a business practice as the employee hand-washing sign? That guy’s everywhere.
As far as To-Go’s, I would look to “Reduce” before “Recycle” in my triple-R toolbox. I mentioned in a previous post Jason’s Deli’s new practice to include extra resources only upon request. This easily be mimicked by restaurants all over the world and the impact would be colossal.
That covers the supply-side, but until that campaign goes through, here’s what we can do from the demand-side. When ordering To-Go’s, ask the server to skip the plasticware, napkins, condiments and menus.
I don’t know if this discredits me, but in the name of full disclosure, I can’t resist the complementary coffee. I get the feeling that bringing your own mug from home would earn a judging eye or two.
Filed under: Business + Politics, Local Events + Action, Society + Media | Tags: coal, coal power plants, Dole Center for Politics, hilarious cartoon described in words, Kansas, KDHE, KU, plants, Rod, Roderick Bremby
This ad ran in newspapers all over Kansas the week after Rod Bremby, Secretary of the Kansas Dept. of Health and Environment, denied permits to two coal-power plants on the basis of excessive carbon emissions.
This ad was funded by Kansans for Affordable Energy, a coal-industry-funded advocacy group. This ad warns that Bremby’s decision will make us all the more dependent on foreign powers for our natural gases.
This ad, Bremby pointed out last night when he spoke at the KU Dole Institute of Politics, forgets to mention that Kansas imports 96 percent of its natural gas from Canada (and absolutely none from Russia, Venezuela or Iran).
And that was just one myth that Bremby dispelled to members of the Lawrence community. He was welcomed with a standing ovation and took his time explaining why he made the decision. Perhaps surprising to some, the list did not include an affinity for standing ovations, hugging trees, or Ahmadinejad.
-A great majority of the plant’s energy would go to Oklahoma and Colorado, not Kansas
-The chances that the denied facility would simply rebuild in another location are slim
-The emission levels would reach unprecedented heights, matching the carbon footprints of 628,000 Americans
-This is not just a decision of today, but a forty- or fifty-year decision
And of course, that pesky issue of global warming. I liked that Bremby approached this point from a sensible, not polarizing, point of view. He didn’t aim to convert global warming skeptics, but instead referred back to the goal of the KDHE: to protect the health and environment of all Kansans.
As a bureaucrat, it would be irresponsible for me to ignore contributions of CO2 to climate change and health.
He went on to speak about global efforts to reduce and conserve, then outlined his hopeful view of a new, sustainable economy that must be in our near future. In my opinion, he threw out some overly optimistic and weakly supported figures, but his heart’s in the right place.
He closed with a cartoon that made my pun-loving boyfriend and I struggle to stifle our laughs as to not interrupt his closing words, but I can’t find it online! Instead of scanning in the pathetic replication I sketched in my notebook last night (what can I say, I was inspired), I’ll just describe it.
Picture in your mind’s eye: a potted flower flexing his muscles and the punchline: “Environmentalism: Kansas’ newest power plant.”
Oh Rod, with that you won my heart.
Filed under: Food + Health | Tags: 24 hour, all in a day's eats, cereal, diary, food, food diary, meals, you are what you eat
I kept a food diary for 24 hours and then thought, this is hardly representative of my habits. I haven’t eaten a single m&m, I had three breakfasts (not in place of any meal, either… I’ll get there), and I didn’t eat any snacks between meals. Then I went back 24 hours and decided that I couldn’t ‘fess up to it because it was entirely (and uncharacteristically, I swear) too greasy. I began to log my current 24-hour period and at the time, I was sipping a latte and planning to bring $18 Whole Foods little fruit-topped cheesecake to my mom for her birthday. I decided that diary sounded too snobby.
Conclusion: Upon reflection, food, like trash, is intimate. We are well-accustomed to answering only to ourselves about what is acceptable and have strong beliefs about how our habits define us (or how who we are define our habits). When I write the foods down/take a picture of my trash, I have to come face-to-face with my daily habits, sans my mental justifications.
Dear Diary (Saturday 9am – Sunday 9am)
1 bowl of my cereal mix (All-Bran, Shredded Wheat, Grape Nuts, Granola) and All-Natural Dannon Vanilla yogurt
Another bowl of the same (I was particularly hungry and planning a very active day)
1 mug of coffee w/ cream and sugar
1 PB & J that my man graciously made and brought to the library for me (aka made on his corn-syrupy wheat bread, non-organic partially hydrogenated oils-filled peanut butter and … I think it was all-natural jelly, actually. I know I’m hypocritically inconsistent w/ my organic demands, but I prefer a body-friendly PBJ since it occurs so frequently in my diet.)
1 apple that I found in my backpack from Friday
–hours and hours and hours pass with no snacks and lots of playing outside!–
1 Jason’s Deli salad-bar salad
Delicious Jason’s Deli strawberry shortcake
A second salad
More delicious strawberry shortcake
–No nighttime snacks because I was early to bed. I had breakfast before work @ 7am so it must be included in this 24hr period–
1 bowl of cereal mix and yogurt
1 mug of coffee with cream and sugar
You are what you eat? Today I was many helpings. Looking at what’s in a Happy Meal, it is clear that my m&m addiction, my job at First Watch (where foods must be researched on the sides of many cardboard boxes shipped from who-knows-where) and my residence in the USA promote a lifestyle full of ingredients I can’t pronounce much less predict what they are/where they came from/what they do in my digestive system.
One good thing I can say is that Jason’s Deli promises zero trans-fats, no MSG and an ongoing effort to reduce/eliminate high-fructose corn syrup from menu items. It also take initiative to make lots of cool eco-conscious efforts to reduce its footprint, like foam-free to-go packaging and napkins/plasticware by request only to reduce waste. Through extensive primary research, I’ve also found overwhelming evidence that it is damn delicious, too.
[Please limit the articles you send me about over-eating and portion control.]
Filed under: Waste + Recycling | Tags: "reduce, coms 130, food waste, gargage, recycle, recycling, reuse, waste, waste management, why recycle
So how about some good trash talk on one of my roommates for a change?
The other day, she asks me if I would tell her the next time I’m going to take the recycling, because– get ready, read slowly, you’re not seeing things– “my recycling is full”
She opens the cabinet under the sink (I thought we only kept cleaning supplies down there) and I see this:
Stifling a gasp, I look up and see a little green-arrow recycling-logo-halo form just above her head. Last semester, I gave a speech on recycling. I guess at least one of the three practice speeches I delivered to her carried influence. Maybe it was my sweet pie-chart on waste disposal, I just can’t be sure.
I’ll tell you now what I told my coms class: Each year, Americans generate enough waste to fill a convoy of garbage trucks halfway to the moon. Whoa! (My classmates, unfortunately, were less captivated by this factoid than I’d hoped). However, if my recyclables are recycled correctly, my personal contribution isn’t grotesque. I live in a scale-free apartment (with two other girls, who knew?) but I’ll call it a fair estimate that my trash falls far below the average American’s 7.5 pounds per week.
(This has been a nomadic weekend for me so I’m missing some plastic wrap from leftovers I had for dinner, a styrofoam cup from OJ at work and a salad bar container).
I’d say 95% of my trash is related to food. My daily granola bar wrapper, snack size m+m’s, salad bar plastic containers, anything messy, paper towels for covering microwaveables– they all end up in the trash can. I’m never home, but snacking continuously, which results in lots of little, single-serving and individually wrapped throw-aways.
I can think of two possible solutions: 1. Go on a diet (“possible” in no way represents “likely,” mind you)
2.Buy in bulk and use reusable tiny tupperware to transport
I used to think that recycling yielded zero-waste. Thinking back, it was my speeches implicit thesis. I’m learning now that the process of recycling is sometimes inefficient, uses plenty of energy (though less than producing virgin materials) and can require lots of transport, which wastes fuel. Reduce, reuse, recycle seems be in descending order of which deserves the most focus.
Where you can’t reduce, however, I still think recycling’s the answer, but not even necessarily from an environmentalist standpoint. I used to take my sandwich/chip lunch in two new Ziplock bags each day. When down to my last two, my stinginess led me to the more ecologically sound practice I use today: Reuse the same two bags forever and ever. Recycling also helps me with stress management. I enjoy few things more than hurling my empty glass bottles into the recycle bin in mock rage. That intentional shattering isn’t welcome just anywhere, you know.
Filed under: Society + Media
Turns out that no matter how you slice it, or in on which language, my personality is measurably ambiguous. Concretely abstract.
I recently completed a personality test for my Spanish class and, like all personality tests before it– Myers Briggs to University Career Center-administered– it showed me to be smack in the middle of nearly all of the opposing characteristics.
I shared my results with my sister and she confided that she had a similarly defunct personality. Our middleness may suggest a rounded, balanced personality. However, after going through some of the catagories (categorías, en realidad), we concluded that it’s more the case that we’ve mastered the worst of both worlds.
We’re optimists, too.
One example–impulsiveness. I’m a bad decision-maker. I spend fifteen minutes picking out laundry detergent at Wal-Mart. And face-wash. And salsa. Yet conversely, every major trip I’ve taken has been an impulsive decision, made in less than thirty seconds.
My bogus personality might also account for my pan-situational sense of belongingness and alienation.
It’s really easy for me to get overwhelmed. When I “multitask” it’s more that I’m trying to do one thing and get distracted. Like when I sign on to make an “About Me” post and get an e-mail reminder about my Spanish homework and end up telling about myself from the inside out. Have I even mentioned where I live yet?
I’m from Overland Park, Kansas, and I think KU was the best mistake I ever made. I had big plans to move away for college, force myself out of my comfort zone and become independent (because it’s that easy). I chickened out– no, I visited my “dream school” in California, was really disappointed in the lack of creative energy on campus, and came to my safe choice, KU. How lucky I am to live so close to such a wonderful university. KU is my little land of opportunity, I’ve been really inspired by the people I’ve met (truly, each of you included), and I feel like this is a good step toward my independence. As far as my plan to get out of Kansas, I’m planning to live in Mexico for six weeks this summer then move away after undergrad. Maybe I’ll move back eventually. Kansas is fantastic, but the world’s far too big to plant your roots at birth. Or ever, I suppose.
Thanks for reading my meandering About Me. Maybe it lacks focus, but so do I. I’ll leave it as is and call it appropriate.
Filed under: Food + Health | Tags: agriculture, energy, fossil fuel, fossil fuels, land, population increase, problem solvers, resources, sustainable
The bad news is that fossil fuels are a limited resource, but society relies on them so heavily that if (when) we run out, we will have no way to sustain ourselves (in other words, eat).
The good news is that humans are problem solvers. It’s undeniable—in fact, it’s how we got here.
A brief history of energy use on Earth starts with the sun. The sun provides energy to plants through photosynthesis and the plants deliver this energy to humans via the food chain.
Problem 1: We want more plants.
Solution: Find more land.
Problem 2: No more productive land.
Solution: Make the existing land more productive.
Problems 3, 4, 5, and 6: Farming takes a lot of time and hard work, the land doesn’t always produce, and pests are getting into the crops.
Solution: Fossil fuels.
More specifically, machinery (fueled by oil), fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.
Because there’s only so much sunlight to go around, we looked for other ways to produce more food. I can’t help but consider this smart. In hindsight, however, these fuel-based solutions are far more temporary than anticipated.
As the population increases, it creates demand for agriculture to keep pace. If fair is fair, we put x amount more resources into the land, it ought to yield x amount more in crops. In reality, the land isn’t holding up its end of the bargain. The pesky thing about Mother Earth is that she refuses to play by our rules.
The U.S. food system consumes ten times more energy than it produces.
Problem: The more we turn to fossil fuels as a solution, the more rapidly we move toward an Earth without any fossil fuels at all, starting with petroleum and natural gas first. Maybe it’s overly optimistic, but I can’t help but reason, if we weren’t capable of creative problem solving, we’d never have made it this far. It’s an obstacle, yes, but mankind is made up of hurdlers.
According to sustainabletable.org, your food travels 1,500 miles on average before it gets to your plate. If demand for local food increases, we can cut back on the fossil fuels used for transportation.