LSP Environmental Studies Community Event Reports

Sha Ni
October 31st 2008
Environmental Studies
C.E #2
Animal Protection
I went to a speech of Peter Young on Wednesday, October 29th. It is about Peter’s experience resisting injustice. The speech was held in Vanderbilt Hall in NYU School of Law from 7:00 pm to 8:45 pm in room 216. Peter Young is the animal rights activist and he is the first person accused as Animal Enterprise Terrorism. The NYU Student Animal Legal Defense Fund, NYU Environmental Law Society, Students for Education on Animal Liberation, and the Pace Law School Student Animal Legal Defense Fund sponsored this speech. This is more like an activist.
First of all, Peter Young showed a few pictures about animal experiments. Those pictures were terrible; doing those experiment hurt cats, monkeys. Peter declared that those experiments are the broken of law, and those are so cruel for animals. Then Peter told that at the beginning he thought it was so abstract when people talking about animal experiment. However, when first seeing the birds’ killing in his neighborhood, he was shocked. This blew his mind; Peter started to care about animal and animal abuse in Washington. Once he was in the library, Peter found a laboratory that priced every animal and visited there. Out of his surprise, he saw that 50 dogs in the building. He asked us what if seeing this situation, what is our response? Are we just tell them that is wrong and tell them do not do that again? He regards this animal experiment as a virtue problem.
Then Peter devotes himself into defending animal experiments affairs. He became an activism that tries to educate people not to abuse animals. Peter regarded his work as a very significant role in animal protection affairs. He asked us a question: “ If someone came to ask you a better life, what you are going to do?” Also, by seeing the terrible pictures that were shown at the beginning, Peter suggests that we should not only know it, but also see it. He appeals us to see the truth of animal abuse so that we may realize how serious it is clearly. Also, Peter shows that there are many animal experiments in New York City, and teaches us the way to define whether there is an animal experiment or not. If we look at the top of the building, at the top window, if window has gap, which means one, or two have no windows, that means there is a laboratory. Since being released from prison last year, Peter Young has raised awareness of the Green Scare – legal action by the United States government against radical environmentalist and animal rights activism by using the banner of anti-terrorism measures Even though Peter was arrested, he never feels shameful for his poisoning, he still obligates himself search online in order to check which place may have animal abuse. In Peter’s opinion, we are all animals, all of us should have a better, and it is so precious if everyone cares about animals, he emphasizes the power of one person has.
Nowadays, animal abuse becomes as a very serious problems. This kind of question impressed me a lot. We are all animals and we are all friends in the world. Animals need protecting Animals are natural resources but people have wasted all through our history. Animals have been killed by using their fur and feathers, using as food, using for sport, and simply because they were in the way. Thousands of kinds of animals have dead out from the earth forever. Hundreds more are on the danger list today. Many animals are about to die out. In the future, there is less and less diversities of animals appear all around the world.
The reason why should people care about animals is because we need animals, and also because once they are gone, there will never be any more. The ecological system will be destroyed; human beings will be threatened by the disappearing of animals. Animals are more than just beautiful or interesting. Animals are not only just a source of food., but also every animal has its own place and plays a significant role in the balance of nature. Any kinds of destroying of animals may emerge many problems. For example, when farmers killed large numbers of hawks, rats and mice destroyed the farmers’ stores of corn and grain. The reason why is because hawks eat rats and mice, with no hawks to keep down their numbers, the rats and mice multiplied quickly. The food chain requires us to protect the balance animals, which means, we need to protect them likes protecting our own lives.
Another vivid example that reflects the importance of animal protection: In February 2003, there was a very serious virus called SARS, which means Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. This virus spread across China, several provinces were infected. The cause of this virus is the overkilling of a kind of animal that has virus inside.
Also, there are many medical treatments and procedures have been developed from experiments on animals. Especially for medical testing. Since animals have so many features that are common with humans, they are used to test the safety and effectiveness of newly developed drugs when they want to have testing on small groups of patients. Medical teams practice new operating techniques such as transplants on animals. Without animal testing, many procedures or new drugs would be extremely unsafe.
But, animal testing is not virtual. Many people are concerned that animals are suffering unnecessarily and cruelly. A further point often raised against animal testing is that it is cruel. They do not believe that every new drug needs to be tested on animals, especially with the huge database of knowledge and modern computer models. They also are worried that many animal tests are ineffective, pointing out that any drugs have had to be withdrawn from the market despite extensive testing. They particularly feel that animal testing should not be used for non-essential products such as cosmetics, shampoos, soaps, and cleaning products. Furthermore, some campaigners would like to see certain tests replaced and more humane methods used.
Opponents of animal testing also claim that the results are not applicable to humans. This may be partly true. Some drugs have had to be withdrawn, despite testing. We need to make sure that the millions of animals who are used for testing new products are treated with the minimum of suffering. Although some animal testing may be unavoidable at present, treating our fellow creatures as mercifully as possible will demonstrate our humanity.
Luckily, some people are working to help save the animals. Some groups raise money to let people know about the problem. And they try to get the governments to pass laws protecting animals in danger. Quite a few countries have passed laws. These laws forbid the killing of any animal the danger list. Slowly, the number of some animals in danger is growing.

On December 3 the Wagner Environmental Policy and Action (WEPA) group sponsored an intimate roundtable event at the Wagner School in the Puck building. The event entitled “Careers in the Environment” was a discussion moderated by Jeremy Friedman who is the head of the NYU Sustainability task-force program. Friedman, a recent graduate himself, interviewed four alums all of whom have different careers but are united by an NYU diploma and an interest in the environment. About 25 students ranging from undergraduate to graduate attended the event. The tone was very didactic with all of the students eager to learn more about the transition from the classroom to the work place and to think of clever options for a relatively new field.
The four speakers ranged in age and occupation. Meredith Bergmann, who is a partner at a media solutions company, advises film and television companies on how to operate more sustainability. Les Judd, the founder of Green Boroughs, spoke at length about his various jobs and his most recent work for Green Boroughs which he hopes will develop into a database that ranks the “green-ness” of NYC based companies. Joshua Klainberg, the youngest of the panel, discussed his work for the New York League of Conservation Voters and his endeavors to “educate, evaluate and endorse” candidates in state-elections and to lobby for environmental reform. Finally, Samantha Macbride addressed the students about her work as the Deputy Director for Recycling at the Bureau of Waste Prevention, Reuse and Recycling for the NYC Department of Sanitation. Indeed, Wagner went all out for this event by having such notable alums speak to the students in such a comfortable setting as a large conference room.
(The Moderator, Jeremy Friedman)
The job that interested me most was Ms. Bergmann’s who gave examples about the struggles to produce movies and television shows sustainably within a hectic city and with important bottom-lines. For Ms. Bergmann, there are short-term and long-term projects that she has worked on, most recently for NBC/Universal. While advising Saturday Night Live she proposed a switch to biodegradable paints, LED lighting and foods to be served that were made locally as to reduce the transportation emissions. For the long-term, she explained to us that SNL builds its stages in New Jersey and then brings them into the city. She is working on ways to recycle SNL’s sets and to find a place closer to the studios in order to make SNL greener. She urged us to follow our passions and to remember that there is absolutely anything that can be related to the environment as long as you use a bit of imagination and think about what you learned while studying at NYU.
The panelists asked each other questions about their jobs and then the students were permitted to ask the panelists anything. This interaction was helpful so that we could direct the panelists towards the areas that we had particular questions about. When asked about the longevity and safety of environmental work within a corporate or public world, the panelists all agreed that environmental jobs are quite safe, especially compared to jobs on Wall Street. Given that environmentalism as a career path is quite new, all of the panelists concurred that the industry is only beginning to grow and is nowhere near maturity. This optimism was very encouraging. In addition, the panelists also agreed that because environmental jobs are so often uncharted, one has the option to be an entrepreneur and to create his or her own profession with the environment in mind. Indeed the moderator, who helped to create the task force for NYU’s sustainability while he was still a student, was able to create a project for academic credit into an occupation that in his words has already “reduced electricity consumption by 10,000 times my life’s consumption.”
New York City was certainly suggested as an ideal starting point for urban environmentalism, but Ms. Macbride proposed that students also consider jobs in Washington. According to Macbride, years of environmental reforms have recently been revoked by the present administration. She urged us all to lobby for increased federal laws and mandates for the environment in order to keep the ball rolling towards sustainability at home and eventually abroad by example.
While I was not surprised to hear of such success from fellow Violets, I was reassured to know that there are still opportunities to improve the environment and to run a profitable and healthy business. This was my second Wagner sponsored event. The first, a screening and discussion of “Garbage Warriors” was enjoyable but this event was practical. Apparently this event happens every year (this years had the highest attendance yet) and helped to demystify the confounding job world while also giving something for students to aim for. While I may not be able to fit environmental studies into my schedule next year, some of the panelists studied business at NYU and were able to parlay their knowledge into sustainable development. I really have no criticisms of the event. With the exception of booking a larger room, everything about it was great. They even provided some snacks!
This event offered a light at the end of the tunnel and introduced me to the environmental job world of the 21st century. I was very impressed that each panelist offered their business card and suggested that we call them anytime for basic questions and to apply for interviews to numerous different organizations. It would be interesting to have an event like this for students who studied Environmental Studies or other science courses at LSP/GSP who have since graduated and to have them come back and speak to us in a similar format. It is so important, especially in the midst of exams, to have encouragement that there is opportunity to be had and that with an NYU sciences focus there are particularly compelling and beneficial options in the years ahead.

(Samantha MacBride (MPA '96)

     On the sixth day of the twelfth month of the two-thousandth and eight year of the Common Era (19 days until Christmas ’08!) I went to Brooklyn for an event titled “Winter Survival Lessons.” It was hosted at Prospect Park and the listing advertised: “Bring your love of nature as the Rangers reveal the astonishing winter adaptations that resident animals use to survive the frigid temperatures. You'll also learn how to identify animal tracks in snow and mud.” Naturally, on an adventure of this magnitude I had to bring my trusty colleague, Amanda Sakuma. We met at the “space ship” in Union Square to begin our journey:

     Amanda and I had some second thoughts about attending this event after we succesfully tracked two furry creatures within five minutes of meeting:

     Nevertheless we continued into the wilderness and within a few minutes of trekking had arrived in Brooklyn. Using advanced navigational techniques, Amanda was able to triangulate Wollman Skating Rink and guide us there. After we questioned the attendants of the rink, we began to think that this event may not be happening but alas, a helpful park ranger came to our service and informed us that the event was indeed happening and that the ranger in charge was outside.      Adrenaline pumping, Sakuma and I were introduced to our guide for the day, Marissa. Then Marissa introduced us to what we had been hoping for the whole train ride, a bunch of little kids! Horay!

(Covert Picture Taken Without Any Chaperones Knowing)
     So yeah, one could say this event’s “tone” may have been: education for the general public; and by general public I mean children.
     After all the kinder found pencils so they could pretend to write in their notebooks, we were off. Marissa explained our route for the day, which was: a walk up Breeze hill, down around the lake and then back. She prefaced the event with a few questions about how animals survived in the winter. The three methods were:
     1. Movement and Migration
     2. Hibernation
     3. “Toughing it out”
     With the heavenly tunes of James Blunt at our back, we walked past the outdoor skating rink and proceeded up Breeze Hill. Marissa spoke about what different animals did in the winter then we looked around to see what flora and fauna surrounded us. She asked us to draw a picture of something we saw around us; Amanda and I did this while the kids fought over a bag of Doritos. While looking for inspiration we saw:
     Some type of four-legged creature I believe the natives call a Squirrel:

     And I think this a Phoenix:

     After that we had a young MacArthur Fellowship candidate ask this question, “Why do bears hibernate even thought they have all that fur?” Pleasantly surprised by this question, Marissa explained how there are different degrees of hibernation and that some scientists question how bears really do hibernate. I followed up with a few questions, the first about what appeared to be trash on the lake:

     As it turns out, this is not trash but actually items placed there by park officials to keep plants from growing too far into the pond and essentially turning it into a field. Then I asked if there were any invasive species in the park and there was actually one right next to us. It was called Mugwort and was brought by the Dutch to bitter their beer. Marissa drinks wine:

     Then we went to the bird feeders and saw a few more birds but the entertaining part about this was the discussion. While looking at the birds Marissa thought one of the kids was asking if there were any city birds there and she started answering only to be corrected and told that he wanted to know if there were any silly birds at the feeders… she dropped the subject. After this, some of the little girls decided that they would race to an undisclosed location; one tripped and fell – not a survival skill.      Back to the topic of winter survival, Marissa spoke about how Killer Whales survived in the winter. She said that because of their fatness and roundness they could stay warm. I still don’t understand the round part… Then she explained that the body loses heat 25% faster in water.      After this we stood around and looked at the geese for a while. Amanda likes geese for reasons beyond me:

     We walked around for a bit more, stared at ice with the little kids, then made our way back to base camp.
     This type of event was definitely new to me. I learned some facts about New York State’s wildlife and more specifically, those that can live in a semi-urban environment. As far as interests, I think I became more appreciative of where I grew up because my field trips were substantially cooler in Massachusetts. This event was definitely valuable to the community. The kids had fun and learned a lot while Amanda and I had a good time watching them. This event absolutely had a positive impact on the environment; teaching kids the value of nature at an early age is, I think, one of the most important things someone can do, in light of modern environmentalism or not.
     Now, for the gripes. I did not really learn any methods of survival aside from getting really fat. And, tracks were not mentioned once. Therefore Amanda and I had to do our own reconnaissance to advance our edification.
     Here is Amanda foraging. Facebook!

     Then we went on our own mission trying to track some more creatures. We found some duck prints and some signs of humans (yep, that’s double entendre son.)

     After finding these signs we successfully tracked a few Homo Sapiens quite successfully.

     When we returned from our journey into the wilderness that is Brooklyn I ruminated on my experience and came to the conclusion that I did enjoy it. Amanda and I learned a bit about nature, laughed at little kids, and learned to track humans. Most importantly, we had fun, and that is the prime function of all parks. So yes, it was worthwhile but sadly, I would die in the wild.

-Craig Cannon

On Monday, November 3, 2008 NYU doctoral candidate Samantha MacBride gave a presentation called “Tonnage and Toxicity: Visible and Invisible Solid Waste Problems in the Contemporary United States” as part of the Coles Science Salon Series. Ms. MacBride received her BA in Biology from Johns Hopkins University, and discussed both hazardous and non-hazardous wastes.

The presentation began with a discussion and outline of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, which is a law that governs the municipal and industrial disposal of both hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. One of the aims of RCRA is to reduce the total amount of generated waste in the United States, but the United States continues to load landfills at a rate of 250 billion tons per year. This is around 4.5 pounds of waste per person in the United States per day!

Graph of Per Capita Waste in the US

Ms. MacBride did a great job of breaking down the different kinds of waste. The different between non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste depends on the EPA standards. To be considered “hazardous,” waste must be ignitable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic. The term “industrial” refers to waste that is generated from industry, manufacturing, mining, and agriculture. Municipal solid wastes, which are more commonly described as “garbage” is the waste created from homes, schools, and businesses.

A lot of the problem, according to Ms. MacBride comes from the lack of government regulation to help the environment; the EPA’s regulations only go so far in the United States. As it stands, Pennsylvania is the only state in the United States that monitors the disposal of non-hazardous industrial waste. The handling of municipal solid wastes, however, is a more than 37 billion dollar industry in the United States. Recycling and sanitation removal is not mandated nationally in the United States, and though many states have come forward to enforce advanced recycling incentives and regulations, there is still more than can be done.

One such incentive is the Bottle Bill, which has passed in only eleven states in the US, which promotes recycling by offering $.05 for each returned recyclable container, such as glass and plastic bottles and aluminum cans. A proposed Bigger Better Bottle Bill, which would raise the incentive to $.10 per return and expand to incorporate water bottle returns, has been vehemently shot down by government, even though the legislation has proven successful in the eleven states, and it does not cut into company profits. At my house, my Dad is absolutely adamant about foraging through the house for any stray cans or bottles to return to the machines that crush them up at the grocery store. Every couple of weeks, my Dad drags my brother and I to Stop and Shop with three or four large garbage bags full of cans and bottles to deposit. Recycling by listening to a machine smash glass and crush aluminum is actually fun, and is a great way to get people of all ages excited to recycle.

A woman returning cans for $.05 each in Connecticut

I agree with Ms. MacBride, who said “people understand recycling – it is the most widely practiced environmental activity in the United States” when referring to the positive progression of curbside recycling. It is important for people to know that recycling is good, and that by not recycling they are damaging the environment; there is not necessarily a reason that the general public should be completely informed about the process of recycling, and just knowing that they are helping the environment should be enough of an incentive to recycle. Of course, with things like the Bottle Bill, there is further incentive as recycling becomes more and more necessary to help the environment. Recycling is something small that everybody in the United States can do individually to collectively have a larger impact on the environment. Further, if the general population sorts out their recycling, this decreases the need for any kind of sortation on an assembly line.

Graph showing the increase in beverage recycling percentage since the Bottle Bill

But we, the general population, pay to recycle through taxes, and even our own time sorting through different recyclable materials. So with this in mind, Ms. MacBride continued on to discuss consumer sovereignty. We, as consumers, have the power to influence the producers. If enough people decide they want to go “green,” and influence the markets by buying green products, then the producers will follow suit and produce more green products. The same can be said for the environment. If enough people exhibit a willingness to recycle, then the government or big corporations could be more inclined to facilitate the recycling process, either by expanding the availability of knowledge about the degradation of the environment or by making recycling easier and more widespread, or even lowering the cost of waste removal.

You see, waste removal charges make it increasingly unattractive to recycle or dispose of waste properly. These prices mean that people need more money, which means people will need to work more, which means they will have less time, which means they will need to buy more convenience foods to in order to juxtapose time and the basic human necessity to eat. Most of these convenience foods are not packaged with the environment in mind, nor are they the best to dispose of. The plastic coating that is placed over frozen foods is not recyclable, nor are most of the plastic trays that hold the food. So while these foods are convenient for consumers, they are not necessarily convenient for the environment. As a consumer, this teaches me that it is increasingly important to look at packaging to find out what can be recycled and what is harmful to the environment.

Frozen convenience foods

Ms. MacBride linked everyone in attendance to a great, informative online video about the consumptive habits of the United States called “The Story of Stuff,” which is narrated by environmentalist Annie Leonard. This video addresses the destruction of the environment, the build-up of waste, and even the national happiness of the United States. One really interesting point brought up in the video is that for every one full garbage can placed on a curb, there are 70 garbage cans of waste that are filled with the leftover materials needed to make the garbage in the one can on the curb. Though this was just a supplemental thought, I went home and watched the 20-minute video, and found it entertaining and engaging, and I think anybody can benefit from just taking a little while out of their day to watch it.

This is the “invisible” solid waste problem that is facing the United States. Being invisible, the large amounts of non-hazardous industrial waste are created behind factory gates without the knowledge of the consumer. The average consumer generally does not care how something is made, as long as it is made and works properly, which is why there is no warning on the box of an iPod that warns “This product alone generated # tons of waste to make.” And before this lecture, I can honestly say that I was in the same mindset. Looking around my dorm room as I type this, I cannot help but wonder to myself just how much waste I myself have inadvertently created just by consuming.

Hazardous waste storage from Texas in 1991

And this is what Ms. MacBride is emphasizing. We need to be conscious consumers when it comes to the environment if we have any hope of overturning the build-up of wastes. It is the common attitude of the general public that their individual efforts will not have a larger effect. But in reality, there is never too little you can do to help the environment.

As far as production value, I enjoyed the PowerPoint presentation, because it was very comprehensive and contained great visuals. Ms. MacBride also timed her clicking to new slides very accurately and the presentation flowed seamlessly. However, I was not engaged because Ms. MacBride simply read straight from her doctoral paper. There was very little eye-contact with the audience, and she read at a speed that made it difficult to take notes or copy things from the PowerPoint. But she proved to be very well-informed in the 20-minute question and answer session, where she tackled every question that came at her with passion and a wealth of knowledge. One woman asked if the problem facing the environment was structural, to which Ms. MacBride said that the fault can be placed on any entity, be it the public or the government. There is so much more we can all do to help the environment, so the blame should not be placed on any one single group, but we all need to play our part. And this is the thought Ms. MacBride left us with.

To view the “Story of Stuff” by Annie Leonard, please visit www.storyofstuff.com

On Wednesday, December 3, 2008 in the NYU Wagner Building in the Mulberry Conference Room from 6:30-8:00pm there was a discussion of sustainability in the environment and the increasing awareness and therefore demand for jobs in the Environment sector. Four very qualified people: one a public relations and advertiser for environmental issues in the entertainment business in New York, a lobbyist for the New York League of Conservation Voters, an entrepreneur and founder of an environment awareness company of Green Boroughs and a bureaucrat of New York State was there to discuss and help and promote students of NYU to pursue increasingly demanding jobs in the Environmental Awareness field. Many topics were brought up in this discussion about the rapidly growing business sector of helping the environment. Topics that were brought up in the discussion were issues such as "Green washing" where companies would misuse and manipulate the label as being environmentally friendly when they are in actuality not or not all the time abiding by what is considered beneficial to the environment. Governmental policies and politics were also brought up particularly about the near dismantlement of the EPA after the Reagan years and the future hope for its revival that seems bright for environmental awareness. All of the speakers also offered advice or students who are interested in getting in the field of promoting environmental awareness.
The room was packed with people, there weren't even enough chairs for all the people who came. The meeting, although all the speakers and attendants seemed to be very concerned about the environment, had an array of all sorts of opinions and ideas about growing environmental concerns. It had a diversity of people in the environmental awareness career which I felt kind of sparked a bit of what could almost be considered as tension among the speakers. All four speakers were extremely passionate in the field that they specialized in the umbrella of environmental careers. For instance I vividly recall when the lady who worked for the environment sector of New York State Department, Samatha McBride, encouraged and stated to all the listeners in the room to go to Washington if they want to make results in the environment because, she says, it is the only way really to make a difference, if she was young again, she would pack her bags and head to Washington, she was quickly retorted by Joshua, the lobbyist and Deputy Director of the New York League of Conservation Voters. Almost before she finished, he tells her that he strongly disagreed with what she says saying, " Don't pack your bags for Washington- that is not the only way....we need you back home as well.." He explains that the National government cannot do some of the things that only the state is allowed to do regarding the environment, the the change will be immensely more immediate at a more local level. Hearing all sorts of opinions and approaches to the growing concern of environmental awareness was overwhelming and at the same time inspiring. In the meeting, one very apparent idea was passed about the room: that there is always more than one way to do things, with everything. One thing, such as the discussion that we had in lab that day earlier before about the billion dollars solution to solve all our environmental problems, will not and cannot make a difference. It was also stressed that the protection of our precious environment is a collective effort, and it takes all or most to make a difference when initiated by a few who when even they have different conceptions and ideas to solutions, promote the same cause.
The Green Businesses were also consistently brought up. Greenopia.org was also a topic that was discussed by Les Judd, the founder of a green company: Green Boroughs, a company that promotes green/eco friendly causes. He talks about the different green businesses on the website and their colored leaf system that rates how "green" or environmentally friendly the self proclaimed "green companies" actually are. He explains that this website is a great way of advertising and promoting environmental awareness and action. On the topic of "green-washing" he says the best way to know and identify these sorts of manipulative advertisement is to ask. To ask the companies why they consider themselves environmentally friendly and what they are doing to promote the protection of it. After hearing him say this, I recalled the class discussion in lab earlier that day about Starbucks and the fair-trade products. In our discussion in lab, Professor Schwartz, almost amusingly, refers to her friend who whenever she passes by a Starbucks, goes in and looks for the Fair-trade coffee, that isn't always there- which is supposed to be a identifying trademark of Starbucks.
This meeting was definitely very resourceful and beneficial for the environmental cause, however it seemed to only have been targeted toward people who already had their attention on environmental issues. If this meeting was larger, had a greater number of speakers and publicized more strategically it would reach a greater number of people who are not aware of environment protection. I feel these people, people who are ignorant of our increasingly dire situation of a perishing Earth that is rapidly being used up by harmful human activity, are the people that these speakers need to reach the most. That way the word will spread faster to the larger masses. Everyone today knows about the economic crisis that the United States is currently in. Apparently the United States and much of the world is currently experiencing a recession that will last roughly until 2011 before the market forces pick up again. Most of us know this because the word is widespread and apparent and broadcasted on all the news stations, papers, talk shows and bank accounts, all of us collectively hopeful of a better future because we know that it is only a matter of time. However, we fail to realize that the environment is not like the economy, for the environment will not pick up once we have exacerbated all that we can of it. In order to persuade and make a change, the panel of speakers nod as Joshua, the deputy director of the New York League of Conservation voters states in his concluding words of advice, " Start where they are, not where you are." Wise words that can be applied to anything, but in this case especially to the rapidly accumulating crisis of our only environment, our only home.

( A political oriented way of promoting and making a difference in the environment, this group of activists aim to elect government officials that will benefit the environment)

(Greentopia.org, consider it a emerging internet encyclopedia promoting all things green such as companies, bands, merchandise and community activity)

( an obvious example of greenwashing.. )

ALL IMAGES FOUND ON GOOGLE IMAGE

The event attended was a book reading/ discussion at Bluestockings, the radical bookstore and vegan café on Allen St. (between Stanton and Rivington), at 8 o’clock on Wednesday, December fourth. About forty or fifty people attended this event, the topic of which was acclaimed activist Van Jones’s new book, entitled The Green Collar Economy, How One Solution Can Fix Our Two Biggest Problems. Mr. Jones flew from Harvard University to speak at Bluestockings, apparently at the request of the owner of Bluestockings, who was a good friend of his.
Given the nature of the bookstore, the crowd attracted to the discussion was very much on the liberal side of the political spectrum, which helped contribute to the persuasive, passionate activist-like tone of the event. Jones’s focus on the current environmental/political state, as well as important theories within his book was received very well, and the audience seemed full of thoughtful discussion at the end of the hour and a half long speech.

Jones began by addressing the current economic crisis, and explained that with the ever-expanding force of globalization also come global problems. Wrenching economic changes are approaching, and require planning. On an optimistic note, Jones said, “Sometimes a breakdown can open the door for a breakthrough.” He acknowledged the fact that the floor had essentially been torn out from under our feet, but also pointed out that in many ways, i.e. technology and decreasing social oppression, the ceiling had also been torn away. “Will we fall or fly,” he asked, “now that the floor and ceiling have been torn away?”
The speaker then addressed the fallacies that he felt brought us here, and refused to place all the blame on the administration of the last eight years. Instead, he explained, we had to realize that the current economy’s problems could be traced back to at least thirty years ago. He pointed out also that the right wing movement of the nineties had a lot to do with our situation at present. The first of the three fallacies in economic policy over the last thirty years that he listed was that the US economy could survive solely off of consumption, which, he exclaimed, is not sustainable. The second was that Americans could survive on credit, rather than smart savings. That debt-ravaged economy, Jones pointed out, just crashed. The final fallacy, which he emphasized the most, was that America could survive based on environmental destruction, and not ecological restoration.
Jones then critiqued the current economy and its corrupt attempts at “going green” against the parameters of his ideal “green economy”. He pointed out that it has always been assumed “green living” was only for an elite group of people who could afford to spend extra money on environmentally friendly lifestyles. Jones contrarily stated that because of its sustainability, the “green economy” will be “the only part of the economy that will survive in light of this catastrophe”. Jones then called out “dirty greens”, or powerful administrators in green businesses who have become corrupt, as well as the process of political green-washing, whereby parties feign concern about the environment, while emissions continue to go up. Again, on a more positive note Jones assured us that, “We are now having the right conversation.” The environment has become a moral, political, and economic problem, as evidenced by the fact that President-elect Obama plans on putting 150 billion dollars towards solving environmental issues and creating 5 million green jobs by 2012.
On this note, Jones began to merge the environmental and economic crises by explaining the endless amount of new jobs available in a green economy. “We want eco-equity, not eco-apartheid,” he explained. He then asked how we could make sure this movement will be effective. The answer offered: cities. Poor, less energy-efficient homes must be improved first. “Everything for the environment can be a job…nothing can be done without labor,” declared Jones. In discussing a new green economy and its many elements, he warned his audience about corporate corruption and an eco-fascist economy.
The speaker then began a description of his ideal “Green Collar Economy”, which, he explained, addresses pathways to progressive living. There will be a place for the impoverished in this new economy, Jones assured us. He passionately declared that we must get off the path from resource wars and clean up. No longer can we dismiss this issue, he said. “We must all respect and honor the Earth.”
The speaker then brought up a green energy grid, called in his book the National Smart Energy Grid, which would connect clean energy power centers to population centers. Not only could energy be brought to people, but people could also add to the energy available by installing solar panels or wind turbines on their property.
Interestingly, after passionately supporting the idea of a green energy grid, Jones declared that it would be “necessary, but radically insufficient”. He explained that if all we do is change our source of energy, we will have the same problems, but solar powered, and we will essentially cook the planet. We mustn’t only treat symptoms of this problem, he implored, but must breakdown and rebuild to be green everything we can in our society.

Attending a discussion of this sort outside of school was a new, and fascinating experience for me. The venue was small enough that the mood was very intimate, rather than a lecture hall that elicits an impersonal feeling. I feel that this added to the impact Dr. Jones’s speech had on the audience. It is especially important when talking about such a vast issue that it doesn’t seem overwhelmingly large and out of our hands. From listening passively to the audience’s chatter after the speech I gathered that I wasn’t alone in my feeling of empowerment with regard to this issue.
Besides specific details about the Green Collar Economy (which I am learning more of from the copy of the book I purchased) I was left with something that I feel is infinitely more valuable, and that is the confidence that we simply will change our way of living. We must. As much as learning about environmental issues in class drives home the fact that we have to change, and have to do it now, the amount of information can get a little overwhelming, and disheartening. This discussion, I feel, was an excellent supplement to class, seeing as it was more personal, and because it wasn’t an academic environment, I suppose Jones could take some creative license in his delivery of the information. I therefore left feeling significant, and in a way powerful, for it is we, after all, who will be making the change happen.
I think the event had great value to the community, and I hope that Mr. Jones remains in New York for a while to speak at other venues of this type. I would say that he should increase the size of his audience to better reach the community, but I feel that speaking to a larger audience would in a way dilute his message. I would hope that his audiences stay this size and just become more frequent. The event definitely had a positive impact on everyone involved, and seemed very successful in informing and inspiring people to take action against the destruction of our planet.

Overall I was very happy with my experience at this event and found it extremely worthwhile. Seeing as Bluestockings has events almost every night, I will definitely pay more attention to their events calendar in the future, in hopes that there will be other discussions about the environment soon. I also plan to finish Mr. Jones’s book over Winter Break, so as to fully understand his arguments.

Wind Turbines on a Wind Farm

Uses of Solar Panels

On November 3rd, 2008 at 5:00PM , I attended a 1-hour academic lecture hosted by New York University’s Coles Science Center at the Avery Fisher Center in Bobst titled, "Tonnage and Toxicity: Visible and Invisible Solid Waste Problems in the United States.” Samantha MacBride, the deputy director of the city’s Department of Sanitation was the guest speaker for the night, introducing her extremely informative PowerPoint with a bright green background to catch our attention. She blended the words “tonnage” and “toxicity” into her first slide, and then followed it with a shadow to show us that the two concepts are sometimes hidden from our view in real life. This quirky joke made the audience, composed of mostly undergraduate students, stir with excitement in anticipation for this event.

Most of the lecture was focused on non-hazardous industrial waste, which is defined as substance that is not ignitable, corrosive, reactive, nor toxic. Samantha introduced the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which grants the United States Environmental Protection Agency the power to oversee all aspects of both hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Essentially, it is a cradle-to-grave tracking of waste, starting from the creation and ending with the disposal. As a nation, we produce approximately 4.5 pounds of municipal solid waste per day, which is an extremely shocking statistic. She also threw out a few numbers that allowed us to rethink our direct relationships to waste, stating that 97% of non-hazardous waste is disposed on-site. In terms of surface impoundment, 3% of non-hazardous waste is transported to landfills and incinerators that receive municipal solid waste. Unfortunately, we cannot break down and clearly define the components of toxic waste, as it is a fusion of various chemicals. Within the past few years, researchers in Pennsylvania have created a rough list of dangerous forms of toxic waste in order to warn the public about its potentially devastating effects on humans and the precious environment.

Graph - Waste Generated Per Year (thousands of tons)

Samantha MacBride crafted the second part of her lecture carefully, directing her lecture towards environmental activist movements. Curbside recycling of municipal solid waste still dominates the field known as American Environmentalism. In fact, in the United States only, over one million people work in this industry, racking up $37 billion in the payroll per year. According to the National Resources Defense Council, recycling seems to be the easiest way to save our planet, due to its appealing nature and accessibility. Since it does not require specific skills, the general public may participate in recycling cardboard, plastic, and other wasteful goods used by the average consumer. In 1982, there was a Bottle Bill act, also known as New York’s Returnable Container Act, which required people to pay a 5 cent deposit on plastic bottles and cans. Though it has served as the foundation of the recycling movement in New York, activists have been pushing for a “Bigger Better Bottle Bill,” which will raise the refundable deposit to 10 cents per bottle. Currently, only eleven states have bottle bills, projecting an image that Americans are not concerned about the well-being of our environment, especially if a simple task like recycling is not taken seriously.

Advertisement presented by the National Resources Defense Council

Initiated in 1978, place-based activism concerns risks from pollution, as it has radically changed how facilities handle chemical and municipal waste. The EPA’s Toxics Release inventory is frequently used by community activists to protest against the harmful destruction of various ecosystems. Furthermore, the EPA conducted a Resource Conservation Challenge, which was the first federal reduction initiative aimed at reducing hazardous waste. It is a completely voluntary program focused on regulating coal ash, construction byproducts, and demolition debris. However, regulation of surface impoundments does not exist at any level, which may be harmful to human health in the long-run.

Public announcement pertaining to the EPA's Resource Conservation Challenge

In this lecture, Samantha argued that regulation is a signal of design failure, as business leaders must alter their perceptions of the world in order to solve this deeply rooted problem. The rebound effect is also hindering the environment, which is the idea that reduced energy consumption caused by improved technological efficiency leads to using more energy. Essentially, technology warps our image of how we are handling our limited amount of energy derived mostly from fossil fuels. She also brought up an intriguing point, indicating that producers respond to diminishing demand through innovation, diversification, artificially generating demand, introducing new global markets, incorporating planned obsolescence, and creating more waste in the process of it all. Since non-hazardous waste is invisible, companies do not consider it a major problem in the near future, but we must take responsibility for our actions, rather than forcing these burdens upon the upcoming generations.

Learning about tonnage and toxicity from a firsthand source enabled me to conceptualize the urgency of proper waste disposal. If only one-fifth of the United States have bottle bills, we can conclude that recycling is not a nationwide phenomenon. This lecture was a fairly new experience for me, mainly because average consumers are not aware of invisible waste, yet we contribute to the massive amount on a daily basis. Samantha MacBride made a major point that dismissed small-scale environmental movements, as it takes a significant amount of group effort to start a revolution. With dozens of initiatives, it is difficult for our society, as a whole, to tackle tough issues involving the treatment of chemical and municipal waste.

This academic lecture resembled a public service announcement, as Samantha encouraged people to become more active in their local communities. I learned a significant amount about how the EPA proposes solutions, but hardly receives enough funding to carry them out. I was slightly disappointed by Samantha’s one suggestion to solving this waste crisis, which was to “storm the factories.” Human effort is limited, and revolutions cannot be only physical, as factory owners may easily figure out a way to prevent these riots from occurring. Targeting local companies does not seem like a feasible idea, as the problem lies in the way our society functions and our skewed ideologies.

I would like to find out more information about toxic waste, seeing as it is an underrated issue in our world today. In fact, there has been too much emphasis on global warming, thus directly all of our attention to alternative energy sources. If we decide to incorporate nuclear technology to generate energy for various populations, we must also think of the byproducts coming from these powerhouses. Part of the crisis lies in apathetic people who do not consider small initiatives, such as recycling, worthy of their time.

This event definitely added value to the community, though the audience was generally composed of NYU Environmental Studies students. Proper treatment of tonnage and toxicity is something that should concern all citizens of any given community, and Samantha MacBride did an excellent job of conveying her enticing points. By encouraging her audience members to be part of a greater cause, Samantha represented the voice of a new generation. The young adults of this age will, arguably, become the most environmentally conscious one in the history of the world. I would definitely say that the event achieved its goal of spreading the word of invisible waste, something that is swept underneath the carpet in order to suppress controversy within our society. In the future, NYU should post flyers around Kimmel and Bobst to inform the students about these environmental events, as I only found out about this through the Environmental Studies Blackboard.

Overall, I enjoyed listening to Samantha MacBride speak about toxic waste that is present in all of our lives, though we are sometimes unaware of it. Her lecturing style was rapid, but all of her information appealed to us, as she provided us with websites to explore at a later date. Our society is changing at an unprecedented pace, so we must insist on taking the environment seriously if we want to make an impact on future generations.

On Wednesday evening, December 3rd, I attended a panel discussion on environmental careers at the Puck Building, sponsored by NYU’s Wagner school. The four panelists were all former students of the Wagner school and currently have careers in the environment. The speakers included Meredith Bergmann, Les Judd, Joshua Klainberg, and Samantha MacBride. Each talked about their experiences in different careers in or around New York City that helped to conserve the environment. Meredith Bergmann works as a partner for a firm that deals with film and television productions, and helps them make more environment-friendly decisions. Joshua Klainberg works for the New York League of Conservation Voters, a political action organization that works to make environmental issues the priority of elected officials, both local and national. Les Judd is the founder of a business called Green Boroughs, whose mission is to “promote green business and sustainable living in the five boroughs of New York through educational, marketing, and networking services.” Samantha MacBride works for the NYC Department of Sanitation, and works on public policy regarding waste management and recycling. All of these careers help to improve our environment, often from the perspective of politics and public policy.
The moderator of the discussion also had a career in the environment, working as a coordinator for the Wagner school’s programs. He had only graduated NYU two years ago and took the position after graduating. According to him, his position existed in 40 schools across the country when he was a freshman, and today there are several hundred such positions. This exponential growth of such programs at the university level is a testament to the growth of the green movement in our country.
Approximately 30 students were in attendance at the discussion, which was conducted in an informal environment. This was effective, as it allowed for a good deal of interaction with the audience. The panelists each talked about their careers, then had some interaction with each other about the similarities and differences or their work, which was interesting. They then opened the floor for questions from the audience. Addressing a group of mainly Wagner students, who would soon be entering the market for jobs in the environment field, there was a degree of optimism. Since the green movement is currently growing, jobs will be opening up for thousands of young workers. Also, one panelist encouraged people to stay local rather than going to Washington D.C., stressing that most problems can be better addressed at local levels rather than on a national level.
Ms. Bergmann’s career was quite interesting, as she discussed how she worked with film studios to make environment friendly productions. It was encouraging and a little bit surprising to hear that large studios, such as NBC/Universal, were willing to take part in the green movement. She talked about how she advised studios on environment friendly construction, as well as disposal of waste. To her, there was nothing more satisfying than taking unusable waste products and finding something do to with them. Also interesting was the career of Mr. Klainberg, whose organization analyzes politicians’ environmental records and stances, and makes endorsements based on these. His office analyzes the positions of politicians on many issues, ranging from nuclear power to construction.
Overall, the event was worthwhile, because it educated me on the wide variety of careers that one can work in to effect positive change on the world. It seems as if the country is beginning to see the need for environment friendly decision making with respect to everything in our daily lives, and it seems as if this movement is still growing fast. While NYU and New York City is probably at the forefront of this transition, it seems as if the future is encouraging.

At 7:30 on December 7th, I attended the “Solar Soiree” held by an organization called “I Heart PV” at the Brooklyn venue, Southpaw. “PV” stands for photovoltaics, which is the technology that converts sunlight into electricity. The tone was pretty informal. It was set up within a small Brooklyn venue, which contained a stage for musical acts and a bar area. There were several environmental booths set up distributing information on solar and other forms of alternative energy, a few tables where you could make a solar car, and a station to write a letter to your senator advocating the making of a law which would support the growth of solar energy in the state of New York. The event was geared towards people already aware of the benefits of solar energy and environmentalists. The crowd was younger and obviously environmentally conscious.
The first activity I participated in was making a solar car. Putting it together was surprisingly easy. I connected the wheels to metal rods, hot-glued a thin piece of wood on the straws on the metal rods, placed a small generator thing on the wood, and then put the photovoltaic rectangle on top. All that was left was to twist the black and red wires from the generator to the photovoltaic piece. I haven’t tested it out yet, but look forward to seeing if it actually works. Next, I went to the Sierra Club booth, where the club member gave me a few brochures on clean energy and a “Cool Neighborhoods Campaign” sheet, which urges you to pledge, and get your neighbors to pledge, to use energy efficient lightbulbs, unplug appliances when not in use, and to use green power. After collecting all the information, I went on to write a letter to a New York Senator. There was a booklet giving statistics on solar energy and why it is better for the environment. The letter was intended to get the senator to support state laws that would work towards supporting a solar initiative, making solar energy more affordable for all. They suggested a small added fee to everyone’s electrical bill that would work towards greater use of solar energy. I wrote to Senator Duane and explained the numerous benefits of switching to solar energy, like the reduction of greenhouse gases which lead to climate change. Also, the event had a DJ, who played music that sported a sun theme.
This was a new experience for me. I don’t normally go to environmental events because I really didn’t know much on the subject before this. The “Solar Soiree” was perfectly timed because it was right after our lecture on alternative energy, so I went into the event knowing something about solar energy. I left the event knowing more about solar energy and with an awesome hand-made solar car. The pamphlets they handed out had some impressive statistics. For example, every megawatt of PV electricity added to the energy mix in New York displaces about 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide. Another said every hour the sun provides the earth with enough energy to power all of humanity’s current energy needs for an entire year. This information was very persuasive in seeing the benefits to solar energy. I think this was a great community event, but the crowd really wasn’t that big. If it was advertised more, it might have brought in more people to educate. The event achieved its aims in spreading the word about alternative energy effectively and in a fun way. I also felt that the letter writing was a good way to get people actively involved. It’s great to know about solar energy, but the only way to enact it with a larger group of people is to contact those who can do something about it. Laws endorsing solar energy can make tiny steps in lessening our impact on the environment.
Overall, I really enjoyed this experience. I learned more about solar energy and came back with an awesome solar energy car. I felt the event was very informative and well organized. It was easy to talk to people, and those I did talk to were well educated on the subject. I would recommend this event to a friend and I may even look at future meet-ups by this group to go to in my spare time. I’m actually glad that we were given these environmental event assignments because I found both to be very worthwhile.

Yaron Weitzman

Event Blog 2

For my second event I went to a lecture given by Rabbi Michael Cohen in the NYU Hillel. Rabbi Cohen is a founding faculty member of the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies. The Arava institute for Environmental Studies is a non-profit organization located in the southern Israeli dessert that focuses on helping the Middle East reach peace as well as developing a sustainable environment on a regional and global scale. Arava uses the universal issue of the environment to bring Israelis and Arabs to work together and cooperatively solve the regions environmental challenges. Essentially, the Arava institute uses the environment as a platform to bring Jews, Muslims, and Christians together while giving them the ability and platform needed to resolve their differences and work towards a common goal. The Arava institute does lots of research projects, working with Palestinians and Jordanians on projects such as Biodiversity, sustainable agriculture in the Middle East, and environmental education.
Rabbi Cohen has served as the Executive Director of the Arava Institute North America, and also co-founded the Green Zionist Alliance, the first Environmental Zionist party to run in the World Zionist Congress elections, in 2002. At the lecture Rabbi Cohen spoke about how it is important to understand that Judaism and care for the environment go hand in hand. His lecture was specifically about reinterpreting the story of creation without looking at people as the center of creation, rather understanding that God created both man and the earth and both are important to him. This is not to say that humans are not important, rather the point is that as human beings, and more specifically Jews who believe in Judaism and God, we have to make sure to take care of the earth. It is our responsibility to God to live environmentally friendly lives and since the earth wasn’t created for man, we are not allowed to destroy the earth and use the earth at our disposal. Rabbi Cohen gave other examples throughout the bible and the book of Genesis showing that things like biodiversity are moral and desired by God.
I though this lecture was very interesting because I had never heard anyone else make these exact points connecting God, Judaism, and the Environment. I have heard lectures about how as religious or God believing people to not care about the environment is somewhat insincere, however I have never heard anything like this redefining of creation and I found it very interesting. . I was also very impressed with the Arava institute and love what they are trying to do in terms of bringing Israelis and Arabs to work together on issues that affect everyone like the environment, thus getting them to work together and see that things can be done together.

(Here is a link to the Arava Institute’s website: http://www.arava.org/new/).

Jessica Donovan

On November 18, I attended a lecture on the Ice Sheets and Climate Change at 285 Mercer Street, at 12:30 pm. David Holland, who works for the Center for Atmosphere-Ocean Science at Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences here at NYU, was the presenter. This event was educational but also activist, because Holland was really stressing the threats of ice sheets melting due to climate change. About twenty five people attended; most were professors at NYU in the science departments or other adults working in similar studies. I was among the four or five students there.

Holland started the lecture with a power point presentation. He focused on a time scale of one hundred years, looking forward to what our world will look like then. Holland stated that most major land developments are on coastlines, and change in sea level will greatly disturb or destroy many cities in the world. The ice sheets Holland focuses on as the main concern are found in Greenland and Antarctica.
Holland, along with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has observed the world has warmed particularly in the polar regions. The key statement released from the IPCC is that most of the warming of the past fifty years is very likely (90%) due to increases of greenhouse gases.
One of the main problems of controlling sea level change, according to Holland, is that we cannot predict it. There is not tool that tells us how sea levels will change over the next hundred years. However, there are computer models that make predictions about what U.S. coastlines will look like in the next century. In the last century alone, sea level has risen one foot and is continuing to accelerate.
Sea levels change because of heat or water added to oceans, expanding and rising water levels. The melting of ice sheets is the main contributor to sea level change. The world’s two largest ice sheets are found in Greenland and Antarctica. Ilulissat Icefjord in Greenland is one of the fastest moving glaciers today. Ilulissat means “among the icebergs,” but today the name is beginning to lose its meaning. The rate of collapse has been rapidly increasing since 1997.

Holland has been to Greenland to observe and study the melting glaciers. There, Holland studied the current rates of the melting of the glaciers and the impact it has on Greenland and the world. During his presentation he showed us a clip from the Lehrer Newshour in which he made an appearance, reporting from Greenland. Holland a crew of other scientists measured the ocean temperatures with probes dropped from helicopters into the water from thousands of feet above. The ocean temperatures showed a drastic increase since 1997. Holland had access to temperatures from 1997 and previous years due to the temperatures recorded by fishermen. Greenland fishermen kept thermometers on their fishing nets over the past decades. These recorded temperatures are evidence that the ocean temperatures around Greenland have steadily been increasing since 1997. Holland could not predict if these temperatures would ever go down, but he suggested it is only going to worsen.
Ilulissat’s fishing industry is beginning to fail due to the change in the ice streams and temperatures, which are affecting marine wildlife. The recent temperature change in the waters surrounding Greenland is because of winds and currents that have shifted warm water to the coasts. The Coriolis Effect is responsible for diverting the majority of the warm water away from Greenland, but still some warm water reaches the coasts and begins to melt the ice sheets.
Although Holland focused his presentation mainly on Greenland, he also mentioned the glaciers that are in danger in Antarctica as well. The Pine Island Glacier expands most of the continent and is changing rapidly. If the entire ice sheet which covers Antarctica melts, the world is in for a catastrophe. Alaskan glaciers are also on their way out, too. The melting of these glaciers will at .7 meters to the sea level.
http://www.thewe.cc/thewei/&/poles/arctic/ilulissat.jpe" alt="Ilulissat" />

Holland blames the media for misguiding the public about the glaciers receding. Using the metaphor of Chicken Little, he claims the media is seeing, hearing, and assuming things they don’t know. Chicken Little thought the sky was falling; the media thinks the world’s only problem is global warming and climate change. He showed us various covers of magazines, such as Time, National Geographic, and Newsweek with false cover titles. Holland says that these magazines and other forms of the media are not concentrating on the important issues of today. Instead of drawing attention to the melting glaciers, global warming and carbon dioxide emissions are the main focus. But glaciers and ice sheets melting, Holland stresses, will have so much more impact on the world if the sea level continues to rise inch by inch.
The rising of sea level is a threat to many megacities in the world which are located on coastlines, New York City included. If the glaciers in Greenland, Alaska, and Antarctica melt into the ocean, sea level will rise by at least several meters and islands and coastal cities will be flooded.
The IPCC released a statement saying that anthropenic forces are likely responsible for the circulation changes that are associated with the melting of the ice sheets. Holland agrees with this and emphasized we act now to save what is left of the ice sheets rather than later. Without any proactive efforts, the ice sheets will melt away along with many global cities.

This event really opened up my eyes. I had no idea that the state of glaciers is so severe. I now know that if the glaciers disappear, a significant portion of our Earth will too. I understand that the ice sheets need to be protected and stopping global warming will help, but there is nothing I can do, as one individual, to help. Saving the ice sheets and protecting the Earth is a project everyone needs to do together.
Holland’s lecture gave valuable information to the audience, but unfortunately there were not enough people there to watch. If Holland’s presentation reached more people, there would be a better understanding of this environmental crisis. However, the presentation did move everyone there, including myself. Holland gave a convincing argument and really knows his stuff. To improve this event and spread the knowledge, Holland should continue to show his presentation to larger groups. To broaden its impact, more people need to see his compelling presentation. If more of the public were given this information, there would be less ignorance and more people willing to make a change.

http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod_e/image/0603/iceberg_nasa.jpg" alt="Antarctica's icesheets receding" />

Overall, I liked Holland’s lecture. His incorporation of a powerpoint slideshow made it easier to follow. He was very successful in capturing the viewers’ attention. I learned about something I would not ordinary learn about, in such depth. I would definitely go to see him speak again.

By Melissa Aragon
For this report, I traveled about two thousand miles less than my first, and attended a lecture in the Environmental Studies building on campus. For those of you who haven’t had the pleasure, this building is located right next to a copy center. It’s an unmarked building whose lobby consists of a two by 3 foot area, a few stairs that wrap around the corner, and two elevators, that upon stepping in them seem about as reliable as the mineshaft they call an elevator at 10 Washington place. Running a little early, I pondered being safe and taking the stairs up, and possibly avoid yet another elevator disaster, which would have been my third of the week. Bad luck was following me, but I was adventurous. I pushed the “Up” button, the door opened, and I took a deep breath and stepped in and started my ascent.
I walked out of the elevator, thanked God that I made it and walked into the fat hallway they called the conference room, which was about 3 tables laid side-by-side, with a projected screen in the front, and a buffet in the back. As I always say, when there’s a lecture, vegetarian wraps and chocolate chip cookies better be involved. And they were. I would take the leap to say that this is the first time I have been to an event that offers only vegetarian selections. I happily yet awkwardly munched on my vegetable and cheese wrap while others around me were also ‘preparing’ themselves for the lecture. There were three other students in attendance, as well as what seemed like many of this professor’s colleagues, who happened to have offices along one side of the conference room as they traded out the hard chairs around the table with their own rolling and swiveling chairs.
After a man sitting a few people to my right introduced Professor Holland, he suggested we go around the table and introduce ourselves. There were about twenty people in attendance including myself and three other GSP students.
After our brief rendition of “Getting to Know You,” Professor Holland began what he had come there to do. We all sat quietly and attentively as we listened to this charismatic and well spoken professor first detail myths about global warming and its link to sea levels rising as well as the research he had done in Antarctica and Greenland.
His main ‘beef’ was with the media’s limited knowledge of the way in which climate change and global warming affect the rise of sea level. He is 90% convinced that warming is increasing due to green house gasses, but that only one third of ocean expansion should be blamed on heating.
An example he talked about, with the masses not fully aware of what is going on was when he talked about the Hockey Stick Controversy. While the sea level has risen 30 cm in the last 100 years, he still argues that this can not be seen as a trend but rather just a fact. From this fact, however, a government funded research group predicted that there is a potential for sea levels to quickly rise an average of 0.4 to 0.8 meters in the near future. When questioned about where these predictions came from, the researchers said they did not believe this prediction was correct, nor that a prediction can be made about the amount of rise sea level will have.
When asked why, in fact, they did make quantitative predictions about this topic; their response was that the government made them produce numbers, as it was some sort of policy.
He kept reiterating how with the science and technology now we can clearly make predictions as to what the Air temperature and air pressure will be 50 years from now, and there is worst case scenario and a best case which are included in these predictions, but predicting this cannot lead to the prediction of how high sea levels will rise as a result. There are too many variables that computer models cannot take into account, Holland states. It seems that the scientific community is split as to how global warming will affect the earth, and if we can ever predict and plan for the rise of the sea levels.
One way that Professor Holland investigated the water temperature during his research in Greenland was to drop a submarine probe into a hole of ice. This needed to be done from 500 meters above the drop site to ensure that it would work. The data gathered from this probe helped Holland and his team come to the conclusion that the Greenland shelf had a three degree C rise within the last six months, and that there was a deep quadratic dependence on temperature.
He went on some more, discussing his research in Antarctica, and what he found there, only went along with his discoveries in Greenland, and he ended his lecture with the final statement on his slide: “When and How much- not predictable. End of Story.”
This was an interesting lecture in the fact that I feel like I walked out of it knowing less about global warming and its effects. His lecture in one form or another said that the things you, as well as many other people read in articles of Time and Newsweek, and other publications that predict the rising of sea level in 2050 or any given date don’t know what they’re talking about. He debunked much of what society holds true and trusts as reliable fact.

Jeffrey Biel
Current Event 1
Enviro. Studies
Prof. Schwartz

On Wednesday, October 15th, I went to the Bronx Zoo. Every Wednesday at the zoo is a “Donation Day” where admission is free, but a donation is expected, although not required. Obviously this is the reason that we picked to attend the zoo on the date that we did. The Bronx Zoo is located in the Bronx on Fordham Road and Bronx River Parkway. The zoo was not very busy, but the people that were present were mostly elementary and middle school students on class trips.

We began walking around the zoo and looking at the different animals and exhibits that the zoo had to offer. On each exhibit or cage, there was a description of the animal that lived inside and the general environment that the animal needs to survive in. There were also some “fun facts” and usually something about the animal being endangered or how zoo goers could donate funds to help that specific animal. This part of the trip was most worrisome for me. It appeared to me that barely any people actually read the signs that told about the animal or the need for donations. People merely looked at the animals and watched them in their environment, commenting on their actions. I was extremely surprised that even the teachers did not make the students read or look at the signs, being that this trip was supposed to be an educational experience.

The most interesting part of the trip for me was the Gorilla Exhibit. I learned that 2009 will be the year of the gorilla and the zoo has been working extremely hard to promote the Gorilla Exhibit and gorilla awareness. All of the information on the gorillas told of the Wildlife Conservation Society and their efforts to inform the public about protection of the gorilla habitat. The main threats to gorilla population is hunters and I believe that if the general population becomes more educated on the topic, perhaps the species can remain at the level it is currently at.

I decided to do a little further research into the Congo Gorilla Exhibit and the difficulties that the gorillas were facing. Astonishingly, I found out that the Wildlife Conservation Society is the only organization in the world that is working to protect and maintain all three subspecies of the gorilla, being the western lowland gorilla, Grauer’s gorilla, and the mountain gorilla. Although the gorilla is not considered an endangered species, they still face many hardships that could definitely lead to their extinction one day.

For example, gorillas have had their habitats reduced considerably by the human population. Humans are not only moving in and reducing their population by taking over the land, but they are also hunting gorillas, as I stated before. I had no idea that people hunted gorillas, but apparently gorillas fetch a hefty price in certain game markets. Obviously it is highly illegal to hunt a gorilla, but anytime there is a financial incentive, people will be willing to break the law. I think that the Environmental Protection Agency needs to do a much better job of patrolling the areas that the gorillas are in and ensuring that people do not have the ability to hunt the animal. Additionally, the Wildlife Conservation Society needs to do a much better job of informing the public and other agencies about this ongoing problem so that other organizations can begin working to protect the gorilla species.

Currently, the future of the gorilla species is really unknown. Most gorillas reside in Africa and the African population is continually growing and intruding on their land. There is also an issue in the Democratic Republic of Congo where people are starving and they are beginning to hunt gorillas (because of their abundance in the region) for food. The Wildlife Conservation Society has been working closely with the United States State Department to aid the people of the area and to protect the gorilla. I found it extremely interesting that the even the United States government has gotten involved in this situation, yet I have heard nothing about it through the media. I think the media could definitely be a successful way to inform about the problem. For example, once Al Gore got involved with using the media in his global warming campaign, many more people became interested in aiding his cause, whether it was through help or financially.

Overall, for me, the trip to the zoo was extremely entertaining, interesting, and most of all educational. The zoo does a tremendous job of presenting information to zoo goers about the animals and their habitats, as well as current protection methods that they are using; yet many people do not read the signs. Perhaps if the zoo made the signs interactive with videos or sound then more people would be apt to pay attention to them and then support their different causes. All of the exhibits were well done and maintained well, which allowed for zoo goers to really enjoy the experience.

Works Cited

http://congogorillaforest.com/congoconservationchoices/congogorillaconservation

Sidra Farooqi

On Wednesday, November 19th, at 7:30 P.M, I attended a lecture called Biodiesel & New York. The event took place at Kimmel Center and was open to all NYU students and faculty. It was hosted by the Earth Matters Club at NYU, and Solar One, a non-profit organization in New York City which seeks to educate people on issues of environmental sustainability and alternate energy, specifically solar power. The event was a formal academic lecture, during which five speakers, including legislative representatives, and representatives from Solar One, CUNY Sustainable Energy Center, and Tri-state Biodiesel, informed the audience about biodiesel fuel and how it fits into New York’s long term energy plan.

http://solar1.org

During the event, five panelists, who represented commercial, legislative, and scientific perspectives, discussed biodiesel and its use in New York. All were very knowledgeable about the subject, although several reiterated the same points over and over. Also, several were representatives from biodiesel groups, so naturally, they only gave the positive benefits and neglected to mention the negative consequences – the event was definitely biased in favor of biodiesel fuel.
The first speaker was Brent Baker, who is the Chief Executive Officer, President, and founder of Tri-State Biodiesel LLC, which is based here in New York, and specializes in biodiesel marketing, production, and waste collection. Baker is an environmental advocate and educator, and also the director of several non-profit organizations. He explained that biodiesel is a renewable fuel that is derived from plant oils and animal fats, including cooking oil. It is blended with petroleum based diesel for transportation and heating purposes, in a chemical process called transesterification.

The second speaker was Luis Torres, who is the Associate Director for Community and Public Affairs at the Bronx Community College’s Center for Sustainable Energy. He explained that used of biodiesel fuel is being considered at the City University of New York (CUNY), and that some campus’s, such as CUNY Staten Island, are using cooking oil to create biodiesel fuel, for use on campus. Another speaker, Samantha Swanson, represented Councilman James Gennaro, who serves as the Chair of the New York City Council’s Environmental Protection Committee. Gennaro wants to pass a bill requiring all suppliers of heating oil to supply at least 5-20% of biodiesel fuel. He spoke about how there is an enormous market for heating oil in the Northeast, where winters are cold. Biodiesel fuel helps run furnaces and makes them run more efficiently, plus it is better for the environment and air quality.

http://www.tristatebiodiesel.com/

The following speaker was Daniel Falcone, who is the owner of a total Fuel Services Corp., a wholesale and retail distributor of diesel and biodiesel blended products. Mr. Falcone is an advocate for alternative fuel markets, and is also a member of the New York State Environmental Business Association. The first thing he pointed out is the biodiesel is not corn ethanol, although the two are often confused by the public. Biodiesel is made from soy or cottonseed oil, or waste animals fats, and not from corn. It is 90% less toxic than purely petroleum diesel, and also has 55% less particulate matter – particulate matter is known to cause cancer and lung disease.

The next speaker, John Nettleton, a Senior Lecturer in the Department of City and Regional Planning and Executive Director of the Cornell Urban Scholars Program, elaborated on the topic of lung disease and cancer. He explained that New York City has one of the highest incidences of lung disease in the country, and a high rate of premature death as a result of petro-diesel exhaust; this is particularly an important issue in lower-income areas of the Bronx. The asthma rates in some New York neighborhoods are five times as high as the rest of the U.S! He stated that biodiesel fuel will result in carbon emission reductions, reduces greenhouse gases, is less toxic, and readily biodegradable. He mentioned that it is now being used by government fleets, military nautical fleets, individually owned vehicles, and consumers of heating oil. Mr. Nettleton also emphasized that while boilers can’t currently use 100% biodiesel fuel, they can use petroleum-biodiesel blends, which cuts down on particulate matter and carbon emissions. While biodiesel fuel will certainly not eliminate American reliance on foreign oil, it is better for public health and the environment.
The final speaker was a representative for Hon. James Gennaro, who represents New York City Council’s 24th District in Queens. She spoke of the economic benefits of biodiesel fuel – it is a homegrown fuel source, it can lead to economic development, it will create jobs in New York State, and provides opportunities for regional production, which can boost the local economy. She also emphasized Biodiesel fuel does not necessarily increase food prices, which is a common misconception. Currently, Gennaro is trying to pass a bill, called the Casey Bill, which will increase use of biodiesel fuel in New York. She also mentioned that they tried to put a state mandate into place that would require all New York City taxi cabs to be diesel hybrids, but that was blocked twice, and that they were close to getting Mayor Bloomberg sign the Casey Bill the first time, but then Time Magazine came out with an issue that stated biodiesel fuel raises food prices.

This was a familiar experience for me, because I’m an active member of the Earth Matters Club, which is an NYU organization that helped to host the event. Over the course of the past semester, I’ve attended multiple events, from academic lectures to public park clean-ups. However, this was the first event I attended which concerned biodiesel fuel, a subject I knew little about. I finally learned exactly what biodiesel fuel is, how it is derived from organic feedstocks like plant oils and animal fats, and how it can be used to make the world, specifically New York, more environmentally sustainable.
The event was definitely of value to the community, because not many people know the issues concerning biodiesel fuel, yet the climate change crisis affects us all. The event achieved its aims of informing people about biodiesel fuel and how it should be used in New York. Overall, it had a positive impact on the environment, despite the myriad of unnecessary flyers and handouts being passed around. However, I think it would have been more beneficial had the lecture been open to a broader audience – this issue affects all of New York City, not just professors and students at one university. Most likely, the professors and other adults who made up the majority of the audience already have more knowledge about the subject than most New Yorkers do.
I also think the whole event would have been more beneficial had it been a debate rather than a lecture, or that the lecture should have included both sides. For almost two hours, I listened to scientists, policy-makers, and business owners lecture about the various benefits of biodiesel fuel. On my way out the door, I was handed a flyer by a member of an anti-biodiesel fuel group. As I read the flyer, I realized it listed all the con arguments of biodiesel fuel, none of which were brought up during the lecture. Some of the arguments included were that biodiesel fuel will increase heating oil costs by 15-30 cents a gallon, require more pesticides because it relies on soybean farming, and cost millions of dollars, at the taxpayer’s expense. Most alarming was that 91 percent of the soybean acreage planted in the U.S last year was genetically engineered to tolerate herbicides, which has boosted the application of a powerful weed killer called glysphosate, which has been linked to cancer, miscarriages, premature births, and is the third most common cause of pesticide illness in farm workers. Also, the entire event was obviously very biased, as many of the speakers were directly involved in the biodiesel industry. When one of the speakers mentioned that the Time Magazine issue stopped the bill from being passed, I thought that was pretty suspicious, because Time Magazine wouldn’t publish something not rooted in facts and research, and the speaker obviously had a political agenda. Because of this, I am still undecided as to whether or not biodiesel is a good idea.
Overall, this was definitely a worthwhile event. I was surprised that I actually enjoyed the lecture, as I expected it would be dry and dull, since biodiesel fuel didn’t sound like a particularly exciting topic. I was expecting to hear scientists lecturing about the science of biodiesel fuel for two hours, but several of the speakers were actually policymakers and business owners. I’m considering pursuing a career in public policy and law, so I found it interesting to hear what policy makers had to say about biodiesel and New York City’s energy plans for the future.

On December 4th at 1:45, I attended the World Wide Green Revolution Lunch, which was an informational gathering so that people could learn about the “cradle to cradle” idea, and about increasing sustainability and eco-efficiency. It was held in one of the NYU Law School buildings. Hauser Global Law School Program and NYU’s Deutsches Haus sponsored the event. The lunch was presented by Elisa Maria Lotz, who worked on the book Gemacht für die Zukunft...., which translates to Made for the Future… She is currently one of NYU’s Visiting Doctoral Researchers, which are doctoral candidates that are enrolled in another school and spend a year researching at the NYU Law School. She is from Humboldt University in Berlin. The tone of the event was informal and relaxed, and there were about fifteen people who attended. Attendees sat around a conference table and were encouraged to and ask questions. There was a powerpoint presentation, and footage of the event was being filmed and sent to Frankfurt, Germany through a webcam. There were similar informational meetings taking place all over the world in China, Chile, and Germany.
At the beginning of the lunch, Elisa introduced us to the idea of eco-efficiency that is presented in the book that she worked on. She took two books—one paperback book and one copy of Gemacht für die Zukunft.... She put the books together in a tray and poured water over them, as if they were left out in the rain, tore at the pages, and spilled coffee over them. The paperback book was completely useless and destroyed, but the other book was still in perfect condition. She explained that this was because her book is not made out of paper; instead it is made out of plastics. It is completely waterproof, and it is the first of its kind in the German market. Elisa explained that even though books are made out of paper, they are not harmless to the environment when they are decomposing. There is ink and other chemicals used in creating books that are harmful to the environment during decomposition. The plastic book will remain a book forever, and it won’t biodegrade and harm the environment.
She explained that the old way of producing things was called “cradle to grave,” and it is when products are made for one purpose only, without the consideration of the side effects of the product to the environment or its complete life cycle. For example, a paperback book is made with consideration only to the actual book, without thinking about its effects on the environment after it becomes trash. This practice results in a lot of waste and a loss of resources. She then talked about the new “cradle to cradle” idea, which was developed by Michael Braungart and William McDonough. In a “cradle to cradle” system, industry and production follows the way nature works. Industry should try to preserve the environment rather than harm it. It uses materials that are organic and completely reusable. Elisa said that often, when things are recycled, they are “downcycled,” which means that they are made into a product of lesser value or quality. The “cradle to cradle” concept allows for “upcycling,” which is when the recycled parts are used for quality products of equal value. It considers the whole life cycle of product, so it is made of nontoxic materials that won’t harm the environment.
To explain the concept, she used the example of a cherry tree. She said that for the tree, there is no concept of waste. Everything is organic. The leaves fall to the ground, where they decompose and help the earth, and carbon dioxide is produced. Everything is used as food for another cycle. In the presentation, Elisa also talked about several German companies that had started to use the “cradle to cradle” idea in their products. For example, the furniture company Herman Miller has created a chair that is almost completely recyclable; the chair can be sent back to the factory and its parts can be reused. She also described tee shirts and textiles that can be thrown into a garden and biodegrade in just 100 days. She also talked about her favorite product, the children’s toy PlayMais, which are little pieces of non-modified corn with food coloring. The pieces stick together with water, are completely biodegradable, and they are also edible.
This was a new experience for me, because I had never heard of the “cradle to cradle” concept before. I have obviously heard of the green movement, but I had never given much thought to how exactly we can make products environmentally friendly, and this informational lunch showed how certain companies are starting to make products that are friendly to the environment and can be remade into other quality products. I also learned a little about the economic aspects of “cradle to cradle” and how it is often easier for smaller companies to get involved than large corporations. I had always been interested in the idea of the “green revolution” but the luncheon made me more interested in how it can actually be carried out. The event was valuable to the community and had a positive effect because it explained a concept that many people may not be familiar with, and it also showcased some products that are currently on the market and fit into the “cradle to cradle” idea. I think that the luncheon achieved its aims, because the people seemed generally interested in finding out more about the products, the process of making them, and why they were less harmful to the environment. In order to broaden the impact of the event, I would have made it more available to the wider public. It was advertised on several NYU calendars, but maybe if it had been more publicized around campus it would have had a larger audience. However, in the case of this luncheon, the smaller group of people was nice because it was more relaxed and informal and people had plenty of opportunity to ask questions and share their ideas.

The environmentally friendly PlayMais toy:

The Book:

Ricky Perlman
Dr. Leah Schwartz
Environmental Studies
12/10/08
Event 2

The event I attended was a visit to the Bronx Zoo from about 12pm to 4pm on October 15, 2008. The zoo is located on 2300 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY. The tone of the event was a mix between nature appreciation, education for the general public, and awareness for environmental concerns. People who wanted to appreciate nature could observe and enjoy looking at the animals; however, these people were also educated and made aware of environmental concerns through signs and other features present at the different exhibits.

When people visiting the Bronx Zoo first buy their tickets they receive a map of the entire zoo. Upon actually entering the zoo it is up to the visitor to decide exactly what he or she gets out of their trip. They have all sorts of options as to what animals and exhibits people can choose to see. If somebody came to the zoo to appreciate and observe the lions they can go to the African Plains exhibit or if they came to see the gorillas they could go to the Congo Gorilla Forest exhibit. However, not only are fans able to appreciate nature by observing their favorite animals in various exhibits, they are also educated and made aware of environmental concerns. At each exhibit there is information about each animal, including its current population status and whether it is endangered or even worse on the brink of extinction. These informational signs explain exactly what is causing the survival problems for the specific animal and how these problems can be alleviated. Not only does the zoo try to inform people about different environmental concerns by posting information on signs throughout the exhibits, but it also tries to educate people as well. For example, in the Congo Gorilla Forest, there was an educational movie, “Saving Africa’s Forest”, which talks about the Wildlife Conservation Society’s (WCS) efforts to protect wildlife in Africa.

My trip to the Bronx Zoo was both a familiar and a new experience for me. Although I have been to the zoo many times when I was a little kid, the way in which I went about my visit was completely different this time. When I was little, I went to the zoo for the shear entertainment of seeing all the different animals; however, when I recently went to the zoo, I actually went with the intention of learning something. Prior to my visit, I was unaware of all the animals, such as the Siberian tiger and the grizzly bear that are actually endangered until I read some of the many informational signs posted within the different exhibits.

This endangered status that is threatening many different animals, if not treated, can potentially lead to the extinction of these animals. As we have learned in our environmental class, the extinction of an animal can pose a major problem to the environment. This problem of extinction can be seen most drastically if the animal going extinct is a keystone species, a species whose removal from an ecosystem can cause a major change in the general nature of that community.

After attending the Bronx Zoo I definitely gained a greater appreciation for the conservation of our world’s animals and its environments. I used to think losing a species to extinction was not that big a deal, but after learning how many species face this problem and learning how this effects our environment in class, I definitely changed my opinion. The Bronx Zoo has more of an entertainment value to the community than an educational. This is because it only educates people who want to be educated. Few people, beside those who wanted to learn, read the signs and information posted throughout the park; most people go just to see the animals for entertainment.

The zoo definitely has a positive impact on the community because of its work with the Wildlife Conservation Society. It is an organization that works toward the preservation of wildlife and wild lands. There are stations at the Bronx Zoo where people can, not only donate money to these causes, but they can vote for which causes they want the zoo to focus more heavily on. Although the zoo clearly achieved its goals of raising funds for these causes, I do not think that it achieved its goal of educating people who go to the zoo. As stated before, too many people go to the zoo only to see the animals and they do not read the informational signs throughout the park. Unfortunately there is not much that I would suggest for the park to do in order to help its cause. It is up to the people to inform themselves, the park can’t force people to read the information. However, the zoo could try to bring more attention to these causes maybe on its maps or other areas people are more likely to look.

I definitely enjoyed going to the Bronx Zoo and truly think it was worthwhile to go there. The trip served as a fun entertaining experience and an informational one as well. I got to see some of my favorite animals and learn about them at the same time. Going to the Bronx Zoo has definitely inspired me to learn more about what can be done to help all these endangered species. I think it is important for everybody in this class, since the zoo is so close and accessible, to visit it with an academic frame of mind before they graduate New York University.

Dan Bravato
Environmental Studies

A Trip To The Zoo

I attended the Bronx Zoo about four weeks ago, on October 15, on a Donation Wednesday in which there is no cost of admission, only a suggested donation which goes to enhancing the zoo and to endangered species. The Bronx Zoo puts a great deal of emphasis on endangered species and how humans are not helping their cause but how we potentially can. In front of every animal exhibit is a small sign that gives information on each animal but also goes into detail with the problems they are having in the wild. Therefore, this event was mostly nature appreciation and based on educating the public on how they can help endangered species.
Our tour, given by ourselves with our handy zoo map, began by looking at gazelles and lions. The exhibit had one of the stands in front of it which gives you insight into the respective animal. The sign tells you what each animal’s typical diet is, what their habit is, and what their niche is. At the end of each chart it shows why each animal is struggling to survive in the wild, if they are. Each animal did not happen to be endangered but it still gave information on how humans are altering their lives. After touring the zoo for some time we moved on to the special Congo exhibit. The Bronx Zoo Congo Gorilla Forest is a special exhibit, separate from zoo admission, in which all profits go to save gorillas in the Congo. The exhibit is devoted to the Congo and to the wildlife that exists there. You enter the special exhibit and see a very humid, almost rain forest type area with special birds and small monkeys. Once you climb through a small rock tunnel, you move into the main event. You are in a class tunnel with gorilla habitats on both sides. The gorillas come up to the glass and entertain the guests. After the most exciting and crowd pleasing part of the exhibit, the groups are brought into a room where it is explained via images and informational videos as to why Gorillas are an endangered species. After seeing the happy and playful animals all of the guests are extremely saddened by the information on their demise. This prompts people to donate more money and potentially purchase gifts with some of the profits going to the Congo and their gorillas. After this exhibit we decided to leave the zoo after learning a great deal about the devastation of the gorillas in the Congo.
Clearly going to the zoo was not a new event for me because I grew up going to the Bronx and Philadelphia zoos. However, after being in this class I have a new appreciation for the environment and those that are a part of it. I had always interpreted the zoo as a fun place to see odd animals, however it is much more. Zoos help to raise awareness on endangered species and how humans directly affect the lives of these creatures. At almost every exhibit at the zoo, there was one of those signs that gives information on why the animal is endangered and how. This gives people knowledge that they would not have had prior to going to the zoo; it also gives you the information while you are directly looking at the cute and fury friends. This causes a direct effect to the viewer and allows them to make a connection between the animal and its troubles. Therefore, I was able to learn a great deal from the zoo and it made me less ignorant towards the woes that different animals face everyday in their previously human-less habitats. With this new knowledge I can apply it to my interest in animals, but more specifically gorillas. I have always had an interest in gorillas and monkeys and now I am even more knowledgeable in that field. Also, I feel as if I have contributed to their cause by paying extra money to see the Bronx Zoo Congo Gorilla Forest. If I was able to learn so much from this event, I think tons of people can learn from it too. Anyone whose able to attend the Bronx Zoo, which is anyone because it is free at least one day a week, will be able to see the troubles that different species face and how humans are affecting their lives. Zoos are attended extremely often and do not have to be just for entertainment, they can help to fight ignorance within the average human. People need to understand how the human race is affecting these animals and what we can do to fix it. I think the event can be approved by having these special exhibits, like the Congo Gorilla Forest, at every zoo across the globe. Zoos are attended by families, adults, teenagers, and students daily. Why not act on all of this exposure and educate the general public? Everyone goes to a zoo at least once with their respective school so why not take this time to educate the future generations of the world. Zoos could raise awareness while raising money to help these endangered species. These animals are in danger mostly because of negative human interaction, so why shouldn’t we work as a race to redeem ourselves and save these animals?
I loved this overall experience and I look forward to going to more zoos and more exhibits on endangered species. Zoos are an excellent way to show the public why kind of unique animals exist in other parts of the world. So let’s take this idea and run with it, let’s use more zoos to educate more and more people. I found this event extremely worthwhile and I learned a ton from the zoo and the Congo Gorilla exhibit I attended. I think everyone should check out this exhibit and take the time to read the signs in front of each exhibit to educate themselves on why each species struggles to survive.

Chelsea Ruplin Professor Schwartz
Environmental Studies December 9, 2008

After stressing about time running out before I could get to a community event, I was relieved in last Wednesday’s class when I learned of all the various opportunities that were still available. As I was too paranoid to procrastinate one more day, I attended the discussion on career paths that benefit the environment that evening, Wednesday December 3rd. The discussion panel was hosted by New York University’s Wagner school and was held in the Puck building on Lafayette. The discussion was led by four individuals who formerly attended the Wagner Graduate School of Public Service and now hold jobs whose purposes are to increase environmental awareness and/or improve environmental conditions. The speakers and their respective jobs were: Meredith Bergmann, who assists a NYC film and television company make environmentally-sound decisions, Les Judd, who actually founded his own company called Green Boroughs, Samantha MacBride, who is an administrative official for the state of NY that lobbies for improved waste management methods, and finally Joshua Kleinberg, who works for the NY League of Conservation voters. The discussion between these four accomplished environmental advocates was conducted in a relatively laid back manner. In addition, the audience was comprised mainly of students, which I also liked because as the speakers were also former students, it provoked participation, as no one seemed to be intimidated by anyone in the room.

However, one thing I noticed was the fervor that each panelist possessed toward his or her field. As they shared their work-related and environmental experiences, it was clear that some of them, respectfully of course, disagreed with each other. The most heated and intriguing part of the discussion occurred when Samantha MacBride advocated taking environmental concerns straight to the nation’s capital. As she felt this was the most effective way of making environmental progress, Joshua Kleinberg quickly countered her statement by claiming that it was more realistic to accomplish change on a smaller scale, like a local level. Although neither of the two panelists was wrong, as the statement is based on opinion, I have to agree more with Joshua Kleinberg’s approach. It always seems as though changes are only made in Washington D.C. if the issue gets serious national attention, which can be very difficult to achieve. Therefore, if a concerned group of college students or even a sector of a notable company wants to make a relatively immediate change, it does seem as though starting off with local legislators would be a more effective and fruitful approach. Then if an amendment is made and passed by a local or state government, perhaps it will have more of a chance of being incorporated into the national law spectrum at some point.

Overall, this experience was new to me. Despite the fact that I have attended discussion panels in the past, I have never attended one in relation to environmentally conscious careers. The speakers who interested and inspired me most were Meredith Bergmann and Les Judd. As Bergmann discussed her efforts in making entertainment companies more eco-friendly, my interest was sparked because I realized that was a very effective approach towards making people aware of environmentally friendly behaviors. As large production companies are widely known and constantly in the media, their utilization of “green” methods of operation, such as improved waste disposal (which is one area that Bergmann focuses on), could be very influential as they have the means of becoming widely advertised. My interest also piqued when listening to Les Judd’s description of his company’s mission. After listening to him talk about the break down of his website and its purpose, which is to inform people how “green” certain companies really are, I actually went online at home and checked certain things out for myself. On greenboroughs.com there is a very informative homepage that gives background on Judd himself and the company’s goals and tasks and there are also links that lead to pages on “Green Business Marketing”, “Corporate Green Events”, “Sustainable Living in NYC”, and “Walking Tours”, which I particularly thought was awesome! I am a big fan of guided walking tours, as I think it is a fun way to become enlightened that is more interactive and hands on than simply sitting through a lecture or something of that nature. According to greenborough.com the mission of the walking tour is to show people how “green” businesses operate, how the owners went about making the change, and what the products of “green” companies physically are like. This is a great way to educate, for it allows people to experience something for themselves as opposed to simply taking a person’s word for something.

In conclusion, this discussion panel was definitely informative. As the world is in a state of environmental crisis, actions need to be made towards improving human habits and the condition of the globe. Although this discussion only reached a small handful of people within the NYC community, the knowledge that we acquired from this meeting can be passed on by word of mouth. It is better to start somewhere as opposed to nowhere at all. In addition the same concept that Joshua Kleinberg was trying to relay can be applied to this situation. As it is sometimes easier to start making changes locally as opposed to nationally, the same concept can be applied when trying to spread awareness. It is easier to gather a conference room full of people than a stadium full. However, once some are educated, they can take what they know and spread that information to others. In addition, environmental action is on the rise as NYU and NYC as a whole seem to be making steps towards becoming more “green” and environmentally friendly in their operations.

http://nyc.indymedia.org/images/2006/08/74665.jpg

Link to picture of Samantha MacBride, employee of the NYC Department of Sanitation

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/08/green-boroughs-nyc-sustainability-course.php

Link to picture of a green boroughs add for classes on sustainable living

By: Amanda Sakuma

Last Saturday morning, I did what every other college student living in New York City does – I went to a “Winter Survival Lesson” tutorial offered by park rangers at Prospect Park in Brooklyn. Excited to learn how to “survive the frigid cold weather” and “identify animal tracks,” my friend Craig Cannon and I prepared for a rigorous course on how to master the great out doors while living in one of the most populous cities in the U.S. With Craig and a strong cup of coffee in tow, I made my way off the comfortable island of Manhattan and on to the unmarked territory of Brooklyn.

Apparently climate concerns are subconsciously making their way to the core of everyday New Yorkers. On the train ride to Brooklyn, squished in between an alcohol ad and a preview for the next action packed prime-time television drama, was a posting on climate change. It displayed four people pondering deeply about the effects of climate change as well as their implications. It sends a positive message to stare at while sitting in a crowded subway car, taking special care to avoid eye contact with the people sitting next to you. Stand clear of closing doors please.

Once at Prospect Park, Craig and I proceeded to walk the entire perimeter in search of the meeting place before arriving to our destination. Once there, park officials stared at us blankly when asked about the winter survival lessons – either they were shocked that anyone would be interested in the lessons, or they genuinely had no idea what was going on. Eventually, we were united with Park Ranger Melissa and her seven dwarfs. I found out later that were actually a small version of humans called children, kids for short. Sightings of such a rare breed of human are somewhat uncommon in Manhattan. I considered myself lucky to be in their presence.

For the tour, Craig toted a swanky camera that appeared to have weighed more than a small child (not unlike the ones accompanying us on the tour). Striking up conversation with Melissa as she guided the tour, he was able to learn a great deal about the park ranger. Marissa was a recent graduate student who was using her environmental biology and urban design degrees to enrich the community at the local parks. It was refreshing to hear that a degree in the sciences can take people further than the laboratory and research field. The exciting career field of park rangers had never occurred to me.

I, for one, was too busy marveling at the specimen of children before me to do too much chatting with Melissa. Apparently there exist small children in all boroughs of New York. Fascinating. All bundled appropriately in oversized hats and scarves, the young children made their way through the tour with astounding attention spans and an eagerness to learn. “My favorite bird is a blue bird,” cried out one of my colleagues. He was then able to point one out in the trees after Melissa had guided his attention. I couldn’t help but glance at the field notes that he was tracking on the trip and admire his attention to detail. Any plant or animal that he could name was neatly listed in columns on his notebook in the most impeccable handwriting I had ever seen. He was starting to make me wonder if the group were in fact children and not really short, yet intelligent adults.
I had never been to Prospect Park before, nor had I been on such a tour before. I’m glad that Craig’s 500-pound zoom lens digital camera was there to document my every step or else I would have forgotten everything about it entirely. I’m not sure if the children were too distracting, or if the information shared by Marissa was genuinely uninteresting, but I did not get much out of the adventure. My book of notes that I toted around only contains quotes from the kids that I thought were entertaining (my favorite being the dialogue on city birds vs. silly birds outlined in Craig’s blog entry. Check it out, it’s funny). I also have a life like drawing of a squirrel from when we were instructed to sketch the wildlife around us.

What I did take away from the event was what the children offered me. I am genuinely impressed with how attentive the kids were. They already had a firm grasp on the concepts of hibernation and migration, and they were more than willing to actively participate in the event. While admiring a flock of Canadian Geese, a personal wildlife favorite of Craig Cannon, the young girl wearing the Spiderman jacket interjected into Marissa’s speech saying, “Geese! They’re heading south because it’s cold in Canada.” Marissa, taken aback by Spiderwoman’s comment, was quick to congratulate her on her intellect. Inside, I wanted to give her a big high five. However, the hawk-like glares from their chaperones deterred me from doing so.

By the end, Craig seemed sincerely upset that we never in fact learned how to “identify animal tracks” in the “frigid cold temperatures.” Apparently the course was not meant to outline human’s capacity towards winter survival, but rather animals’ survival skills. I admit, I was disappointed as well that I may never know how to survive the frigid cold temperatures, the experience was worthwhile. What I did learn was a great deal on the importance of environmental education for young people. The event displayed the children’s knowledge and interest in nature. There are plenty of other things they could have been doing on a Saturday morning, like watching cartoons on TV, but instead, they were outside and learning about the environment. It gave me a heightened appreciation of the city parks in New York and the resources that they offer. Kids are able to grow up in a large city and still have a sense and appreciation towards nature. I hope events like this happen more often to offer children more opportunities to become involved and invested in the environment of their community. If so, I will once again shamelessly attend.

Taryn Gregory

Environmental Studies 12:30-1:45

On November 30, at 1 pm, I went to Prospect Park in Brooklyn to go on a walk to learn about forest pathology from the Urban Park Rangers. We all met up outside the Audubon Center. The group mostly consisted of middle aged or older couples and parents with their kids. The tone of the event was more in the theme of nature appreciation with a little bit of education. It was more about interacting with nature than learning about it. It was aimed towards people that appreciate the aesthetic appeal of nature.

The event itself consisted of us taking a walking tour of the park and discussing the diseases that can harm nature and mar our appreciation of it. The ranger told us of diseases that are common primarily in the United States, such as the American Chestnut Blight or Anthracnose Diseases, which is particularly problematic in New York City. We continued to walk through the park, examining the barren Cherry Trees and admiring nature in the middle of an urban environment. As part of this, we took a closer look at some of the problems of these trees, examining ones with black knots and one with a bacterial canker that might have to be cut down. Because of the cold, there was fairly little animal activity.

Our group was relatively quiet, listening attentively to the ranger when he talked, but really just enjoying the park on a cold winter day. Occasionally, one of the older participants would ask a question about the active prevention being done or how to treat the illness, but mostly people were quiet. Generally, we were all enjoying the walking part of the tour much more than the informational aspect.

For me, this was a new experience. I like to go on nature walks, but I’d never even heard of forest pathology. The true learning experience for me was being able to identify sick trees by sight. I thought the experience was fairly informative. It was more of an informational walk than anything else; while it did teach me some things about tree and plant health, it didn’t really peak my interest or spark further inquiry. Overall, I found the experience okay. There was a lot more that could have been discussed and there was very little discussion about the impact on the environment due to time. For a person who likes to understand what they see in nature, this would have been more worthwhile.

On Thursday, December 4th, I attended a performance with two friends that was held at 7:30pm at The Tank, which is a small theater located at 217 East 42nd street. Ann Keilson and Collaborators presented the show and it was an alternative approach to exploring the origins of life and the process of evolution. The venue is a non-profit arts presenter and serves as the host for a wide-range of productions. The Tank’s mission is to allow artists with new ideas to showcase their work in an inexpensive, resourceful, shared and hospitable way. The Tank aims to help the younger generation create a following for budding artists, live shows and community dialogue. Nine college graduates founded The Tank in 2003 with the desire to seize a space of New York City that is dedicated solely to the cultivation of artists without the issues of money, competition and exclusivity taking priority. Over the past five years, the organization has grown from being a group of volunteers to utilizing a paid staff with support from foundations and government.
The show took place on the floor with a circle of chairs lined up against the walls of the theater for the audience to sit in. With only about 35 people in attendance, the show felt personal and organic. There were three women who danced and another two people to assist with the lighting and musical aspects of the show. With a total of five people contributing to the presentation, it was low-key and modest and the emphasis was entirely focused on the movements of the dancers. The lighting remained dim throughout the show, which added a sense of drama, passion and intensity. Each woman wore a simple outfit that had no attention grabbing accessories or colors. This helped direct the focus to their facial expressions and body language. Their dance began with crawling and creeping motions and each woman appeared to be dancing on her own with no relation to the others. Gradually, the movements transitioned into some small steps and lunges and then finally into full-fledged strides and walking. In between some of the movements, the woman did some kicking and jumping that seemed a bit out of place with the majority of actions in the performance. The dance lasted for 45 minutes and by the end, the women were visibly drained, which showed how strenuous the movements were for that long of a period. When the dance was finished, the audience was welcomed to stay and chat with the dancers and hang out. We spoke with one of the dancers to gain a sense of her personal feelings about the performance and what it meant to her. She clarified that the sometimes erratic movements within the dance were supposed to represent the evolution of insects and how many different kinds of creatures developed that had different ways of moving. The dancer also explained that some of the motions were meant to symbolize the gradual extinction of certain species and how it can be random and inexplicable. She was very forthcoming with her ideas and thoughts about the dance and the conversation brought a nice close to the experience.
I had never been to such a small and up close dance production with that sort of a message and theme behind it so this experience was completely new to me. The event showed me a brand new way to look at evolution, a process that had always seemed so straightforward and scientific to me, that involved movements instead of facts and data. Although I enjoy watching dance performances and dancing for fun, I do not think that I would want to attempt what these women did with their thoughtout dance and message. I am not sure the show has value in the academic community but it was a worthwhile event to go to in order to witness a new form of expression. The purpose of The Tank and the events it hosts are positive contributions to the community and make it possible for artists to get their message out to the public in a forum that is personal and inviting. Since the show was meant as a way to convey the artists’ ideas and viewpoint with room for interpretation, I believe it was successful in getting the desired message across. It was plain to see that the women were moving in ways that they felt represented animal and human evolution. The shows that take place at The Tank are meant to put out ideas in an affordable way so in order to broaden the impact, there would need to be a larger venue that has the same goals and values that would have the capacity to host more people in the audience.
I enjoyed the event because it was a brand new experience and I went to it with friends, which made it easier to talk about after the show was finished. It was helpful to hear some perspectives that were different than mine from my friends and also from the dancer that we spoke to when the dance was over. The venue itself was intriguing and it’s history and mission added to the overall experience. I think the purpose of The Tank is helpful in generating new ideas and giving a voice to young artists.

On a rainy December evening in Midtown a trio of dancers began to perform “Forward” at the Chashama Theatre on 217 E 42nd Street. Inside the warm, dimly lit theatre was not the regular Times Square crowd nor the flashy Broadway scene, but rather an intimate gathering of New York’s modern dance enthusiasts. It was the sort of place you had to search for- and once you found the Chashama, you immediately became part of an underground dance movement. The chairs were arranged in an intimate circle with about twenty to thirty guests in attendance.
The show was put on by a non-profit arts presenter called “the TANK” founded in April 2003 by nine college graduates who wanted to bring the arts to the people at an affordable price. Their mission statement reads “The Tank seeks to cultivate a new generation of audience for life performances, civic discourse, and the work of emerging artists.”

But, wait, some of you might be wondering- isn’t this supposed to be an environmental community event report and not a review of a small performance? Well, “Forward” by Ana Keilson and Collaborators explored the topic of evolution. In true Darwin homage, Keilson explores the process of evolution from the animal kingdom to the emergence of humans. Her movement vocabulary simulated the movement of bugs, bipeds, and bodies in various stages of development. In an interview of Keilson afterwards, she conveyed that her goal was to show a simultaneous evolution of different species with a specific focus on Neanderthals. She wanted to portray this as a long-drawn out process to symbolize the billions of years over which evolution has taken place. The idea of “change” for Keilson was an important concept to base her movement off of. The natural change of physical forms in the evolution of animals was important to Keilson.

As the show began, three bodies writhed on the floor as the sounds of a distant rainforest began to permeate the space. The room was stuffy almost reminiscent of a wet and dark rainforest with light appearing intermittedley. As the lights turned on and off, appeared and reappeared, it made me wonder if we are still in the dark about evolution? If appearance of light hinted at a beginning of understanding of evolution- do we have further to go?
The dancers wore muted Earth tones ranging from mauve, faded yellow, and a dirt brown. At times the dancers would stop in unison and scan the audience- almost as if our participation was interactive. Our watching was intimate- we took place in this process of evolution. Could Keilson be hinting at an anthropogenic cause that has effected evolution? Maybe.
While watching the choreography among the three individuals it is easy to observe the process of natural selection. At first the three dancers are all mimicking each other: crawling, writhing, kicking, and isolating movements. Then one seems to develop wings while another doesn’t- and at the end of the two-minute sequence both have developed wings. This begs the question: what are the three things must a trait have in order to be chosen for natural selection? It has to be advantageous, inheritable, and there must be variable difference in population. The wings were clearly advantageous in this development. This wasn’t the only instance that natural selection was practiced for the dancers: the process was repeated for the development of the backbone or vertebrae, the tail of the fish, and the transition from quadruped to biped.
Although evolution is an organic process, the movements tended to stray away from any fluidity. It almost seemed as if the movement of these organisms were processed and calculated. The intermittent kicks were all to rehearsed and the movement vocabulary seemed to be lacking an diversity. It took away from the concept!
Overall, it was an interesting event that elicited discussion about the process of evolution- and how far different species have come. It was fascinating to understand the concept behind the movement. So much of evolution is misunderstood and misused, and I felt that evolution can be showed as a beautiful progression. I enjoyed attending this event and it is definitely an experience I will never forget.
For information on the tank visit: www.thetanknyc.org

Cheng Yu
Community Event

I went to a lunch held at Furman Hall on Dec, 4th. It was a meeting where the speaker, Maria Lotz, talked about innovating products. When I got there, all the food was set up on the table. The speaker welcomed each visitor with a kind smile. When every one sat down in comfort and started to talk, the speaker suddenly informed us about something that gave us a jump. She pointed at a webcam which was pointing at us, and said it was directly connected to Germany. That meant, people from headquarter were looking at us right at that moment. After some loose jokes we finally got into the mood of receiving the speech.
Maria started the speech with an interesting experiment. She pulled out two books and set a bow full of water in front them. She put both books in it and started to rip one of them. In the end, that book became nothing but a pile of garbage. However, the other one stayed intact, and with a little wipe it was as new as before. According to her explanation, the book was the first book in German that was made up of plastic. This unique characteristic makes it waterproof as well as fun to read. She went on explaining how this product will not lose its quality even when being recycled for several times. Maria defined that as down recycling, and told us many recycles, such as recycling of paper, are down recycling. The reason for that is because when being recycled once, the paper can no longer be used as paper. This is also called cradle to grave. However, plastic is different; they can remain their original state after the process. This, she called, is cradle to cradle. It was being inspired by cherry blossom which produces no waste even when all the petals fall to the ground.
With that being done, she Maria went further with the idea of cradle to cradle. She said it was the idea of designing something with its side effects and whole life cycle in mind. It has to make sure that the product can enter a cycle of eternity; can be used again and again without degrading. She generalized it into 4Rs; reduce, reuse, recycle, and regulate. Product designed according to the cradle to cradle theory use materials that are non toxic as well as recyclable in biological cycles.
After an overview of the differences between cradle to grave and cradle to cradle, she started to talk about all the new products that were being made using this idea. The first example was a chair, “Mirra”, made by Herman Miller; 96% of it was made up of cradle to cradle materials. However, the company was aware that most consumers don't care about eco-friendly product, so they did not include this element as part of the promotion. The second product was Rohner Textiles, which produces textile that rot in 100 days if being thrown into soil. Tetra packs invented plastics for packaging that can be separate from the card board once being used. The plastic can be recycled, and therefore, it changes a non cradle to cradle product to one. She mentioned many other renovating companies until she got to the most important one, Loick Biowerstoffe. This company produces things such as forks and spoons that can rot in soil, as well as children’s toys made from corn and water. After the summery of the companies, she ended her presentation.
Many people asked questions about the new products. The main ones addressed the doubts of whether these products will be widely used. The expensive prices are definitely a problem. If most people can not afford it, the products will not help the environment. People also questioned about the infrastructure of these products. Will they be recycled properly? How will the companies retrieve the products after being used? Many of the questions Maria could not answer because companies need to keep much information a secret.
The meeting was very interesting. The speaker was able to create a very comfortable atmosphere for everyone. The experiment was able to get people into the presentation mood immediately. In addition, I could see that all the innovating products really got people excited. During this short meeting, I learned many interesting innovations people around the world are inventing. Their main purpose was to incorporate eco friendly materials. I also learned that most items aren’t recycled the way I used to believe. I didn't realize the quality of the paper reduces as it is being recycled again and again until it becomes a total waste. People should, therefore, be worried about the amount of goods we are producing each day. I also realized how hard it is to push these products out onto the market. Their prices scare many middle and lower class consumers away.
In my opinion, I think the speech was interesting to hear. However, it’s hard to relate to it because it did not raise a lot of awareness. It’s sad, but most people are selfish. They only want to get eco friendly products when they have nothing to lose, or when they realize how their lives will be damaged if they don't use it. The speech didn't address a lot of problems cradle to grave products create in the world. I think she should first create this sense of urgency, and then go into cradle to cradle products. In addition, many visitors went there to learn about these new ideas, in order to go into that field themselves. However, most of them were students and people who were already well informed. Therefore, I think, though the speech was rather effective it should be able to reach the ears of many others who are not that well informed.

For my second community event report, I went to the New York Botanical Garden located in the Bronx towards the end of November 16th. To get there, I rode the 4 Train near the Union Square Station at 14th street from Carlyle to the Lehman College Station/ Bedford Park Blvd. The trip took approximately 45 minutes but was well worth my time for I was about to see some spectacular display at this floral paradise located in the Bronx. That Sunday when I got there, there was a huge line of people waiting to get in. It took at least a 15 minute wait to enter, however this did not deter me from enjoying myself. I had to make sure that I get money’s worth of sightseeing since I had all day free from school and other obligations.

That said, Garden is not really a garden, instead it’s a huge plot of land (200 acres I believe?) that is drenched in all different types of plant life. There are lots of space for you to explore and literally enough flowers and floral to keep you occupied for the entire afternoon. In addition, there are also different animal life that reside in the garden. You can see all different types of small animals, ranging from tiny birds, to amphibians, to water turtles, to lizards, etc. I’ve heard from some of the people who work there that even beavers and other small mammals live there.

This non-profit organization puts a lot of work in some of its displays/exhibits. Perhaps my favorite one of them all is the Japanese chrysanthemum exhibit called Kiku. At this display exhibit numerous types of chrysanthemum from all over the world, mostly Japanese and some Korean. Exhibit Kiku was an very informative display of the different types of Japanese chrysanthemum technique and cultivation. In addition, there are tons of information located all over the chrysanthemum exhibit that teaches you about different types of chrysanthemum and how to tell them apart. Believe me; it was pretty easy since there was so many of them. In addition to the floras on display, there were also Japanese clothing (kimonos), Japanese art (hanging scrolls), folding screens which were used as decoration and practical purposes, and an assortment of different Japanese objects.

Another one of my favorite exhibits is the orchid exhibit (by the way, the botanical garden offers these exhibits all year long so you can see them anytime you want). There were hundreds of countless orchids that are housed by so many exotic trees. This exhibit is located in a gigantic Greenhouse that you can probably forget that you’re visiting the garden in the middle of autumn. In addition, this exhibit gives you tons of information regarding different species of orchids and which ones are best for growing at home, just in case any visitors are interested in growing their own.

One of the most interesting and perhaps natural areas in this conservatory is probably the 40 acres of forest. The forest is amazing and easy to get lost in. This might sound sad, but I grew up in New York City, so I’ve never actually been to the woods and let alone got lost in the forest. So visiting this wooded area was definitely one of the more exciting parts of my trip here. In addition, the cascading wall fall located here was simply breath taking.

Another one of the “services” that the garden offered was identifying plant life for visitors who are oblivious to any type of vegetation. You just have to find someone who worked there or a botanist who’ll help you identify any plant that you pick up on the way (please don’t go around picking up flowers from exhibits, it is not recommended). The New York Botanical Garden also give free workshops for those who would like to learn the art of gardening and cultivating plant life. For those looking for Christmas gifts, they have a gift shop on premises that offers literature regarding botany, toys for the kids, live plants for households, and the strangest of all, they even have plant inspired jewelry! If you get bored of the great outdoors, this place also has a bookstore/library where you can learn about even more plants and the history of New York.

Overall, my trip to this Botanical Garden was positive. There's nothing like walking through a area filled with plant and animal life and pretending that you are not in the heart of one of the most urbanized cities of the world. It was great afternoon, well spent to say the least, just wandering around in a garden and getting lost. It was basically like an adventure where we had a map and had to find every single exhibit/garden on the map because we were pretty anal people and because we are poor college students who wanted to get our money’s worth. My only regret is not going on a Wednesday which would have saved me a few dollars since Wednesdays are free.

By visiting this garden, it has opened my eyes about why we should conserve plant and wildlife. Nothing is as beautiful as natural beauty and getting out of the city once in a while was such a stress reliving experience that I might go back again on a spare afternoon. This New York Botanical Garden was trying glorying natural that perhaps we should learn from it and try harder to conserve natural and enjoy its intrinsic beauty.

Robb LoCurto
Leah Schwartz
Enviro Studies
12/10/08

Due to an intense motivation to do well on other certain Environmental Studies projects such as the second Lab Report, I was left with little time to complete a community event when I realized a walk through the city could provide me with ecological findings. My main focus was to take the opportunities that I had walking to and from class or where ever I was going to really take notice of what animal life the city has to offer. Sometimes I would devote my time looking up, trying to find different species of birds other than the indigenous pigeon. I’ve seen hawks, blue jays, cardinals, sparrows, and many other different types of birds, all in different trips. What did it teach me? Not a whole lot, considering they are birds and I’m not going to major in anything involving birds, or environmental studies for that matter! Anyway, here’s a picture of one of the bird species I saw flying up above the skyscrapers:


Also on my walks, I’ve noticed the different colors of squirrels that seem to enjoy getting in our way as we rush to our next destination. Being from Long Island, squirrels scurrying about is nothing new to me, however, back home they are much more afraid of people as opposed to here. When I tried to approach both black squirrels and grey squirrels, I’ve picked up on that fact that the black squirrels are much more enticed by human activity, whereas the grey squirrels portray themselves in a Long Island type fashion.



Above is a picture of a black squirrel, probably after a nice encounter with a human. It is very interesting to step back and take account of what other species may be thinking of us as humans. Are they thinking anything? Do they know that in most cases they are merely forms of entertainment for people with superior forms of knowledge? Do they view us as entertainment or as pure hunters? I believe the mindset of a specific species is dependent on which type of species it is. A small squirrel’s mind will be racing to the point of insanity of it feels threatened by a much larger species (a human for example), but may have a sense of clarity and vision when dealing with insects. It all depends on the mindset of a species whether or not it will be intimidated. One way or another, that process is what determines which squirrels or birds will find their way to me as I approach, and which ones will be threatened and intimidated and run away.
If this community event did one thing, it enhanced my interest in studying the mind and the different possibilities of how to control it. If we all learn how to control our minds and rid ourselves of unnecessary worry, maybe some day other species, like the timid squirrel, will emulate this action and our environment will be better for it. All that from a couple of hawks and squirrels, go figure.

On Saturday November 29th I took a drive up the New Jersey turnpike to spend a day at the Liberty Science Center. The Science Center is about a thirty minute drive from my home town but I hadn’t been there since I attended as part of a class trip in the 6th grade. I was surprised by how much information I learned over the course of this trip, my memories of the Liberty Science Center where very colorful and cartoonish, I remembered the games we played and the interactive exhibits that served as indoor playgrounds but don’t actual remember gaining any knowledge from the trip. Upon entering the Building it seemed very familiar but much less overwhelming and majestic. As I walked through the exhibits the first thing I noticed was that it was definitely kid friendly and a lot of exhibits where designed solely for children but at the same time their was a lot of knowledge for an older audience that was presented in a fun way.
height="297"/>
I took my ten year old cousin Dale with me because he had never been (but mainly because I didn’t want to go by myself and I couldn’t convince any friends to take the trip). It turned out that having him come with me was a good learning experience for myself, I got to see how he interacted with the exhibits and imagine how I had experienced some of the same things almost a decade ago. My cousins favorite exhibit was one called “Eat or Be Eaten”. The exhibit was all about the relationships between predators and prey, it showed how different animals use different tactics to avoid be eaten and the tactics some predators use to capture their prey. A member of the Science Centers staff was even on hand to show off some of the animals up close (my cousin was much braver than I was, or am for that matter. So I stepped back and let him have his fun).
The exhibit that was the main reason for this trip was called “Our Hudson Home” which as the title states was about the Hudson River. The exhibit didn’t touch on the Blue Crab or Zebra Mussels specifically, nor did it talk about biomagnification and toxins but it did touch on many of the problems facing the Hudson River. As the exhibit showed the Hudson River serves as home to a very wide range of animals such as horseshoe crabs, Star Fish, and oysters (which they had a project for to try and raise their population in the Hudson). The part of the exhibit we spent the most time at (since my 10 year old cousin was the one designating how much time was spent at each exhibit) was a miniature model of the Hudson River. It was basically an area where kids could control water flows and see the effects different amounts of water and man made objects can effect the environment (or just play with water and sand).
While at the science center we also took time out to watch one of the centers Imax movies, which I had done as kid. I don’t really remember the show I watched the last time I was there, I think it was about stars? Maybe something about the north pole? I can’t recall, I just remember it being really cool so I figured we would check it out. The show we saw was all about ancient Egypt (pharaohs, mummies, sphinx) and was narrated by mummies, which was again another part of the center that was geared toward the entertainment of children but once you got over the fact that mummies were speaking to you there was a lot of interesting information packed into the show.
Overall it was a good experience. It was a little expensive (especially when compared to my free zoo trip) and a little out of the way, especially if one was trying to get there from the city, but I would definitely recommend all to go. I felt The Science Center did a really god job of reaching its target audience, it’s a very family friendly environment that could keep children of all ages entertained for hours while still providing parents and chaperones with lots of fun facts and interesting exhibits.
Mostly I enjoyed experiencing something as an adult that I had experienced as a child, and seeing the difference in mind sets and ways of thinking; searching for the information and fun facts, when as I child I remember searching for the first place we could run around or climb on something. I cant say for certain that my little cousin took too much knowledge from the trip (except a fun fact about snapping turtles being able to live over 100 years old that he told just about everyone we saw after the trip) but I can say that he did have a lot of fun, and that was what I think is the main purpose of the center. I think it is (or should be) just as, if not more so important that kids leave the Liberty Science Center with the knowledge that they can have fun with science and that it spans beyond the classroom and textbooks and touches some aspect or anything that interests them. They may not be able to teach kids about all of natures issues that they will face throughout their life time but they can get kids seeing science in a different way and spark some interest in the field.

Benjamin Ruiz

On Thursday, December 4th, I had the pleasure of attending one of the most informative discussions I have ever been to yet. Van Jones greeted a modest audience of about 30 people at the Lower East Side's "Bluestockings" radical bookstore to talk about his critically-acclaimed new book, The Green Collar Economy. Throughout his lecture, Jones detailed his vision of how to solve both America's economical and environmental problems. He opened his discussion with what he saw as the three most fatal buttresses of the US's economic foundation: 1) The US economy can survive solely on production; 2) The US economy is based on borrowing instead of building; 3) The US economy can run forever on ecological destruction.
Jones used these points to structure his lecture, describing how each ideology has lead to the current economic and environmental crisis faced by the US. He touched upon points ranging from the potentially counter-production dangerous "eco-chic" movement to the dilemmas of consumerism. Weaved throughout discourse of poverty, racism, and exploitation, Jones's essential thesis was the the environment can be saved by improving the lives of America's working-class. The "eco-chic" movement that equates saving the environment to buying a brand-new Prius is dangerous in that it, according to Jones, imposes a sort of eco-apartheid (Jones wittily refers to Wholefoods and "Whole-Paycheck"). The answer to both problems comes from the development of his book's namesake: a "Green Collar Economy." For Jones, this means training all the unemployed automobile factory workers in Detroit to make wind-turbines; employing thousands of working-class Americans to install solar panels not just on the houses of people who can afford them, but on apartment buildings and government-subsidized housing. We must start greening the city before we start greening the penthouses - We must ensure that saving the environment and the economy means eco-equity; means equal employment, fair pay, and rewarding working conditions. As he reminds us, "everything in the fight against global warming is a job."
As a frequent lecture-attendee, I found Jones's presentation enlightening and informative. As he was wrapping up, it was clear that he sparked inspiration in the crowd. Jones's dual plan is realistic, practical, and most importantly, critically rethinks the way that America operates its economic and environmental policies. I was very impressed when he noted that we cannot simply change the way we power (meaning energy, etc) current society, that we need to rework the powers that operate in society. This aspect made him a radical - I know that the word economy sends shivers down my spine because I know that so much depends on the United States completely rethinking its relationship with capitalism and industry. I was even more surprised when Jones made a point to mention what the "environment" and "going green" means to Native Americans - being that massive amounts of our nuclear waste is being stored on their lands, as well as their lands being critical locations for wind and solar energy. I think that in order for this country to move in the right direction both environmentally and economically, we must consider and include the rights and sovereignty of all peoples, not only those financially able to have a substantial political voice. For me, Jones outlines what seems a workable and radical solution. Hey, I bought his book and I've even started reading it!