
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
 
<title>Brighter Green</title>
<link>http://www.brightergreen.org/</link>
<description>Brighter Green</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 07:23:17 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<copyright>Copyright 2006 brightergreen.org</copyright>


<item>
<title><![CDATA[
Denaturing, the Fiscal Crisis and Nature's Rights
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/forestsstanding.jpg" alt="Forest" height="121" width="96" />
<p>Still standing...soon to have standing, too</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
OK, so you think &#036;700 billion is a lot to stem (rescue or bailout) the financial crisis, an infusion of cash that may not even stop the stock slide. How about &#036;2 to &#036;5 trillion. No, that's not a stock market number, but a nature number. It's the price put on the loss to the global economy <em>each year</em> from the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7662565.stm">loss of the world's forests</a>. Forests, of course, provide a range of "services", among them sequestering carbon dioxide (slowing global warming) and protecting soil fertility -- not to mention providing homes for millions of species, including us. Ecuador seems to have gotten the message: nature matters. Its government, though, isn't seeking to put a price on nature, but to extend rights to it. <br />
<br />
This Sunday, Ecuadorians go to the polls to vote on a <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/24/equador.conservation">new constitution that would give binding legal rights to forests, islands, rivers, and even air</a>. Opinion surveys show the referendum is supported by more than half of Ecuador's people and should be enacted into law. It will be the first such statute enacted in a constitution in the world. So what will it mean? The possibilities are fascinating and compelling, but largely unknown. American environmental lawyer <a href=" http://www.idealog.us/2006/08/thomas_linzey_l.html">Thomas Linzey</a>, who worked with Ecuador's government to craft the constitution, says even he isn't quite sure: "No one knows what will happen [if the referendum goes in favor of new rights for nature] because there are no examples of how this works in the real world...A lot of people will be watching what happens."
]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:41:33 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=59
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=59
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Post post debate
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/chinafordebate.jpg" alt="China environmental crisis" height="95" width="139" />
<p>OK, you can't see it from Alaska, but still....</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Well, the pundits and analysts and partisans and more than a few hacks have weighed in on the Biden vs. Palin debate. But what I've heard less about is what we <em>didn't</em> hear issue-wise. Not only in the answers, but in the questions, too, asked by moderator <a href="http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/gwen">Gwen Ifill</a>, of whom I'm a fan. For instance, I don't recall even one question that dealt with China...at all. Maybe because you can't see it from Alaska? But I'd liked to have heard asked, What does China's rise mean for the U.S.? For the world? For the Chinese? For the global economy, the global environment, global warming, and global food security? Well, that would have been one <em>long</em> question. Nonetheless, <a href="http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10766740">here's a recent piece from the Economist</a> on an aspect of China that rarely gets much attention, from debaters or non-debaters alike: the slow, but seemingly steady, growth of the animal rights movement. Here's <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/06/19/green.wenbo">another from CNN</a> on something that's also usualy below the radar: the burgeoning Chinese environmental movement and the leadership of young people in it.<br />
<br />
I also didn't hear Biden or Palin or Ifill asking or answering questions about equity, in a truly global sense, such as: how do the U.S.' actions (and inactions) -- collective and individual, policy and practice -- affect the billions of people living in the global south? And (OK, it's a two-parter) how should they in future? Read <a href="http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200805/lol.asp#foot">this piece from a recent Sierra magazine</a> about how the rich world's greenhouse gas emissions weigh on those in poor countries, and the ecological price of industrialized nations' extraction of natural resources. Hint: it's higher than the &#036;700 billion price tag for the just-passed-by-the U.S. Congress bailout bill. That was discussed (it's hard to say it was truly debated) on the stage in St. Louis.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 05 Oct 2008 11:23:18 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=58
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=58
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Palin-drone
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/wolvespalin.jpg" alt="Wolves" height="113" width="150" />
<p>On the ground</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
No, I'm not attempting to provide pre-debate punditry on the likely outcome of the Palin-Biden VP-wanna be match-up on October 2nd. What I am doing, though, is observing an interesting strain in the Palin coverage: recognition by the mainstream media and advocates that Palin's support for aerial hunting of wolves in Alaska is a salient (pollster and policy-speak) issue with voters. Palin has not only supported the air-shooting as a way of increasing the numbers of moose and caribou available to hunters (including her). She's also been said to have participated in the shooting herself. We know she hunts moose and caribou: we've seen the photos (and the bloody snow).<br />
<br />
The latter point may or may not be accurate, but the details of the hunt are: wolves are tracked from small airplanes, chased until they tire and then the plane hovers low to the ground or even lands and the exhausted wolves are shot at close range. This has outraged animal rights advocates and environmentalists for years, and has been rejected repeatedly by Alaska voters. I have heard Palin defend the aerial hunts, with some rather vague phrasing, lampooning the concerns of Easterners for the wolves in one setting and in another saying of the hunt, with a hint of a smile, "You've got to do what you have to do." <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
And Palin's also supported a &#036;150 "bounty" on Alaska's wolves, paid when a wolf foreleg is presented. But consider this: the issue of extreme cruelty to animals has become a campaign issue. Palin's support for the sharpshooter-staffed wolf drones has been used as a way of defining her character, her values and her priorities. <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-steinem4-2008sep04,0,1290251.story">Feminist icon Gloria Steinem</a> includes it as a building block in her case for why Palin's the "wrong woman" for the job she seeks. Defenders of Wildlife, a generally mainstream environmental group, has created <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/01/anti-palin-wolf-ad-campai_n_130744.html">"Brutal", an ad focused solely on Palin's support for the aerial wolf</a> hunts as a reason she shouldn't be the U.S.' veep. On some measures, it's one of the most successful ads of the campaign to date. That's fascinating. The ad buy for "Brutal" is expanding into key battleground states. That's something, too. Could animal rights be the new wedge issue? <br />
<br />
Wolves do seem to get people's attention. A few years back I wrote a series of boiler-plate emails to legislators in Wyoming about that state's weak plan to protect wolves once federal protections ended (a development recently put on hold by a federal judge). I'd seen wolves -- fascinating, beautiful, extraordinary -- in Yellowstone National Park and wanted to speak up for them. One of the legislators forwarded my email to one of his most anti wolf constituents and as a result, I received a series of email flames: pictures of "prey" animals supposedly ravaged by wolves; a loopy email comparing what wolves do to the environment to the dangers to a woman like me from a rapist lurking in Central Park; and a charge that I wasn't a real American (talk about sterotyping Eastcoasters). Even when I said "enough" he persisted. This zeal even made the news in Wyoming (<a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-15857377.html">I was interviewed</a>), and I got a letter of apology from the Governor's Chief of Staff. <br />
<br />
And now we have wolves and Palin becoming a theme, perhaps even a voting issue, in a national election. That is progress, although ending the aerial hunts for all time would be, too. Whether or not Palin can see Russia (and the wolves who live there) from Alaska.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:03:59 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=57
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=57
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Amazon Update
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/amazonfrom air.jpg" alt="Amazon from air" height="84" width="126" />
<p>Look now</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
In August, the Amazon forest was being cleared at <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/world/americas/30briefs-AMAZONLOGGIN_BRF.html?scp=1&sq=Amazon%20deforestation&st=cse">nearly twice the level of July</a>, according to the Brazilian government. That's a 228 percent <em>increase</em> over a year ago. The government, chagrined, says local elected officials are letting loggers, ranchers, and large-scale soy farmers cut the forest as a way of increasing votes. Environmentalists say the rapid rise in deforestation is being driven by the rapid rise in food prices, making soy and cattle even more remunerative. It's cheaper and easier to clear new forest than reclaim and rehabilitate already deforested land. And so the chopping, clearing, and carbon-releasing goes on.<br />
<br />
What was new and surprising in the recent news was that the <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUKN29399100">Brazilian government itself topped a list</a>, prepared by Brazil's environment ministry, of the 100 biggest illegal Amazon loggers. Strange, but apparently true. The illegal clearing has taken place on land controlled by the government agency, Incra, that's responsible for parceling out land to the (many) landless poor. Large landowners responded to the news by charging that small landholders, too, are destroying the forest. The government counters that land titles are falsified regularly and indigenous peoples shunted aside, or bought off cheaply by cattle, soy and timber barons. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
"It was a terrible result," Brazil's new environment minister Carlos Minc said about the August rise in Amazon deforestation. Of the top 100 list, he vowed: "We're going to blow all 100 of them out of the water and then some." Stay tuned.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:35:22 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=56
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=56
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Green for All - September 27th
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/greenforall.jpg" alt="Green for all logo" height="105" width="200" />
<p>Green day</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Not too long ago, I had the pleasure of moderating a panel at a <a href="http://www.internationaldonors.org">Grantmakers without Borders</a> conference in San Francisco on which the estimable <a href="http://www.greenforall.org/about-us/staff">Van Jones</a> was a speaker. As many will know, Van is a visionary, as well as a practical advocate and doer in the field of environmental justice. I've been a fan of Van's for years, but the panel was the first time I got to meet him and hear him speak live. He didn't disappoint, laying out a compelling challenge along with an agenda for creating, on a basis of urgency, a green economy that not only mitigates climate change but also provides good jobs and secures human rights for the U.S.' most marginalized communities. On Saturday, September 27th, the organization Van founded last year, <a href="http://www.greenforall.org/about-us">Green For All</a>, is coordinating a national day of action in support of <a href="http://www.greenjobsnow.com/about">"Green Jobs Now."</a> (The timing, the day after the first presidential debate -- yep, it's on -- is not incidental.) Events are being organized across the country in both "red" states and "blue." Click <a href="http://events.greenjobsnow.com/greenforall/calendars/show">here</a> to see what's going on and to participate. Al Gore's <a href="http://www.wecansolveit.org">"We"</a> climate campaign is also a partner. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
Here's some from the Green Jobs Now manifesto, which, like Van Jones himself, makes so much sense (and stay tuned: Jones has a book coming out in early October, his first, on green collaring the U.S. economy):<br />
<br />
<blockquote>We are ready to tackle the climate crisis by building a green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty.<br />
<br />
Green Jobs Now is a National Day of Action that will empower everyday people to stage hundreds of grassroots events throughout the country. We will have a special focus on low-income communities, communities of color and indigenous people. This will send a message to our leaders that, when it comes to creating green jobs for a more sustainable economy, PEOPLE ARE READY!<br />
<br />
Right now, there are millions of people ready to work and countless jobs to be done that will strengthen our economy at home. There are thousands of buildings that need to be weatherized, solar panels to be installed, and wind turbines to be erected. There are communities that need local and sustainable food and people ready to farm the crops....</blockquote>
]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:26:45 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=55
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=55
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Taking the Climate (and Forests) to Lunch
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/climatefood.jpg" alt="parched earth and trees" height="117" width="113" />
<p>Not on the plate - yet</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Forests are getting more attention in the global discussion of climate change, and how to address it. They should. Intact tropical forests are, despite decades of campaigning on their behalf, still being cleared at alarming rates in the Amazon, in southeast Asia, and in the Congo Basin of central Africa. A lunch earlier this week hosted by <a href="http://www.adpartners.org">Avoided Deforestation Partners</a> (ADP) sought to draw attention to the need for, in particular, U.S. leadership to avoid further forest destruction as a central element of climate policy. It featured Nobel peace laureates <a href="http://www.wecansolveit.org">Al Gore</a> and <a href="http://www.greenbeltmovement.org">Wangari Maathai</a> (Brighter Green colleague) in conversation with veteran news anchor Dan Rather about the role and value of forests in slowing global warming and supporting billions of livelihoods. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
Given the participants, the discussion was sure to be lively and timely. And substantive. Clearing forests produces up to 20 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, more as organizers noted, than the whole global transport sector (about 14 percent). But what, I wondered, would they serve for lunch? How climate friendly would the food be? Agriculture may be responsible for 30 percent of GHG emissions...and livestock 18 percent. Might the food be vegetarian and local (walking the climate walk?) Alas, no. It was (any guesses?) chicken. While chicken surely isn't a no GHG food, it's increasingly seen as the "meat of choice" for omnivores reducing climate footprints. This is the case even though chicken manure emits methane and nitrous oxide, and producing all that feed for the billions of chickens consumed each year in the U.S. and globally has multiple, and significant, forest and climate impacts. <br />
<br />
The clearing of intact forests for huge plantings of soy, a common poultry feed, as well as cattle ranching was mentioned during the course of the lunch. But nothing was said - at least formally - about the climate or forest footprint of the food on our plates. At my table, three veggie plates were ordered and consumed. I can also report that Al Gore, impressive and focused in his remarks, did indeed eat his chicken. But not, at least from my vantage point, all of the green beans also served with his lunch (and mine). <br />
<br />
Learn more about ADP's work and its call to action for U.S. leadership on avoiding deforestation and supporting carbon markets <a href="http://www.adpartners.org">here</a>. To learn more about food and climate change, visit <a href="http://www.takeabite.cc">Take a Bite Out of Climate Change</a>, run by BG colleague Anna Lapp&eacute;.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:06:08 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=54
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=54
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Istanbul, Not Constantinople
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/istanbul.jpg" alt="Istanbul" height="90" width="135" />
<p>Not Constantinople; no turkeys here</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Nobel laureate <a href="http://www.orhanpamuk.net">Orhan Pamuk</a> writes eloquently (as only he can) about the "huzun" or melancholy that afflicts the city in which he's lived just about all of his life, Istanbul. I'm just recently back from there and while I wouldn't quibble with Mr. Pamuk -- it was, after all, his novel <em>Snow</em> that made me want to visit Turkey -- but I didn't see much melancholy on display. It was Ramadan and a few shopkeepers were, well, not in the best frame of mind for mid-afternoon bargaining, still hours from their breaking-of-the-fast evening meal. But <em>huzun</em>? Not that I could detect. I found the city beautiful, fascinating, arresting in its views of the Marmara Sea and the sounds of the call to prayer, and, despite its long history and slow decline (the cause of Pamuk's <em>huzun</em>), decidedly modern. A new light rail carried tourists and Istanbullus alike across the city; both old and new "tunels" or funicular railways carried us up steep hills quickly and quietly. And we discovered, thanks to our not always reliable guidebook, a wonderful vegetarian restaurant near the Galata Tower, <a href="http://www.parsifalde.com">Parsifal</a>. It's named both for the Wagner opera and a red-booted, black cat, owner Ayfer Uzunogullari explained. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
During a series of terrific lunches and dinners at Parsifal, we discussed with Ayfer the U.S. elections, Orhan Pamuk and his writings (including his latest novel, just out, <a href="http://themuseumofinnocence.com"><em>The Museum of Innocence</em></a>), and the seeming ubiquity of Istanbul's cats. Now for the most part, these aren't ordinary stray cats. Almost all seem to have a human benefactor who's feeding them or allowing them into their home or shop, even as they continue to live outside. Ayfer explained that Istanbullus like cats, are generally kind to them, especially in the city center, and that many people, including her, do trap, spay/neuter and release. <br />
<br />
The cats left me feeling ambivalence, although not <em>huzun</em>. In many ways, they appeared to have decent lives, the shape of which they could determine: kittens tumbling together in brambles not far from the Blue Mosque; cats going in and out of a shop, sleeping, as they like, on the ground or a pile of cushion covers; a lean, young orange tabby visiting table after table in a seaside cafe with a magnificent view on a warm Istanbul afternoon. They aren't feral: most were very amenable to being stroked and seemed to enjoy human company. And yet, they are out there, if not quite alone, then not quite companioned, either. Some get into scrapes (the sound of cats fighting punctuated the Istanbul evening several times), surely they have shorter lives than house cats, and I did see many young males who had not been neutered and at least one amorous pair in a mosque graveyard . . . meaning thousands of descendents may eventually populate the streets of the city. <br />
<br />
The cats of Istanbul made me think of a "herd of cats" I saw a few years back on the grounds of the <a href="http://www.unep.org">UN Environment Programme</a> headquarters in Nairobi one evening at dusk. These cats, all white but for one who was black, appeared much more "wild" than their Istanbullus cousins. They seemed like a gang, patrolling their territory -- a patch of tall grasses outside an administrative building -- hissing at each other and possibly me, too, as they did. Given the fading equatorial light, they almost seemed like ghosts: shimmering, in and out of sight, unplaceable, decidedly feral, slightly spooky. Anxious, too. More so than the cats in Istanbul. Were they, I wonder now, experiencing <em>huzun</em>? They seemed too active for that, energized by the cooling night air. Back in Istanbul, I thought: could it be that the cats, too, are afflicted by <em>huzun</em>, or are they, at least in part, its antidote? Pamuk, for one, doesn't say. I'm still puzzling over it, even as I recall with pleasure my own interactions with the cats and kittens of Istanbul, and wonder how they're doing. <br />
<br />
A leap now, not across the Bosphorus, but from Turkey to turkeys. The latest issue of <a href="http://www.plentymag.com">Plenty</a>, the environment/lifestyle magazine, has, previewing Thanksgiving, two short pieces about the short, cramped and unpleasant lives of standard American "meat" turkeys. The huge breasts that leave them unable to walk comfortably or even mate naturally; the antibiotics and hormones required to bring them to slaughter weight. How unlike wild turkeys these "Frankenbirds" (their term) are . . . so, what to do on Thanksgiving? Plenty's advice: choose a "heritage" breed turkey instead. Not no turkey, or Tofurky. Disappointing. Perhaps a trip to Turkey itself would help, and a full course of meals at Parsifal. . . . Not a turkey in sight. <br />
<br />
Quick coda: Istanbul was, of course, once Constantinople and before that, Byzantium. For a fun rendition of a mid-20th century song inspired by the city's changing names click <a href="http://www.last.fm/music/They+Might+Be+Giants/_/Istanbul+(Not+Constantinople)">here</a> for a rendition by Brooklyn-based <a href="http://www.theymightbegiants.com">They Might Be Giants</a>.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 12:30:30 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=53
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=53
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Meat Heat
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/heatingupcartoon.jpg" alt="militant cows" height="98" width="131" />
<p>One perspective...not Boris' </p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
So far September's been a pretty good month for shedding some light on the connections between meat and global warming. First, Brighter Green's policy paper on China and factory farming has gotten a good reception. Fall forward. More heat. The catalyst: UK-based <a href="http://ciwf.org.uk">Compassion in World Farming</a> sponsored a <a href="http://ciwf.org.uk/news/factory_farming/lecture_calls_for_dietary_change.aspx">dialogue-shaping lecture in London with Rajendra Pachauri</a>, head of the <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch">UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a>. Dr. Pachauri's topic? Meat and the climate. He urged, without dancing around the topic, people to eat less meat, starting with one meatless day a week and expanding from there. The day before Dr. Pachauri's talk (I was in London, although unfortunately had to leave before the event) the UK Observer, the Guardian on Sunday, made its lead story the meat-climate story and an interview with Dr. Pachauri <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/07/food.foodanddrink"></a>. The headline: "UN says eat less meat to curb global warming." Nothing ambiguous about that. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
Time magazine also covered Dr. Pachauri's lecture and produced a <a href="http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1839995,00.html">thoughtful piece on meat and climate change</a>. Not to be outdone, <a href="http://www.boris-johnson.com/2008/09/09/un-panel-on-climate-change">London's voluble new mayor, Boris Johnson, also weighed in</a> on Dr. Pachauri's analysis -- rather less thoughtfully. In a column full of his trade-mark "Boris bluster" he poked fun at the UN and the "UN man" and suggested the UK hold feasts of meat and name them for Dr. Pachauri. Man is an omnivore, Johnson declared, and it's curbing global population growth -- not meat -- where public and policy attention should be. Father-of-four Johnson didn't refer to his own production and consumption habits. Nor did he leaven his screed with many facts, including that Western meat consumption is still much higher than that in less developed regions . . . but that with the globalization of the Western consumer lifestyle, per capita meat and dairy consumption is rising rapidly, much faster than population growth rates.<br />
Case in point: well, China, of course. (See the Brighter Green policy paper -- if you haven't already.) <br />
<br />
While the mayor was waiting on lines for omnivorous meals at the Beijing Olympics while observing the scant lines for "salad" (an anecdote he relates in his column), he may well have usefully been reading -- the policy paper. Maybe he will have by the time the Olympics get to London in 2012. Even as summer in the northern hemisphere winds down, it's clear the heat is on.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:39:48 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=52
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=52
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Skillful Means: A New Report from Brighter Green
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/breeding_sow.jpg" alt="Breeding Sow" height="150" width="200" />
<p>Breeding Sow in a Medium-Sized Farm, Eastern China (Picture: Peter Li/HSI/CIWF)</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
New York&#8211;based policy action tank Brighter Green&#8217;s new report, <a href="http://www.brightergreen.org/files/brightergreen_china_print.pdf">Skillful Means: The Challenges of China&#8217;s Encounter with Factory Farming</a> (PDF) explores the emerging superpower&#8217;s &#8220;livestock revolution,&#8221; which is having serious impacts on public health, food security, and equity in China&mdash;and the world. The Beijing Summer Olympics are showcasing a resurgent nation, which only two generations after a devastating national famine is eating increasingly high on the food chain. In the past ten years, consumption of China&#8217;s most popular meat, pork, has doubled. In 2007, China raised well over half a billion pigs for meat. <br />
<br />
Given that every fifth person in the world is Chinese, even small increases in individual meat or dairy consumption will have broad, collective environmental as well as climate impacts. Increasingly, what the Chinese eat, and how China produces its food, affects not only China, but the world, too. <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
&#8220;When I was a child, every person was allotted one pound of pork a month,&#8221; says Peter Li, a professor of political science at the University of Houston in Texas who grew up in Jiangxi province in southeast China says in Eating Skillfully. &#8220;We could not eat more than that. You could not get it. Now, though, more people have access to more meat and want to eat a lot of it.&#8221;<br />
<br />
In yuan terms, meat is the second largest segment of China&#8217;s retail food market. China has also opened its doors to investments by major multinational meat and dairy producers, as well as animal feed corporations, including Tyson Foods, Smithfield, and Novus International. Western-style meat culture has gone mainstream. Fast food is a U.S. &#036;28-billion-a-year business in China. McDonald&#8217;s, a major sponsor of the Olympics, had more than 800 restaurants in China, with at least a hundred more set to open by the time the games began. Four McDonald&#8217;s are operating in Olympic venues, including the press center and the athletes&#8217; village. <br />
<br />
&#8220;China is not yet a bone fida &#8220;factory farm nation&#8221; like the U.S.,&#8221; says Mia MacDonald, Brighter Green&#8217;s executive director and co-author of Skillful Means. &#8220;But the strains of its fast-growing livestock sector are becoming harder to ignore. In the U.S., a re-examination of the multiple human, environmental, economic, and ethical costs of factory farming is taking place. Such a process needs to get underway in China&#8212;before it&#8217;s too late.&#8221;  <br />
<br />
Although these realities won&#8217;t be fully obvious to the millions of people cheering on the Olympic athletes in China and across the globe, they demand attention:<ul><li>China&#8217;s livestock produce 2.7 billion tons of manure every year, nearly three and a half times the industrial solid waste level. Run-off from livestock operations have created a large &#8220;dead zone&#8221; in the South China Sea that is virtually devoid of marine life.</li><li>In northern China, overgrazing and overfarming lead to the loss of nearly a million acres of grassland each year to desert.</li><li>Diet-related chronic diseases now kill more Chinese than any other cause, and nearly one in four Chinese is overweight.</li><li>More than 90 percent of some bacteria in Asia can no longer be treated effectively with &#8220;first-line&#8221; antibiotics like penicillin&#8212;due to their overuse in farmed animals.</li><li>China can still feed itself. But this is likely to change as its meat and dairy sectors expand and intensify. The Chinese government is looking abroad, not only to international food markets but also to Africa, Latin America, and other parts of Asia for land on which to produce food for people and feed for livestock.</li><li>In 2008, China surpassed the U.S. to become the world&#8217;s leading emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2). Per capita emissions of CO2 in China have more than doubled, from 2.1 tons of CO2 equivalent in 1990 to 5.1 tons today. Meat and dairy production have a direct relationship with global climate change: fully 18 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions stem from the livestock industry.</li></ul><br />
Even though the Chinese government seems set on emulating industrialized nations&#8217; meat and dairy culture, a small but growing number of Chinese non-governmental organizations and individuals are questioning this path. To them food quality, not quantity, is important, along with issues of sustainability and animal welfare.<br />
<br />
Eating Skillfully recommends the following actions to both the Chinese government and civil society:<ul><li>The government ought to redefine its conception of short- and long-term food security so it doesn&#8217;t give priority to a meat-centered diet. Meat in China ought to be, as it was, a condiment and not the mainstay of a meal.</li><li>Government subsidies that now support the expansion of industrial-scale livestock operations, owned by Chinese or foreign companies, should be ended.</li><li>The &#8220;externalities&#8221; on which animal agriculture is dependent&#8212;such as riverine and marine water pollution, contamination of soil and groundwater, and land degradation&#8212;should be paid for, in full, by the industry and/or specific facilities that cause them.</li><li>Increased sharing of information and experiences of industrial animal agriculture should take place among policy-makers, academics, and civil society groups in China and other countries, both developing and developed.</li><li>A forum for dialogue between the government and China&#8217;s and global animal welfare, environment and other civil society organizations should be established.</li><li>The growing environmental movement in China ought to include the issue of intensive animal agriculture within its analysis, awareness-raising, and advocacy activities, and collaborate with civil society groups working on related issues.</li></ul> <br />
Contact: Mia MacDonald, Brighter Green, New York, E-mail: macdonald@brightergreen.org (After August 26: Tel: (1) 917 202 2809). <br />
<br />
Peter Li, University of Houston, Texas <br />
Tel: (1) 832-647-6518. E-mail: LiP@uhd.edu
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:11:32 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=51
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=51
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Food for Thought
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/kangaroo_meat.jpg" alt="Kangaroo meat" height="128" width="89" />
<p>Kangaroo: How rare do you want it?</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
File this under "Suggestive Connection": In <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7551125.stm">a report on the BBC</a>, an Australian researcher is recommending a vast increase in the farming and eating of kangaroos in order to combat global warming. Because of their different digestive systems, kangaroos do not produce as much methane as cows and sheep (currently the main source of meat for Australians), and thus humans switching to a different sort of muscle to chew on would reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.<br />
<br />
In an <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7555206.stm"> unrelated&mdash;but perhaps not <em>that</em> unrelated&mdash;story</a>, a team of scientists have discovered that many prehistoric species extinctions, including that of the three-meter tall giant kangaroo and marsupial lion, were caused not by natural causes, such as catastrophic weather events or habitat change, but by the newly evolved human beings. Apparently, we hunted them to death -- presumably, as many animals continue to be today, for our consumption.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:24:45 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=50
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=50
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Primates: Good News and Bad
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imagesyounggorilla.jpg" alt="Young lowland gorilla" height="133" width="88" />
<p>Ah, youth - and a place to live</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
A drought of blogs here, due to a range of other Brighter Green projects, but rain (of a sort) has returned. In fact, it has been a very rainy summer in New York, but sunny, too. A paradox, like the subject of this blog. An exhaustive foot and air survey has led scientists from the New York-based <a href="http://www.wcs.org">Wildlife Conservation Society</a> to conclude that nearly <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/science/05apes.html?scp=1&sq=lowland%20gorilla&st=cse">125,000 western lowland gorillas</a> are alive, and doing pretty well, in the forests of the Congo Republic. That's about the human population of Flint, Michigan or odiferous Elizabeth, New Jersey. So used to hearing about non-human primates in small numbers, this news struck me (and many others) as extraordinary. But with the sweet comes the bitter. Forests nearly everywhere in the global south are under threat (more below) from loggers, poachers, farmers, and others. Can the gorillas' idyll last? Watch a few minutes of video of some of them <a href="http://www.wcs.org/gorilladiscovery/wcs_gorilladiscovery">here</a>.  <br />
<br />
Now for the bad news: another study, also recently released, says that <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7541192.stm">primates are under threat of extinction</a> as no other members of a species are. In Asia, 70% of primates are endangered. What primates around the world face: loss of habitat and loss of lives, including hunting for meat -- including in places where habitat is relatively intact. "In many places, primates are quite literally being eaten to extinction," Russell Mittermeier, chair of the <a href="http://cms.iucn.org">IUCN</a> primate specialist group says. A dismaying, although apt, segue to the last bit of (bad) news: the world's forests may fall faster and further as a result of human primates' escalating demands for food, fuel, and wood. The <a href="http://www.rightsandresources.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=737">Rights and Resources Initiative</a> reports that only half of the land needed by 2030 to meet these demands is available, without encroaching on tropical forests. "Arguably, we are on the verge of the last great global land grab," RRI's Andy White, co-author of the report, told the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7503304.stm">BBC</a>. <br />
<br />
Watch this space for more blogs and news soon, and Brighter Green's about-to-be-released case study -- in time for the Beijing Olympics -- on China and intensifying meat production and consumption (yeah, this is a mouthful in need of a rebranding. People at work on it.)
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:16:29 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=49
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=49
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
(Inter)National Interest
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/gorilladeadincongo.jpg" alt="Mountain gorillas dead" height="102" width="136" />
<p>Mourning in Congo</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
I know that for most readers, the words "National Geographic" don't conjure anything very exciting. Interesting, sure. Many of us grew up amid stacks of the yellow-bordered periodical in our living rooms or stored carefully in our basements, thumbing through the pages to learn about Pharaohs or Incan gold or Hawaii's big waves and to ogle the often-stellar photos (with or without our parents hovering). But <em>exciting</em>? Not so much. About a year ago, after decades of not reading NG, I decided to get a subscription. Now, I wouldn't say reading it is as scintillating as being at a rave or atop a big wave on a surfboard may be (neither of which I've experienced), but it is almost always really interesting. <br />
<br />
And less, how can I say it, hoary than I remember? (OK, I am just a bit older now.) Today's NG delves much further into socio-economic realities, equity, poverty, sustainability, and other essential issues than I ever recall it doing before. As if it realized that we, the junior high schoolers, could take--indeed, needed--more reality, semi-unvarnished (the photos are still incredibly glossy).<br />
<br />
 I'd highly recommend checking out two recent editions: the first is a <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/05/china/journey/hessler-text">whole issue devoted to China</a>. Lots on the environment and the toll of industrialization, China's building and consumption booms, and the diversity of China's peoples. Just one nugget: 37% of people driving cars in China today didn't know how to drive three years ago...and 1,000 new cars a day take to the road in Beijing. <br />
<br />
The other is the <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/07/table-of-contents">current issue</a>, with the very 21st century title, "Who Murdered the Mountain Gorillas" emblazoned over a portrait of a silverback in Congo. Note that NG uses "murdered," implying personhood, rather than the more generic term "killed," much more usually used when referring to non-human animals. The article on the seven mountain gorillas slaughtered in 2007 reads like a political and ecological thriller, but with substance. It delves into the complex factors that put gorillas at risk in Congo's <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/63">Virunga National Park</a> and the complex factions in whose hands their lives rest (from charcoal traders to a warlord who professes to be a conservationist to noble rangers--and at least one park ranger suspected of being extremely unnoble). The photos are stunning, and also harrowing. <br />
<br />
If you read the article and want to know more about the gorillas and the rangers' daily--blogged--efforts to protect them, here's a link to <a href="http://gorilla.wildlifedirect.org">Wildlife Direct's gorilla protection page</a>. You can also support the rangers' work. Now, I don't store the new old NG's in a basement anymore, but before I pass them along, I do tend to find myself reading them (almost) yellow-bordered cover to cover.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:13:18 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=48
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=48
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Something's, Well, Fishy
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imageshumpback.jpg" alt="Humpback" height="84" width="150" />
<p>Perhaps the one I didn't see</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Sometimes people say the strangest things...the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7476652.stm">International Whaling Commission meeting yesterday rejected Greenland's request to hunt 10 humpback whales</a>. The IWC judged the hunt not essential for Greenland's indigenous population and too commercial to qualify as subsistence whaling. At least 25% of the meat ends up in supermarkets, according to a <a href="http://www.wspa-usa.org/download/112_wspa_defyinginternational.pdf">recent report by the World Society for the Protection of Animals</a>. Denmark, of which Greenland is an autonomous territory, dissented, as did Japan, South Korea and perhaps surprisingly, the U.S. But amid the angry words, one response left me, well, without words. It was this, from Daven Joseph of the St Kitts and Nevis delegation: "At a time when the world is witnessing food shortages, we are seeing a small group of countries that are purporting to be world leaders depriving marginal peoples of the right to eat." <br />
<br />
As if...an infusion of whaling and whale meat could solve the global food crisis (which is nothing to joke about). Why not an infusion to Greenland of tofu, lentils or even Boca burgers? I was lucky enough to visit Greenland several years ago. It's a remarkable place: beautiful, austere, enveloping. The population is about 26,000 and compared to Denmark, Greenland is quite poor. But its people are not facing a food crisis. There are supermarkets. And subsistence hunting of seals and yes, whales: minkes. Speaking of whales, when I was there, my colleagues and I went on a boat trip with Greenlanders. Two boats. Mine saw a seal -- not unexciting. But the other group saw a humpback and came back ecstatic. Ever since I've regretted not being on that boat.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 08:35:50 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=47
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=47
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Rustling in the Rainforest
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imagescattlerustle.jpg" alt="Cattle rainforest" height="89" width="136" />
<p>They're out of the forest...now</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Earlier this week, the Brazilian government <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/business/worldbusiness/25beef.html?ex=1215144000&en=e8074915c45916f4&ei=5070&emc=eta1"">captured and removed 3,100 cows grazing in a nature reserve in the Amazon</a>. The "raid", if it can be called that, was designed as a warning to other ranchers grazing their cattle on what was once rainforest but has been illegally deforested. Perhaps 60,000 cattle have this "status" in the Amazon (outlaw, from now on), although the number could be higher since, according to a <a href="http://www.amazonia.org.br/arquivos/259673.pdf">recent report from Friends of the Earth-Brazilian Amazon</a>, nearly 75 million cattle are in the Amazon. Environmentalists in Brazil praised the government's action, but warned that if it was a one-time thing, a stunt of sorts, it wouldn't dissuade cattle operators lured into the rainforest by cheap land, often found (illegally) in indigenous reserves or protected areas. <br />
<br />
Some such cattle are, reportedly, being moved out to avoid any future government seizure plans (another 10,000 cattle are slated for removal). As to the fate of the Amazon rainforest over the longer-tern: it's uncertain. Rates of clearing aren't as high as they were at their peak in 2004, but have been accelerating in recent months, stirring unease within the government and alarm elsewhere. The fate of the legally "rustled" cattle? Well, more certain. They'll be auctioned, with proceeds going to a government nutrition program for poor Brazilians, health care for indigenous groups and to fund future cattle-out-of-illegally-deforested-Amazon-removal efforts.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:11:45 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=46
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=46
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
World Environment Day
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imagesworldenviroday.jpg" alt="Green Earth" height="121" width="109" />
<p>Let's celebrate</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Yes, it's the annual celebration of <a href="http://www.unep.org/wed/2008/english">World Environment Day</a>. Even though the occasion usually draws a yawn, if that, in most of the U.S. and Europe, it is celebrated enthusiastically in other parts of the world. "Kick the Carbon Habit" is this year's World Environment Day theme. Celebrants are urged to find ways to reduce their own personal carbon emissions, and support progress toward low carbon economies. Click <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-day.html">here</a> to read about how World Environment Day is being marked in a number of countries and regions, including those set to be most affected by (and least ready to adapt to) climate change. <br />
<br />
Quick World Environment Day update: after reaching its goals of first, one, and then two <em>billion</em> trees planted around the world...the <strong>Billion Tree Campaign</strong> has set a new goal: <em>seven billion</em> by 2009. Read more, see who's pledged and register your tree planting efforts <a href="http://www.unep.org/BILLIONTREECAMPAIGN">here</a>.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:02:30 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=45
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=45
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Food Matters...Again
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imageskeyhole.jpg" alt="Key hole garden" height="85" width="111" />
<p>Key to a food secure future? View from Lesotho</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
In Rome, the <a href="http://www.fao.org">UN Food and Agriculture Organization</a> has convened a summit to deal with the world's growing food crisis, which threatens -- through high prices and flagging production -- to push another 100 million people into the category of hungry; 800 million are already there. The Summit, whose attendees include some heads of state and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, concludes on Thursday. Look out for the final declaration and action plan. In the meantime, get an <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7432583.stm">update on what's been happening from the BBC.</a> The BBC has some excellent reporting on food issues this week. Two stories caught my eye. The first is on corn and tortilla prices in Mexico. Read it <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7432164.stm">here</a>. According to the report one reason why Mexico can't increase agricultural production substantially is because so many rural Mexicans, once farmers, have made their way north to work in U.S. cities. <br />
<br />
The second BBC story comes from the southern African nation of Lesotho, where over-use of soil and clearing of trees and other vegetation has left much farmland teetering at the edge of infertility or already there. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7432972.stm"> The BBC story</a> focuses on a family that's found a home-grown remedy: "key hole gardens." The gardens are producing enough vegetables to feed large extended families, with some left over for local markets. A mini (deep) green revolution. From China comes an example of another kind of revolution, which some call "pink." Today, according to a recent issue of <a href="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm">National Geographic</a> on China, the country has precisely <em>one</em> McDonald's drive-through. By the end of this year however, there will be -- wait for it -- <em>115</em>. "Food is life," Deputy Minister for Agriculture and Food Security, Efraim Lehatahe, told the BBC, commenting on his country's predicament and the Rome food summit's agenda. "If we can't afford that, we're finished."
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:51:17 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=44
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=44
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Billion Bag Ban
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imageschinabags.jpg" alt="China plastic bags" height="94" width="128" />
<p>Soon to be in the dustbin of history?</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
On June 1st, China imposed a national ban on ultra-thin plastic bags, the kind we all get -- or have -- at supermarkets, drug stores and even, sometimes, at fruit or vegetable stands. From yesterday, shoppers in China will have to bring their own bag or, if they want a plastic bag, slightly thicker varieties will be available, for a fee. Men Xiaowei from China's Ministry of Commerce said in <a href="http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-06/01/content_6726830.htm">an on-line interview with China Daily</a> that the plastic bag ban was "a 'habit revolution'. To limit the use of plastic bags is to protect our environment." According to China Daily, an astonishing 1,300 tons of oil had been used in China every day to produce plastic shopping bags just for supermarkets. (I wonder if Wal-Mart, an increasing large player in China's retail landscape, is included in that total. Probably not.) Another eye-popping number: China used three billion plastic bags a day, more than two per person. A <a href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/01/business/plastic.php">Reuters report on Sunday indicated some hiccups with the ban</a>, although nothing very surprising: one shopper thought the ban was coming into effect in a month or so, while a steamed bun seller was still using the thin plastic bags in violation of the new law. He said he'd continue until his supply was exhausted...and then begin charging customers about 3 cents for a thicker plastic bag -- if they don't change their habits and bring their own.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 09:21:22 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=43
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=43
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Good Grazing
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imagesgrazing.jpg" alt="Land on Earth from space" height="118" width="118" />
<p>Planetary grazing</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
Last night I watched a Web video of a talk New York Times food writer <a href="http://www.ted.com/index.php/speakers/view/id/234">Mark Bittman</a> gave at a TED conference last December called <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/263">"What's Wrong With What We Eat."</a> Bittman, a wry and clear writer is, it turns out, a wry and clear speaker. His main thesis: over-consumption of meat is putting the planet and us at risk, big-time (his emphasis), due to its links with global warming and human disease. In crafting his argument over 20 minutes, Bittman makes some of the same points and employs some of the same data that we at Brighter Green have been using...but he has a much, much snappier Power Point. It's worth watching and then, as I did, this morning, sending the link to friends and colleagues. Better yet: let people know about this blog. And for those unfamiliar with Bittman's writing on these issues, it's worth digesting his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=meat+guzzler&st=nyt&oref=slogin">New York Times' article, "Rethinking the Meat Guzzler"</a> from earlier this year. The piece got quite a reception: it was the most-emailed article on the Times' Website for days and then nested among the Times' top 10 most emailed for weeks. Bittman's latest book is <a href="http://www.howtocookeverything.tv/htce/Home/index.html">"How to Cook Everything Vegetarian."</a> It's chunky and green.  <br />
<!--readmore--><br />
Another excellent piece of writing I came across today (no video version yet) is an <a href="http://www.fresnobee.com/644/story/586406.html">oped by PCRM's Hope Ferdowsian in the Fresno (Calif.) Bee, "Fighting the Food Crisis One Bite at a Time."</a> She examines, through data and personal experience, how what's on our plates -- and particularly animal foods -- determines what food is and isn't available for people in the developing world (global South). With rising food prices still in the headlines, this is essential reading.<br />
<br />
Finally, I had the opportunity to hear <a href="http://www.heathermills.org">Heather Mills</a> (until recently also McCartney) speak over the weekend (on Saturday night she hosted a gala in Manhattan for <a href="http://www.farmsanctuary.org">Farm Sanctuary</a>; Sunday she attended a book party as a special guest. I attended as one of the hoi polloi). On Sunday, she told this story of how she'd returned to veganism from a stint as a vegetarian. During the Live 8 charity concert in 2005 (that would be when she was still married to Paul), she was standing back stage with an African woman, an NGO leader. Mills said she asked her, "How does it feel to have all these thousands of people here who've shown up because they care about you and your continent?" The woman replied, to Mills' amazement: "That's great, but it would help even more if people didn't drink so many lattes." The woman explained that in her country, close to villages where children went hungry at night, were huge fields of grain that were harvested and shipped to Europe to feed to dairy cows. Privation amid plenty. We are all bound together, far more than we may think on an average day. Needless to say, Mills said, that was the last day she drank a morning cow's milk latte.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 19:55:10 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=42
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=42
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
Rosy City
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imageslilac.jpg" alt="lilacs" height="106" width="141" />
<p>Fragrant City</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
I've been spending a few days in Portland, Oregon, also known as the City of Roses. The roses aren't in bloom yet, but the lilacs are. Large bushes or trees of them seem to be everywhere here, in hues from light lavender to bright, deep purple. I came out to the northwest to give two talks, first at <a href="http://www.pdx.edu">Portland State University</a> and then at Portland's annual <a href="http://portlandvegfest.org/2008">VegFest</a>. My topic? The environmental, climate, public health, equity and food security issues surrounding industrial meat production, in the U.S. and in the fast-growing countries of the developing world. I've enjoyed interacting with activists, environmentalists, students, philosophers, vegans and omnivores. They listened to and read (I think) my projected slides and then voiced some terrific ideas, observations and questions. The title of my second talk was "Your Burger or Your Car." Ironically, across from the VegFest venue was a Hummer dealership. But I haven't seen a single Hummer seen on Portland's streets, however.<!--readmore-->  <br />
<br />
When I haven't been speaking, I've been walking, visiting with friends and eating. (I also made a quick trip to Mt. Hood where it was snowing and people were skiiing. Quite a sight for an east coaster in May.) Portland has an increasingly lively set of vegetarian eateries. I enjoyed <a href="http://www.vegetarianhouse.com">Vegetarian House</a> in Chinatown my first night in town. My 90-year-old uncle, visiting from Seattle, also was nourished by the pungent mock meat and the subtle messages in the fortune cookies. Cafeteria-style <a href="http://www.veganopolis.com">Veganopolis</a> has been great for breakfast, lunch and free WiFi. Today I ate a "Democracy Burger." Not coincidentally, the three main contenders for the U.S. Presidency all have been in Oregon in recent days. At <a href="http://www.nutshellpdx.com">Nutshell</a>, a hip, relatively new vegan hot spot, I bit into a 150 ingredient (really) flat bread -- inventive -- excellent greens and a beet and Fuji apple salad. When I emerged into the evening (cool, but clear and light until late), I smelled the lilacs again, and tried to inhale deeply.
]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 09:40:21 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=41
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=41
]]></link>
</item><item>
<title><![CDATA[
World, Warming, in a Coffee Mug
]]></title>

<description><![CDATA[

<div class="illowrapper">
<div class="illoliner">
<img src="http://brightergreen.org/images/blog/imagesmug.jpg" alt="Mug" height="101" width="135" />
<p>The mug, ready for sale at a (too) reasonable price</p>
</div><!-- closes "illoliner" -->
</div><!-- closes "illowrapper" -->
A few months ago I got a global warming mug as a gift. It's high-concept. When you pour in a hot beverage, a world map stuck on the mug changes. Coastal regions disappear (so long, Bangladesh and south Florida). They're "flooded" by blue, mimicking what's expected to happen if, as scientists predict, sea levels rise between 11 and 17 inches over the next 92 years. Those sea level increases would be accompanied by (really, caused by) a rise in global temperature of between 1.8° and 4° C by 2100. That's 3.2° to 7.2° Fahrenheit. <br />
<br />
But wait, even if your coffee's getting cold. Global temperatures may rise even higher, faster: by as much as 6.4° C (11.5° F) by century's end. So, the mug is pretty cool (although it can't go into my Energy Star, 18-inch, water-saving dishwasher). But something about it struck me first as odd, then as almost risible. When I turned it over, I saw a familiar three words: Made in China. So much else is, that both does and doesn't cost an arm and a leg, so why not this, too? <!--readmore--> <br />
The U.S. was, until very recently, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Yet, a mug, sold in the U.S., presumably to raise awareness of global warming (even if at a slightly kitsch level), is made in China. So the emissions toll of that manufacture is outsourced and added to China's total. China, very recently anointed the world's new, largest emitter of greenhouse gases, surpassed the U.S. in this dubious honor precisely because of its roaring manufacturing economy and booming consumer lifestyle. China's making and selling  everything from pricey linen clothes to cars to solar-powered battery chargers to...probably billions of coffee mugs, mine among them. <br />
<br />
So, what kept me from finishing my tea? Well, something like this: China's following our lead and becoming the world's main greenhouse gas culprit, in part because they make nearly all of the stuff we buy. Global warming's a crucial challenge. But a mug sold in the U.S. to elucidate consumers (and hot beverage drinkers) about the toll of global warming isn't made at home -- saving considerable GHGs from shipping -- it's made in China. And now <em>that</em> mug has helped, in some small way, China ratchet up its global warming impact on the world. It also may have been made by young women or men in a sweatshop...and I try to avoid products made in China precisely for this reason. Oy vey. It was all enough to make me want to drop the mug and see the map -- coastlines intact or not -- shatter, so I wouldn't be responsible anymore. <br />
<br />
Alas, the mug survives. And so does my quandary. There are many things for which to blame China (suppression in Tibet, stalling on Darfur, imprisoning journalists and rights advocates). But not for this mug. For that, I blame whoever decided to make it in a Chinese factory where labor's  cheap and labor rights scarce. Surely a global warming mug should cost in line with its cost to the Earth. Just as surely, the emissions associated with making and delivering that mug ought to have been as small as possible, meaning local, or localized, production. <br />
<br />
I haven't seen my global warming mug recently. I know it's still in the cabinet, the map a little rough around the edges now, but I'm mostly happy for it to stay there. The other day, though, I read this interesting poem, posted anonymously on a Website by a "silent, silent Chinese" and quoted in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/education/29student.html?scp=1&sq=China+students+U.S.&st=nyt">this recent piece in the New York Times</a>. It made me think of the conundrum of my mug...and how we're all in the climate change conundrum together. Even though my mug isn't sophisticated enough to spell it out: as the seas rise, millions of people, coastal villages and other coast-dwelling species will be engulfed. That is something to let my tea go cold over. But before your hot beverage gets really cold, here's the text of the poem, made in China, I presume:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet./ When we tried limiting our numbers, you said it is human rights abuse...When we were poor, you thought we were dogs./ When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts./ When we build our industries, you called us polluters./ When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming."</blockquote><br />
And when we make global warming mugs, you....
]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 09:51:34 EST</pubDate>
<author>mia@brightergreen.org (Mia MacDonald)</author>
<guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=40
]]></guid>
<link><![CDATA[
http://www.brightergreen.org/entry.php?id=40
]]></link>
</item></channel>
</rss>