Environmental Websites

The Friends of Science website claims that their goal is to help engage Canada in debates about the validity of climate change science and the Kyoto protocol, and to do so by educating the public about the so-called “science” of global warming. FOS believes that the main cause of global warming is the heat from the sun, and that like any other natural process, the best way to respond is through adaptation and not flawed attempts at changing the process.

The Grist Magazine website approaches climate change skepticism by simply answering claims made against the existence of global warming. Its purpose is much different than the FOS website in that it takes a less serious approach, acknowledging the fact that the world is full of tree-hugging environmentalists, and what we need instead is a light-hearted approach to an extremely serious issue.

I think that in trying to evaluate the scientific claims that these websites make, you have to understand the purpose of spreading the information in the first place. For FOS, they're goals are to have the government of Canada re-evaluate the Kyoto Protocol, so they obviously have some sort of political agenda. Additionally, its important to question the sources of their science – it specifically says on the FOS website that although the body is comprised of highly educated scientists and professionals, they do not do any original scientific research but instead research works already written by scientists.

I think this definitely makes the site way less convincing and a lot less valid, because you can't even trace their claims back to any valid body of work. Instead, their claims seem like opinions that they push for their own agenda, using words such as “significant”, “mild warming”, etc., to provide the rhetoric that climate change is not a real threat. They do however, in talking about the importance of “adaptation” note that warming is a) something that cannot be ignored and b) something to which we do, to a degree, need to respond.

I appreciate the approach of the Grist website because its fronted by the WWF, which makes it seem a lot more legitimate, and also it makes no “claims” for climate change – instead approaches its existence as merely common sense. “There is no evidence”, well in fact, “yes there is”. The website also includes numerous links to other scientifically-recognized organizations such as NASA, the Climate Research Unit, etc., to back-up the claims they make.

Corn is everywhere!

I found this assignment incredibly challenging due to the fact that living on a tight budget often means I shop in advance and try (as best possible) to plan meals in advance. Therefore when I was at home I was limited to eating what I had already purchased, and as we all know, there is corn in pretty much everything in the U.S. I had no idea that everything from my sandwich to my pasta would be affected. So needless to say I did not succeed very well.

But I do eat at least once a day on campus. Here there is not the pre-planned problem, although I am limited to the food choices on campus that I can pay cash with, since I don't have a meal plan. Again most foods (that I would choose to eat from AU food services) have some element of corn in them. I try eating salads, but even the dressing has corn product in it. And basically anything from The Tavern is going to have corn in it (and I don't even eat their burgers).

Overall I was really surprised at how all encompassing corn is in the American diet, and in my opinion for seemingly no reason. Do we need corn in our tooth paste, salad dressing, or bread to make it taste good? I really don't think so. I begin to question what incentive does the food producing company have for adding just one more ingredient to their food, especially one that is so seemingly useless in terms of taste and quality. Although I failed at the NO corn for a week assignment, it was a great learning opportunity to see just what is inside American food products. Surprisingly corn is everywhere!

Amanda

There is corn in my beer???

This was pretty hard, seeing as how I already have to check food labels often for any meat product, and also just can't eat meat in general. But that is just with the food that I eat – not to mention the things I drank, the medication I took. I thought a lot about a good friend of mine who is allergice to peanuts, and how hard it must be to have to check labels of everything you eat, and how additionally hard it must be when your food is prepared for you, so you are never really sure of what it contains. And THEN, I started thinking about labels, and what is actually in food. A huge percentage of the list on the corn allergen website contains words that I've never heard of, ending in -ine, -ate, acid, etc. What is all this crap? Why is it in our food? How does corn end up in vanilla, or baking soda, or confectioner's sugar? It doesn't belong there!

This was a really hard challenge, nearly impossible, seeing as how even the cab that I drove home in had corn in it. But, it brought full circle everything that we've learned about the contemporary US food system. When we can really cash in on a commodity, like corn, we abuse it to the max. There isn't any reason for corn to be in everything we eat – its hardly a vegetable, and it has little nutritional value. But corporations can make a lot of money on it, and pump millions of dollars into aid campaigns about how high-fructose corn syrup is “just like sugar” (see http://www.sweetsurprise.com/) . Our food system has absolutely nothing to do with growing and selling food that humans need to live a healthy life. Just like every other aspect of our consumer society, it has become a way to make the consumer ignorant and encourage bad habits.

Food

When trying to decide what food to eat there a quite a few characteristics to consider. Besides the obvious nutritious factor, taste must also be considered. I try to eat as healthy as possibly and after living in Europe where there are more organic food options readily and cheaply available, I try to eat organic if possible. However, given my status as a college student, without a sizable income, it is not entirely realistic for me to be able to afford to buy organic food, even if I really would like to eat completely organic.

Of the foods I've eaten in the past few days, the foods worst for the environment would have to be something that is very processed, definitely not organic, that has chemicals added to it and is then produced in an environmentally damaging way. Processed foods such as fruit snacks or peanut butter, would probably be very environmentally damaging, along with such natural products like grains that are grown with excess chemicals which are environmentally harmful.

Amanda

Your Water Footprint

This is the link to the article I mentioned earlier about your "water footprint" from Good Magazine (which is a totally awesome magazine, btw):

http://www.good.is/?p=16356

FOOD

So, I’m a vegetarian, which means that food is always an issue for me. I have to be really picky about where I go out to eat, what I buy, etc. Before interning at the Greenpeace office last fall, I always thought that stores like Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods (health food stores) were the best places to shop as a vegetarian – plentiful amounts of meat substitutes and lots of alternative options. I started shopping at these places partly out of diet changes but also because I was concerned about the environment. But in researching the practices of grocery stores, even ones like Whole Foods, I’ve found that it is nearly impossible to shop at a supermarket that doesn’t inflict environmental harm in selling its products. So when I shop, I try to buy things that are a) vegetarian, b) remotely healthy/good for me and when I can afford it, making sure that it’s local. But it’s definitely hard to do all those things!
Thinking about what I’ve eaten in the past few days, the food that I would guess has had the greatest environmental impact would be eggs maybe? I eat eggs a lot because they are a good source of protein, and their cheap, but I found an article on water consumption, and it takes a ridiculous amount of water to produce eggs. Not to mention the land and food it takes to maintain chickens. Also, I had some strawberries this morning, and I bet that eating out of season fruit is also pretty bad for the environment because it takes shipping and resources that aren’t always readily available. For example, it has a way bigger impact to ship strawberries to D.C. from California in the middle of March when they are out of season, than from Maryland or Virginia in the middle of June when they are in season.

discussion question #6 - FOOD!

This was an interesting topic for me to consider for many reasons. Firstly, as a former athlete and the daughter of a fitness trainer, it would be safe to expect that i may have a lot of nutritional considerations when it comes to food; ironically, this is just the opposite, becuase in fact i eat fairly unhealthy.....

....on the other hand, it was also an interesting topic for me because last summer, i took an interesting seminar course, all about food. the predominate theme of the course, particularly seen with the semester long reading of Michael Pollan's book Omnivore's Dilemma. The book, among various food matters, examines the origins of food, the food production process (i mean literally, from hunting a deer or squeezing the egg from the chicken yourself!) to the paths our food takes to reach our plates, as well as animal rights questions. Since reading Dilemma, i certainly keep many of the considerations i took from it in mind when i am out eating. For example, i have a secret craving for McDonald's chicken mcnuggets and fries now and then - i wont fool myself and pretend that their are healthy, but, mcdonalds does something right if you look at the food labels which they give. But by Pollan's account, i am literally eating corn, corn corn (and maybe even some fake corn); the chickens were fed corn, then their meat was mixed with corn, which was coated in some corn and fried in some corn oil (and served to me with some corn and potato fries and some corn-syrup sweetened soda). now if this bothers some consumers, so be it, but it is how it is made. it is understanding the origins of the food though which allows a consumer, such as myself, to adjust the content of the rest of their daily diet to accomodate this corn intake. PLUS....I JUST LIKE NUGGETS SOMETIMES!

The second question of this weeks blog question is especially relevant for me actually, becuase in the past weekend i have encountered a few food situations where these exact issues came up! i was recently at a local deli/market, and i noticed that they had signage explaining how their fresh roasted chicken was not only hormone free, but also local sourced (driven in from maryland). upon further questioning it turns out the deli used the practice to cover many of their merchandise, such as the meats, vegetables, as well as dairy departments. this and my meal were interesting in the environmental impact concern because it covers some of the strongest aspects of the issue, the organic or non-chemically-altered element to the food, as well the distance factor, locally grown often being ideal becuase there is usually a high economic AND environmental cost associated with your pomegranates and grapes flying in from chile yesterday night. these such issues, when i have an active control over following them, are ones i highly agree with and try to stick to often. personally, i am not too too crazy about utterly non-natural means of say, getting my meat (feed-lots anyone? eww), and also, unless i am just dying for some raspberries one day, i try to shop and cook foods that are in season, locally grown, although ultimately, i will admit price is a MAJOR factor in some of my purchasing decisions.....

-amy