Advocacy and Environmental Justice

Many groups have sprung up in recent years in order to speak out against environmental injustice and racism. One of the most notable groups to have taken on this fight has been the NRDC, or national resource defense council. The group credits the beginnings of this movement to an event that occurred in 1982 in Warren County, North Carolina when the state dumped 9,000 truckloads of toxic dirt into the majority African American community's city dump. This incident set off a firestorm of research which  found that the major producing projects within the United States are almost exclusively located in minority communities, and that somebody had to take up the fight against this environmental racism that is being practiced across the nation. The fight was finally nationally recognized by Bill Clinton in 1992 with his signing of executive order number 12898 which required all federal agencies to "identify and address disproportionately high adverse health or environmental effects of their policies or programs on low-income people and people of color."

What is Environmental Justice?

The EPA defines environmental justice as:

"Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies."

This definition by the EPA means that people should not be targeted because of their race or any other factor to have environmentally detrimental projects put in their neighborhoods. Even though this policy has been put in place by the EPA, the policy has not always been effective and the US has had problems with implementing environmental justice. One very recent example is the Dakota Access Pipeline, where the land of native Americans would have been poisoned had it not been for a public outcry. 

Reflections on an Inconvenient Truth

The movie that we were shown, An Inconvenient Truth, which starred former Vice  President and once Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore was truly eye opening. I had always been taught that emissions that were released into the atmosphere through human activity had an adverse effect on our environment; but to see the graphs that he was showing and to see the clips of the actual damage that we had caused was truly concerning. Seeing this movie has truly convinced me to push for sustainable energy practices and to make simple changes in my own life in order to use less energy. I hope that we make this change to renewable energies soon so that the Earth can start to heal.

Cities and Sustainability in Norway

Norway's capital, Oslo, is routinely named as one of the most sustainable cities on the face of the Earth. It has an efficient public transportation system, is comprised of 2/3 protected lands (including forests, hills, and lakes), and includes a 20% "open areas" mandate. In fact on 44 square miles of the city are actually developed. However, this modern city is facing some problems. It's first problem is a population boom, Oslo is currently the fastest growing Scandinavian city with a population increase of at least 2% a year. Oslo's citizens also rely heavily on cars and the highways which connect the city to its suburbs are a main source of pollution because of the traffic jams this reliance on personal transportation has caused.

Food Insecurity & Sustainability in Norway

Norway is quite advanced in terms of food security for it's population. For example, 100% of Norwegians have access to clean and safe water, while it's farmers have ample supplies of agricultural waters for their farms. The energy needed for farming and for cooking is supplied almost completely sustainably as Norway harnesses its rivers and wind resources to produce 99% of its electricity. Norway also ranks #14 in the world in calorie intake per citizen at 3,511 calories per day.
The only cases of acknowledged malnutrition in Norway have been reported in Hospitals and Nursing homes, but these cases are incredibly rare.

Economic History of Norway

Norway's economy is based on two main industries; fishing and petroleum. The second part of it's economy is fairly new as it was only added in the last century, but the fishing industry of Norway can be traced back to the time of the Norwegian Vikings. However, to keep track of Norway's economy throughout its entire history is quite tricky because Norway has only been independent for a bit more than 100 years. Before this, the Norwegian territory has changed hands between Denmark and Sweden. However, with the economic data that we do have we can say for certain that the Norwegian economy had been fueled by farming and fishing until oil was discovered in the early 20th century. Since this discovery of oil Norway has become the 14th largest oil producer and the 9th largest oil exporter in the world. oil also accounts for 50% of all exports from the country and 30% of all revenue from the country. Currently, the Norwegian government is reinvesting most of its oil revenues into renewable energies as they foresee oil prices falling over the years to come.

Development Metrics In Norway

Norway has paved the way as one of the world's foremost leaders in sustainability, both in their energy usage and in their sustainable development goals. Norway has recently come out with a 17 point sustainable development goal plan that they hope to achieve by 2030. This plan includes some high reaching goals including:

• eradicating extreme poverty
• promoting prosperity, peace, and environmental justice
• protecting planetary boundaries
• increasing high-school completion rates
• improving urban air quality
• halving food waste and reducing the "waste generation"
• reducing the impact of invasive species
• reducing emissions by 40% by 2030 
• compared to 1990 levels 

Norway has also been able to retain over a quarter of its land as wild forests. This is a testament on its own to Norway's commitment to sustainable development. 

Reaction to Presentations 12/5

Throughout our in class presentations a common theme emerged over the course of the two classes in which we presented. This theme was a lack of adequate public transportation which served only a select few. This inadequate public transportation system led to two major problems which were brought up in almost all of our presentations. The first was the neglect of lower income, mostly minority neighborhoods. These people can't afford personal transportation and since they live far from public transportation it creates a major inconvenience in their lives. On the flip side of this, the richer mostly white communities also didn't have access to public transportation but were able to afford personal transportation. However, with everyone having a car they would clog up the freeways and create tons of pollution that would adversely affect their health and the health of their city. Along with this another common theme was environmental racism. This was clear in my presentation about Atlanta, where the airport was located in a majority African American community and the airport polluted and displaced this community almost at will. Unfortunately, my own city was far from the only city practicing environmental racism.

Reaction to Class Presentations

On Thursday in class we all presented our chapters on urban sprawl of cities and their affect on the populations which live in them. Although our cities were spread out across the United States they all had some very similar themes in how they were growing and how the population was reacting to this urban sprawl. In Nashville, the city that I studied, the growth was outward and the land usage of Nashville was off the charts. The city was using its land at an alarming pace as people migrated from the city of Nashville to the surrounding suburban counties. Not only was the actual growth of the city concerning, the way that people were migrating was also alarming. It was clear that in Nashville the richer, mostly white residents, were the ones expanding the suburbs and leaving the city, This left the poorer, mostly African American residents in the city where environmental policy had lapsed along with the school systems and public transportation policy. Unfortunately, this scenario where the more wealthy and mostly white citizens of a city have left for the suburbs, leaving the mostly African American, poorer citizens to deal with lapses in policy and education was a common theme throughout our presentations.  

Urban Planning, San Diego California, Transportation

San Diego California has an incredibly extensive general plan for the urban development of the city. The general plan was last updated in 2015, and is focused on adding more carbon neutral or environmentally friendly options for the transportation of its citizens. The plan calls for a "City of Villages" that are developed in close cooperation with the transportation and land use committees. The governing body of San Diego would like these villages to have easy access to walkways, public transportation; all the while it would like these villages to be densely populated so that the minimum amount of land is used for a maximum amount of people. The governing body also plans to improve roads, transit systems, and encourage businesses to move their offices closer to the "villages" in order to cut down on travel time and emissions.

The stated goals of the plan include:

• walking being a viable mode of transportation
• creating a safe and comfortable pedestrian environment
• having a pedestrian environment that is accessible to people of all abilities

Health in Norway

Being a first world country with access to modern medicine and health practices, Norway has a life expectancy, infant mortality rate, and nutrition rate comparable to that of other first world nations such as the United States. Norway's relatively tiny population gives it the advantage of effectively using a state run healthcare service for its citizens. This has led it to have one of the highest life expectancys in the developed world, with males expected to live to 80 and females to 84. Norway spends a bit over 9% of GDP on medical costs which breaks down to the equivalent of about six thousand dollars per citizen.

Gender Equality in Norway

Norway is consistently ranked among the most equal countries in the world in terms of gender equality. It's laws put men and women on equal footing and protect them equally from wage and hiring discrimination. However, although Norway is one of the world's leaders in gender equality, there are still improvements to be made in this sector.

Women are still under-represented in Norwegian politics, with most positions of power being held by males, and despite laws outlawing wage discrimination men still out-earn women with men's average income being 407,000 Krone to the average women who earns 313,100 Krone (Huffpost). Although this income inequality can be traced to factors other than wage discrimination (men are more likely to work in higher paying private sector jobs while women are more likely to work in lower paying public sector jobs) it still exists. There is also the fact that women are electing to stay at home longer after child birth than men. The Norwegian welfare system allows for paid parental leave up to 2 years, but men are more likely to take this leave for an average of 10 weeks while women are taking the full 2 years about 86% of the time. Even though this is their choice and public day care is available, this is still hampering the careers of these women.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/mona-elisabeth-brother/gender-equality-norway_b_6809300.html

http://www.nordiclabourjournal.org/nyheter/news-2012/article.2012-10-09.2932693655
 

A Planetary Constraint of Norway

Norway, being one of the world's leaders in green energy, is very conscious of its environmental impact. However, there is one planetary constraint that Norwegians could not have planned for, but their development as a nation has helped to preserve their environment. This is the fact that Norway's population has ceased it's growth and while this does cause other problems, it will preserve Norway's natural lands and forests because new housing and infrastructure is not needed for a stable population.

As can be seen in the figure below, Norway's forests have held steady through the past 25 years.

Extent of forest and other wooded land

FRA 2005 categories	Area (1000 hectares)
	1990	2000	2005
Forest	9,130	9,301	9,387
Other wooded land	2,870	2,699	2,613
Forest and other wooded land	12,000	12,000	12,000
Other land	18,625	18,625	18,625
...of which with tree cover	-	-	-
Total land area	30,625	30,625	30,625
Inland water bodies	1,751	1,751	1,751
Total area of country	32,376	32,376	32,376

The Economy of Norway and How that affects sustainability

Norway, considered a first world nation by all financial statistics, has a strong economy. their gross GDP has climbed steadily over the few years from $496 billion in 2011 to $524 billion in 2015. Because of this industrialized economy, Norway has been able to invest heavily in clean energy. About 99% of all electricity produced in Norway comes from hydroplants around the country, there is also a push within the country to explore wind, wave, and bio energy. Norway is even the world's largest producer of solar silicon (the coating for solar panels) even though Norway itself has little use for solar power. The fact that Norway is such a developed nation has helped with it's push towards sustainable energy, to the point where the oil and gas industries of Norway are slowly being phased out of it's economy.

In Reaction to Sachs First Chapter

In Sachs' bool, "The Age of Sustainable Development", the first chapter talks about sustainable development goals and how we as a species attain such goals. The chapter takes into account that developed countries are more likely to intrepid the use of renewable energies as they have the capital necessary to investigate such sources of new energy. However, the chapter also takes into account the needs of developing economies, most notably India, who garner most of their energy from fossil fuels and don't yet have the necessary capital to invest in renewable energy sources.

Personally, I would define sustainability as having 0 impact on earth, and garnering all of our energy needs from renewable resources such as wind, solar, and hydro power

I personally would love to investigate the energy uses of 2 countries; Norway and Germany.

"The Bet" by Paul Simon, Book Review

Hoff

Derek Hoff, a Professor at the University of Utah wrote a review of Paul Simon's, The Bet. In his review Hoff gave a brief overview of the actual wager that the book about. He states that although Julian Simon won the bet as the metals decreased in price, he would have lost 63% of the time between 1900 - 2008. He states that although the radical points presented by the environmentalists created some unwanted backlash, they did get some things done such as bills to clean up both water and air in America. Hoff goes on to say that Simon also had some far reaching predictions such as the prediction that the human race can reproduce exponentially without fear of exhausting resources. He states that Sabin is fair to a fault and ignores the fact that eventually even technological innovation won't be able to keep up with an ever expanding population.

My own view

The Bet by Paul Sabin was a book that I thoroughly enjoyed. Not only did it outline the environmental concerns of the time, it delved deeper into the inception of partisan politics and the feelings of America and Americans during the time of the bet. I agree with Hoff's assertion above that Sabin was fair to a fault however, I believe that his fairness cuts both ways. It's true that Sabin did not expose some of the outrageous comments from Simon but he also failed to expose the intensely despicable character of Ehrlich. Ehrlich openly favored a restrictive and authoritarian America which would put luxury taxes on necessities such as diapers and having sterilization as a pre- requisite for trade deals. All while calling people who had been innovators "idiots and morons" (one example would be Norman Borlaug the inventor of scientific farming). I believe the book was interesting and informative but also flawed.

In response to the Politico Article; "Sources: Obama, China aim to formally join Paris climate pact ahead of G-20"

This article explains that both the US and China, the two biggest carbon producers in the world, are expected to announce a ratification of the G-20 climate agreement that they signed last year at the UN. These two countries account for more than half of the world's carbon emissions at 55%. On the election front the Clinton camp is heralding this as a major step forward for America and is touting her role in the agreement when she was Secretary of State. On the other side of this is the Trump camp which fears that this ratification will lead to massive regulations that will strangle America's businesses, especially those in the energy sector.

The authors of this piece, Andrew Restuccia and Eric Wolff, are American and are much more invested in this deal because it will directly affect them as well as the rest of the American public. However, this article (like most politico articles) is pretty straight forward in terms of presenting the facts and keeping personal opinions to a minimum.

In Response to the Politico Article, "Obama tightens fuel efficiency rules for trucks" by Alex Guillen

In his article, Alex Guillen discusses the new round of emissions regulations announced by the EPA under the Obama administration. These rules are specifically geared towards “freight-hauling tractor trailers, garbage trucks, buses, and the largest class of pick-up trucks.” These new regulations, combined with those already enacted, are estimated to “save U.S businesses more than $1.9 trillion in energy costs and cut oil consumption by 8.1 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicle.” The EPA estimates that, all together, these rules would “eliminate carbon dioxide equal to cars travelling 17.7 trillion miles, or running 2,145 coal plants for one year.”

I believe that this is a great step forward not only for U.S. energy independence but for the advancement of renewable energy. In order to meet the regulations set forth by the EPA car companies will have either develop more efficient engines, invest in zero emissions power (such as electric power), or both. Either way this helps to stabilize our economy in times where oil is scarce and helps us get one step closer to our ultimate goal of carbon neutrality. The author of this article doesn't really take a side although there is a slight inclination towards supporting these policy changes. Having said this, the article appears mostly neutral. 

In Reaction to Malthus & Neo - Malthusians

Thomas Robert Malthus, an English cleric who lived in both the 16th and 17th centuries declared that overpopulation of the world would soon lead to the doom of the human race. His claims were revived by Paul Ehrlich in 1970 with his book, The Population Bomb. In the book Ehrlich describes a world where increasing demand for food and resources leads to mass famine and worldwide crisis. Ehrlich, however, was rebutted by Julian Simon; an economist who believed that however large the population of Earth became technological innovation would be able to meet the demands of that population.

Personally, I agree with Simon as Paul Ehrlich's claims had been made before by Malthus and had amounted to nothing. Ehrlich is not accounting for the march of human progress towards the future and how problems will always exist, but where there is a problem there is also a solution. I'm less inclined to bet with Ehrlich against the human race in finding that solution.

In Response to the Washington Post Article, "Can the EPA clean up one of America's most toxic rivers?"

The article above gracefully explores the controversy surrounding the EPA's plan to clean up a section of the Passaic River. The $1.4 billion plan includes dredging the lower eight miles of the river and then capping the river with a two feet of sand and and stone. To pay for the cleanup the EPA is looking to the more than 100 companies responsible for the waste including but not limited to Daimond Alkali (responsible for the release of agent orange into the river), Honeywell, and Sherwin-Williams. 

The plan has become a point of controversy within the community with some believing that the EPA has not gone far; while others are just thankful that something is being done. 

Personally, I believe that this should be looked at as a start to the work and should be cautiously applauded. It should be looked at as the first step within a long term project to clean up an important river within the US. I'd like to follow this story and see what happens after this initial step is completed. Washington Post Article