Write and Respond: The Power of the Consumer in the Palm Oil Industry – Ian Hepler

Posted on December 9, 2019 by Ian Hepler

The Power of the Consumer in the Palm Oil Industry 

Ramen noodles, lipstick, chocolate, and laundry detergent. If asked to name one common factor between these four products, many would fail to produce an answer. There is one, however, and it is something of a big deal. The truth is that each of these common, everyday items contain palm oil. Palm oil is a substance extracted from oil palm trees and used in a variety of everyday objects. Palm oil can be found in cosmetics, cleaning products, and, most importantly, food. As a matter of fact, according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the role and reach of palm oil is so widespread that more than half of the Earth depends on it for its utility in food production, and with a global population that is ever-increasing, the demand for palm oil is growing right alongside it.  

Image result for palm oil graphic

Source for graphic

Unfortunately, while cheap and easy to produce, palm oil production does not go without having any flaws. Quite on the contrary, obtaining palm oil has harsh ecological and social ramifications for the Earth, both on local and global levels. Deforestation, loss of wildlife habitat, and air pollution are just a few of the detrimental impacts that palm oil production has in the world. With a growing worldwide dependence upon palm oil both in terms of global food production and economic stimulation, what can be done to rectify this situation? The answer, to many, is clear: consumers must use their power to only buy sustainably produced palm oil products. If consumers support companies that utilize  healthy palm oil production techniques, they can weed out competitors whose methods of production are ill-favored. 

As previously mentioned, the detriments of palm oil production are varied and serious. The largest impact that palm oil production has on the Earth is through deforestation and the loss of habitat for many wildlife populations. The process of palm oil production is carried out at palm oil plantations. These plantations are designated portions of land where the oil palm plants are grown and where their kernels are subsequently harvested to produce palm oil. It may seem unclear how this factors into deforestation and loss of biodiversity until one is aware of a necessity regarding the growing of oil palm plant. Oil palms must grow in environments that are warm, tropical, and have easy access to water. This factor pigeonholes the number of locations where oil palms can be grown, relegating the growing sites to tropical areas like Indonesia, Malaysia, and a handful of South American countries. With strict growth requirements and a small number of areas that can accommodate, rainforests are optimal locations. (It is important to keep in mind that rainforests are usually hubs of wildlife and plant biodiversity in the world.) Usually what happens is that areas of rainforest are selected and sectioned off. The trees in these designated areas are then either cut down or burnt in order to make room for the oil palms. After the land is cleared, oil palms are planted in such a way that makes extraction of the fruits and ability to clear the plants simple. The practice of cutting down or burning rainforest leaves many wildlife populations, namely the already severely endangered Orangutans, Sumatran tigers, elephants, and rhinoceroses, without a place to live. (And that is if they have not already gotten injured or killed in the deforestation process.) It is easy to see how even the beginning stages of palm oil production can have deleterious impacts on the wildlife populations that inhabit areas used for palm oil plantations.  

Infograph part 3 - IUCN report "Palm oil and biodiversity" June 2018Source for graphic 

One may be curious as to the extent to which deforestation of the rainforest for palm oil plantations is a problem in numerical terms. A report by the World Wildlife Fund stated that an area of rainforest approximately the size of 300 football fields is cut every hour to make room for palm oil plantations. After an entire year, the estimated total amount of rainforest land destroyed is around 151 billion square feet, or 5400 square miles worth of wildlife, biodiversity, and habitat.

\[ \frac{300 \text{ football fields}}{1 \text{ hour}} \times \frac{24 \text{ hours}}{1 \text{ day}} \times \frac{365 \text{ days}}{1 \text { year}} \times \frac{57,600 \text{ square feet}}{1 \text { football field}}\times \frac{1 \text{ square mile}}{27,878,400 \text { square feet}} \approx \frac{5,400 \text{ square miles}}{1 \text { year}}\]

New York City’s land area is about 302 square miles. The amount of forested land lost to deforestation for palm oil production is approximately 18 times that. 

In terms of specific animal populations, I think we should focus on just one population, perhaps the most afflicted by this epidemic – the orangutan. A hundred years ago, there was an estimated 230,000 orangutans that lived in the wild. Today, according to the World Wildlife Fund, about 112,000, and that number is swiftly declining. Current estimates say that between 1,000 to 5,000 orangutans die every year due to palm oil ventures. Let us assume that about 2,500 die every year for the next century. This would mean that in another century, there would be a net negative population of orangutans. In another century, assuming the rate of orangutans deaths per year did not increase at all, there would be a loss of 250,000 orangutans, or –138,000.

\[ \frac{2,500 \text{ orangutan deaths}}{1 \text{ year}} \times \frac{100 \text{  years}}{1 \text{ century}} = \frac{250,000 \text{ orangutan deaths}}{\text{ century}}\]

That is to say, if we keep up our current rate of deforestation, orangutans will not last another century. And that is also without looking at the impact it would have on other populations. In fact, when we reach the age of 70, the population will have completely died out.  

Loss of biodiversity is just one of the reasons why we need to shift how we spend our dollars on palm oil products. If we focus on products that are approved by the Roundtable of Sustainable Palm Oil, the overarching authority on safe palm-oil production, there will be a smaller net loss of such populations. One criticism of the RSPO is that it does not completely cut out deforestation. However, it does refuse to allow deforestation of areas with high level of biodiversity and is starting to phase out the allowance of companies to deforest rainforest entirely. It is important to keep in mind that it won’t do to completely quit using palm oil products, as over half of the world relies on that economy for food. However, we can continue using our money to support companies that use more sustainable methods. RSPO approved companies do not eliminate the destruction of rainforest, but they take steps to mitigate the loss of animal and plant populations in some of the richest parts of our world. Orangutans and other animals, as well as the native flora, are being lost at an alarming rate, all because companies are taking shortcuts. Customers must use their dollars in such a way that animal and plant populations are respected alongside those of humans. 

In addition to a loss in biodiversity, the cutting down and burning of rainforests can also result in an increase of effects that exacerbate the impacts of climate change. When a tree is chopped down, there is a release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. When a tree is burnt, it also released carbon dioxide at a rate faster than when they are cut down. When this deforestation takes place over large swaths of area and in locations where there is a large number of trees in a small area, i.e. a rainforest, the release of carbon dioxide increases alarmingly fast. According to a report in The Scientific American, the majority of analysts claim that the deforestation of the rainforests contributes more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than do the combined total of cars and trucks on the entire Earth. They claim that the latter contributes roughly 14%, whereas the former contributes about 15%. This is a large number, especially considering that the expansion of palm oil plantations is not a completely necessary task. What’s more is that necessity of the rainforest being preserved is two-fold. Not only do you have the fact that the cutting down and burning of trees releases a considerably substantial amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, there is also the truth that trees are able to take in carbon dioxide. In dense rainforests, where trees exist en masse, there is a lot of opportunity for global carbon dioxide levels to fall as the forests’ trees can absorb it. However, if humans are cutting down rainforest, which both increases carbon dioxide levels and precludes the possibility that those trees can be taking in more carbon dioxide, the total amount of emissions is increased exponentially. 

According to an aforementioned example, around 151,000,000,000 square feet of land are cut down on a yearly average for the purpose of expanding the palm oil industry. Pursuant to a claim in a journal in Science Daily, one hectare of rainforest land that is converted into oil palm-supporting land loses around 174 tons of carbon dioxide, most of which rises into the atmosphere. Let us assume that 75% of this 174 tons, or 348000 pounds of CO2, make it into the air. Also important is that around one hectare is equal to 107639 square feet. Given these details of information, it can be assumed that around 367 billion pounds of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere on a yearly basis from just the deforestation of the rainforest. This does not include the amount of carbon dioxide that is no longer able to be absorbed by the trees that are no longer living. 

\[ \frac{151 \text{ million square feet}}{1 \text{ year}} \times \frac{1 \text{  hectare}}{107,639 \text{ square feet}} \times \frac{174 \text{ tons of CO2}}{1 \text{ hectare}} \times \frac{2000 \text{  lbs of CO2}}{1 \text{ ton CO2}} \times 75\text{%} \approx 367 \text{ bil lbs of CO2} \]

Image result for co2 emissions palm oil

Source for graphic

If we continue to cut down rainforests, the impact will actually also affect ocean populations. Without the stability that the forests provide in absorbing carbon dioxide, the ocean is one of the next places where it can be absorbed. Unfortunately, this will have an impact on the wildlife, as it will acidify the water. The carbon release brought on by deforestation and air pollution for the sake of the palm oil industry has the potential to perpetrate one of the worst crimes against the Earth’s safety in many different domains. 

As you can clearly see, the damage done to not only the immediate populations that surround the rainforests but also the Earth is widespread and largely unfavorable to the interests of its inhabitants. If we can focus on buying from companies that have received their mark of RSPO approval, we will without a doubt see a decrease in the impact of climate change, at least from the angle of the palm oil industry. Rainforests are critically important in reducing CO2. As explained in an article by a news outlet Mongabay, the efforts of the RSPO to reduce deforestation by non-RSPO-approved companies was little but still successful, They were able to save 8 square miles of Indonesian forest over a fourteen year span. This is not a lot of area saved, but it is a start, and by supporting the RSPO in its quest to have sustainable methods for all palm oil producers, their impact can grow. The role of palm oil is deeply rooted in our everyday life, in so many of our products, whether we realize it or not, and it is here to stay. As a matter of fact, it may be more detrimental to stop using the product. That said, we have to use our function as consumers to do the right thing.

Infograph 2 - IUCN report "Palm oil and biodiversity" June 2018

Source for graphic

The palm oil industry presents the world with a major challenge: balancing the needs of Earth’s human current population without neglecting its ecological needs and the posterity and future generations. Palm oil is necessary in supplying most of the the world’s population with one of its most basic needs. However, the practices of those that produce the product often take shortcuts and neglect the impact of their actions. As consumers, we must utilize our power and put pressure on entities that subvert the care required to maintain and foster a prosperous world. Only by buying from companies that practice environmentally friendly techniques can we do ensure that our use of palm oil is healthy for our world. Hopefully, this will also cause other companies to change their dangerous methods and adopt newer, safer, and more lucrative ones. Orangutan and elephant populations, the integrity of rainforests, the safety of our globe against the effects of climate change hang in the balance. It is up to us to use our power to create the change we wish to see. And that starts with buying from eco-friendly palm oil producers. 

 

Works Cited 

Cannon, John C. “Study: RSPO Certification Prunes Deforestation in Indonesia – but Not by Much.” Mongabay Environmental News, Copyright Conservation, 13 Dec. 2017, news.mongabay.com/2017/12/study-rspo-certification-prunes-deforestation-in-indonesia-but-not-by-much/.

École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. “Palm oil: The carbon cost of deforestation.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 19 June 2018. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180619123018.htm.  

International Union for Conservation of Nature. “Palm Oil and Biodiversity.” International Union for Conservation of Nature , International Union for Conservation of Nature, 7 May 2019, www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/palm-oil-and-biodiversity. 

Orangutan Foundation International. “What’s Wrong with Palm Oil?” Official Orangutan Foundation International Site, Orangutan Foundation International, 2018, orangutan.org/palmoil/. 

Rainforest Rescue. “Palm Oil – Deforestation for Everyday Products.” Rainforest Rescue, Rainforest Rescue, 2019, www.rainforest-rescue.org/topics/palm-oil. 

Rainforest Rescue. “Questions and Answers About Palm Oil.” Rainforest Rescue, Rainforest Rescue, 2019, www.rainforest-rescue.org/topics/palm-oil/questions-and-answers#start. 

Scheer, Roddy, and Doug Moss. “Deforestation and Its Extreme Effect on Global Warming.” Scientific American, Scientific American, 13 Nov. 2012, www.scientificamerican.com/article/deforestation-and-global-warming/. 

World Wildlife Fund. “8 Things to Know About Palm Oil.” World Wildlife Fund, WWF-UK, 12 Nov. 2018, www.wwf.org.uk/updates/8-things-know-about-palm-oil.  

World Wildlife Fund. “Orangutan: Facts.” WWF, World Wildlife Fund, 2019, www.worldwildlife.org/species/orangutan. 

World Wildlife Fund. “Palm Oil Fact Sheet.” WWF, World Wildlife Fund, 2018, deforestationandpalmoil.weebly.com/uploads/1/8/8/5/18854416/wwf.pdf.

Posted in Write and Respond | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reflective Writing

Posted on December 9, 2019 by Katie Federman

I believe I have a pretty good background  of the environment since I have taken an environmental science class before, in addition to being apart of environmental clubs. However, I wanted to take this class to put a number to the environmental problems and climate change. Because of this class, my perspective on the ocean’s problems have strengthened since I learned a lot from my write and respond project. I became more concerned about overfishing and I’m changing my consumer habits because of what I learned.

For my write and respond project, I was curious about problems in the ocean due to climate change. I was concerned about sea levels rising, coral bleaching, plastic pollution, and overfishing.  However, I decided to focus the topic of my project should be on overfishing since I had the least amount of knowledge on it and wanted to learn more. Using sources and equations I had learned from the class, I learned that the United States wastes over 600,000,000 pounds of fish per year. Thus, the extremity of the situation became more aware to me and as I dove deeper into the issue I became more impacted. I knew that overfishing was an issue, yet my perspective became stronger since I was able to educate myself on the impact of overfishing. I learned that the ocean’s problems are complex and there isn’t a simple solution; therefore, I’m going to be a better consumer and try to reduce my carbon footprint. Fish is a big part of my diet since I don’t eat much red meat, yet I’m to reduce the amount of fish I eat by a lot. In addition, I’m going to try to eat less tuna, which is one of the most overfished species. Plus, I’m going to try and eat more wild caught fish rather than farmed since farmed fish causes tons of waste. Because I learned more about overfishing, I feel more strongly about it and I’m changing my consumer habits because of it.

Ultimately, this class has taught me that climate change and environmental problems can be explained with numbers, which helps strengthens my understanding of the issues. The class topics have helped me understand that these issues are more complex and aren’t easily solvable. Learning about overfishing for my write and respond project has helped me understand the extremity of the issue and strengthened my perspective of needing to change the way fish is produced.

Posted in Reflective Writing | Leave a comment

Reflection on Math 33

Posted on December 9, 2019 by Sydney Thiem

Coming into this class, I was already keen on the idea that more needed to be done to protect our resources and overall environment. Math 33 definitely reinforced this belief and it actually helped me formulate possible solutions to specific problems, showed me how to make arguments about the declining quality of the environment by using mathematics, and inspired me to work to become a Penn State EcoRep. I feel that I have gained enough knowledge and how to convey it properly that I now feel comfortable joining a group like this and implement change locally from the things that I have learned and gained.

One thing I especially enjoyed doing in this class was working on the In The News posts. Those encouraged me to search the web for the most up-to-date events regarding sustainability. I now not only know where to look for these types of articles, but how to analyze them to get the most information out of them. I also liked being able to educate myself on what is happening to the environment globally, rather than just what makes headline news and is local mostly to the United States. Doing these analysis assignments have helped strengthen my desire to educate others on the prevalence and importance of our global environmental struggle because I have learned in this class just how prevalent this is and is continuing to be.

I feel like I am with most students when I say that I was not sure how mathematics was going to be tied into this class and was nervous that I would struggle with the concepts, even though I knew I loved sustainability a lot. However, I was very interested in the different math topics that we went over and felt that they were important to learn if I was ever needing to provide concrete evidence for an environmental issue. Like in our Write and Respond assignment for example. I felt that it was important to have a mathematical component to make our argument or analysis stand out and be taken seriously as factual evidence. Especially for people who are more inclined to believe an argument when it is logically broken down into something like mathematical equations. This can be beneficial to me as I enter into EcoReps and start doing research and finding solutions to make Penn State more sustainable.

Overall, I am very glad I took this class and was able to broaden my horizons and look at the environment and sustainability on more of a global scale. I also was glad for the experience to work with some environmental questions and problems and try to answer them with mathematical equations and techniques. I believe this will help me during my time and Penn State and beyond as I try to help keep the environment healthy and livable for the generations after us.

Posted in Reflective Writing | Leave a comment

Flooding in New Orleans

Posted on December 9, 2019 by elm5585

In the world today, there are many areas that are affected by damaging, life-threatening floods. While this is happening across the globe, many people may not be aware that it could be occurring in the country that they call home. New Orleans is a city on the south west side of Louisiana that has been greatly affected by flooding issues for many years. Being so close to the coast, other large bodies of water, and having significant rainfall, NOLA is a major city that could potentially disappear in future years. With a constant increase in climate change and rainfall over the years, New Orleans, Louisiana faces many obstacles related to the cities safety when it comes to flood risk which may cause a strong increase in loss of homes, lives, and land. 

 

Today, New Orleans is a city that is prone to flooding. The city could flood at any time, but the rainiest months of the year in that area are June, July, and August. Rain is the most common way for the city to flood. When it starts to rain, water doesn’t only flood the streets, but it causes the levels of water in nearby bodies to rise and eventually overflow. Lake Borgne and Lake Pontchartrain are the two lakes that border the city from the east and north, causing a greater flood risk in New Orleans. The Mississippi River is another body of water that raises flood risk within the city. The river snakes around the western, southern, and eastern side of the city, leaving many areas available for potential flooding. Along with the rise of water levels from rainfall, the changes in climate are causing a strong rise in sea levels. According to a study done on 2016, the sea level around New Orleans is rising at a rate of about 0.75 inches per year.  

Sea Level Rise by 2100:

\(80 \text { Years} \times {0.75 \text { Inches}} = 60 \text{ Inches by 2100}\)

12 Inches = 1 Foot

\(60 \text{ Inches} \div {12 \text { Inches}} = 5 \text{ Feet}\)

 

 

—Link—  

This means that if these rates continue at the same rate each year, the entire city is projected to be just about underwater by 2100: by then, the land will be about five more feet underwater. New Orleans currently stands under the high-tide line due to the rise in sea levels over the years. The city has managed to maintain its land by putting barriers, or levees, in place that work to hold back the water forcing its way into the city. Although there are levees that stand up to 20 feet above sea level, they could be surpassed within the near future.  

 

With many risks of flooding, the city has come together to form ways to prevent flooding from causing mass amounts of damage to the land and homes that stand there. The most common form of flood protection today are barriers or walls, which are more specifically known as levees. Levees are natural or artificial walls that basically block water from going where it shouldn’t go. Levees are currently put in places where the land is greatly exposed and prone to flooding, such as areas of lower elevation. Samantha Montano from The Week writes, “There are canals to channel the water, pumps to remove the water, flood gates and walls to hold water back, greenspace to absorb water, levees to keep water out of the city and levees to keep water in the river.” (Montano). As written in this article, there are many ways that the city is currently trying to deal with the issues at hand. As well as attempting to physically block water from entering the city, officials of Homeland Security are looking for more ways to communicate flood risk to the public to make these dangerous situations more prominent to the public. The NOLA community must come together and be aware of these situations at hand, because this issue affects the entire city.  

 

 

—Link— 

People have lost homes, land, belongings, and much more from floods, which leaves a huge cost for the repercussions to be made after. Thousands of homes have been lost, however insurance on what is lost is dependent on the area your home is located, and how far below the high-tide line it lies. Some homes may have no insurance for what is lost, just based on where it is located. With that being said, homes in areas that meet the elevation requirement for insurance may soon have nowhere to go due to the rapid increase of land being lost per year. “Since the 1930s, Louisiana has lost over 2,000 square miles of land, an area roughly the size of Delaware” (Mississippi River Delta).  

 

—Link— 

 For the future, the city of New Orleans is constantly proposing ways to keep the city above water. This mainly includes creating more levees to hold the water back or adding more pumps to the city to flush the water out after significant flooding. However, constant natural disasters are putting the city under strain. Ultimately humans can’t change the weather, or fully control where massive amounts of water can go. The amount of time that it takes to construct barriers or other operations for flood prevention outweighs the amount of time we have between each rainfall, storm, or sea level rise. While in the process of creating better, stronger blockages, there is bound to be another obstacle that will ruin the work being done. Although this is a harsh reality for the city, they are remaining hopeful for the future. People have begun to realize that aside from significant rainfall, cities such as Louisiana will continue to have these pressing issues if we don’t make necessary environmental changes. Montano writes,  

“Louisiana exemplifies our continued reality in the climate crisis: our communities will face overlapping hazards. This week, record spring flooding has collided with hurricane season and the outcome could be devastating…. An American city living on the brink of destruction from a relatively minor storm isn’t a sustainable future. Nor is standing by quietly as the coast disappears below the waves. This is the reality we’ve made. Now we have to figure out a way to live in it.” (Montano).  

Humans must make the necessary environmental changes to save the future of this city. Climate change is the leading cause of sea level rise, and humans are the ones causing it. We must work to save energy and be more efficient, because although it may not seem like it’s helping, it makes a huge difference.  

 

In conclusion, there are many ways that cause New Orleans to flood, while there are many ways that we are working to fight this issue. The flooding in this city is mainly caused by rainfall, natural disaster, and climate change. Bodies of water such as lakes and rivers that border the city start to fill up and overflow when massive amounts of rain or weather occur. New Orleans is noted to be a very rainy city as well with many large bodies of water surrounding it, not to mention being so close to the coast. The proximity of the city to the coast is another red flag for flooding due to the increase of predicted sea level rises that are coming our way. Humans have the power to make this situation better, however there are many obstacles that stand in our way. Ultimately, we cannot control rainfall and storms that hit this specific area, however the rises in sea level can be more controlled if we work to reduce hectic climate change around the globe. Because there are so many people in this world, it has been a struggle to make an effective change for the better. Climate change is only making these issues worse, and it is up to humans to make a difference.  

 

Works Cited  

 

Adelson, Jeff. “New Orleans’ Revised Flood Maps Set to Slash Insurance Rates for Many Homeowners.” NOLA.com, 30 Sept. 2016, www.nola.com/news/article_5ab88d73-a3e7-5934-8750-e6b76dd726f4.html.  

 

“Land Loss” http://mississippiriverdelta.org/our-coastal-crisis/land-loss/  

 

Montano, Samantha. “How New Orleans’ Flooding Risks Are Exacerbated by Climate Change.” Image, The Week, 13 July 2019, theweek.com/articles/852411/how-new-orleans-flooding-risks-are-exacerbated-by-climate-change.  

 

“Reducing New Orleans Storm-Surge Flood Risk in an Uncertain Future.” RAND Corporation, www.rand.org/well-being/community-health-and-environmental-policy/projects/new-orleans-flood-risk.html. 

 

Elevation Image: https://people.uwec.edu/jolhm/eh3/group7/WhyNOVulnerable.htm 

 

Flood Image: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weather/video/new-orleans-in-state-of-emergency-amid-flood-risk-1022431299857 

  

Levees Image: https://www.ourdailyplanet.com/story/new-orleans-levees-sinking-city-sues-oil-companies/ 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized, Write and Respond | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Write and Respond: Exploring Water Consumption in Beef

Posted on December 9, 2019 by lvf5049

It is now commonplace to see a plant based option at even the most meat centric restaurants. We see Burger King even advertising their new meatless burger. Advocates for the plant based movement have been arguing for decades that eating less meat will ultimately help the current environmental crisis, but is there a mathematical truth to that? One of the biggest concerns facing our environmental crisis is the lack of existing clean, viable water. We are currently witnessing many cities going through an intense drought. I am advocating that eating a more plant based diet as an effective alternative to eating the standard American diet (one containing a large amount of meat) will conserve a statistically significant amount of water. 

To judge the amount of water is going to meat production I will be looking at the production of beef or more accurately how much water goes into the production of one pound of beef. I will first be looking at the US as a whole before looking at plant based alternatives. Let’s first look at where the water for beef production comes from and how much goes into one pound of beef.

Beef is a water intensive product because in order to go from livestock to the pound of meat on your plate there are thousands of gallons of water that go into keeping the animal alive, in both the water it drinks and then the vast amount of water that goes into the grass or grain that is fed to the animal. Livestock are not efficient forms of energy because they require so much energy that goes into just keeping them alive. There are a wide range of estimates as to how much water goes into one pound of beef from four-hundred gallons to eight-thousand gallons. So the number I settled on comes from the widely cited, more conservative number of two-thousand and five hundred gallons of water per one pound of beef (Piemental). I then went on to find that the average American eats about fifty-four pounds of beef per year (Durisin). The US population is around 325million people. The following is the math used to find out how many gallons of water are providing the United State’s beef habit.

\[ \frac { 2,500 \text {gallons of water}}{\text {per lb of meat}} \times \frac {54 \text{lbs of beef}}{\text{per American}}\times {325 \text {million people}}=43,875,000,000,000 \text {gallons of water}\]

That means the US uses 43,875,000,000,000 gallons of water just for their beef habit, or more effectively \( 4.4 \times 10^{13} \text {gallons of water} \). That also simplifies down to the average American using 135,000gallons of water for the beef they eat in a single year. To put this into context, the average backyard swimming pool holds about 19,000 gallons of water (Reference). That means the average American fills roughly 7 full backyard swimming pools full of water with how much goes into their beef consumption in a single year.

\[ 135,000 \text {gallons of water}\div 19,000 \text {gallons of water}= 7.1 \text {pools} \]

To then conceptualize actually how much water the entire United States is using for beef in one year, \( 7 \text {pools} \times 325 \text {million}=2.275\text {billion swimming pools} \). That is over two billion backyard swimming pools worth of water that is being used solely on beef production in the United States. That is not including any other kind of meat other than beef. Now, let’s look at a comparable plant based protein.

Tofu is a protein heavy plant based protein that uses roughly 300 gallons of water per one pound of protein (Boeherer). So using the same numbers from beef just with 300 gallons of water instead of 2,500 gallons of water (which means we would be substituting all beef consumption with tofu) we will calculate how much water would then be used for tofu.

\[ \frac { 300 \text {gallons of water}}{\text {per lb of tofu}} \times \frac {54 \text{lbs of tofu}}{\text{per American}}\times {325 \text {million people}}=5,265,000,000,000 \text {gallons of water}\]

That is over eight times less water that goes into producing tofu rather than beef. While many people might be angry over the idea of switching all of their beef intake to tofu in reality we can do a lot to reduce the water consumption by looking at our diet as a whole. The most popular form of meat in the United States is now chicken so switching out beef for tofu is still within reason because it is not even the most popular meat (Durisin). Another argument we hear time and time again is that plant based proteins do not contain as much protein as animal based proteins. While in many cases that is true, it is also true that more industrialized nations are actually consuming excessive amounts of protein. According to the World Resources Institute, wealthier countries eat more protein than they actually need (WRI). In fact, our culture has become obsessed with protein, trying to make carbs the enemy and citing that higher protein diets will solve your diet woes. This has been disproved from a nutritional standpoint, showing that these high protein, high fat diets are not healthy according to cardiologist Dr. Dean Ornish as he writes in the New York Times in an article aptly named “The Myth of High Protein Diets”  (Ornish).

While the criticism against going plant based is usually one of fear and lack of facts; it is obvious when we look at the numbers that not only is eating less beef better for our health. It is better for the environment as well. We are already starting to see countries and regions experiencing severe draughts. Within the United States we have seen draught ravage California and exacerbate forest fires. When we look at the Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs, the right to clean water is high on the list. Yet communities within the United States do not have access to clean water. However, they do have access to cheap beef.

One aspect of this advocacy work within the plant based movement is also hitting on the point of privilege and how it is not reasonable at the moment for everyone to go plant based because it is expensive. However, the US government plays a large part in that. Living in a capitalistic society means money is the largest motivator and politicians receive large amount of money from animal agriculture lobbyists. That is a big reason in the Farm Bills from the last few decades have all included large subsidies to animal agriculture but we do not see the same for plant based proteins and vegetables. Not all communities can afford plant based proteins or if they live in a food desert like much of the US population does then it may just not be available to them. While I am advocating for more plant based eating it is a privilege to be able to tackle this from the consumer side. We need to see farms receive incentives to switch to more sustainable farming practices and products and for the last century we have seen only incentives for animal agriculture. This change needs to be a political and industrial one or we will see wealthier communities start to make the switch and marginalized communities bear the brunt of this environmental problem and not have the privilege to change their actions.

As was shown mathematically, beef is consuming a lot of water that we could save as we explore plant based options. While it is currently a question of privilege we need to call our political leaders to make political and structural change.

 

Works Cited

Boehrer, Katherine. “Which Of Your Favorite Foods Are Hiding A Massive Water Footprint?” HuffPost, HuffPost, 31 Dec. 2018, www.huffpost.com/entry/food-water-footprint_n_5952862.

Durisin, Megan, and Shruti Date Singh. “Americans’ Meat Consumption Set to Hit a Record in 2018.” The Seattle Times, The Seattle Times Company, 2 Jan. 2018, www.seattletimes.com/business/americans-meat-consumption-set-to-hit-a-record-in-2018/.

“How Important is Irrigation to U.S. Agriculture?” USDA: Economic Research Service. 18 November, 2019

“How Many Gallons Are There in a Pool?” Reference, IAC Publishing, www.reference.com/world-view/many-gallons-pool-f705582183cb0362.

Ornish, Dean. “The Myth of High-Protein Diets.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 23 Mar. 2015, www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/opinion/the-myth-of-high-protein-diets.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share.

“People Are Eating More Protein than They Need-Especially in Wealthy Regions.” World Resources Institute, 31 May 2018, www.wri.org/resources/charts-graphs/people-eating-more-protein-wealthy-regions.

Pimentel, David, et al. “Water Resources: Agricultural and Environmental Issues”. BioScience (2004) 54 (10): 909-918. 18 November, 2019

 

Posted in Write and Respond | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Analysis of Feral Pigs Within California and Texas

Posted on December 9, 2019 by spg5164

 

 

 

In our modern age, we can be closer together than ever before; the advances in communication, trade, and mobility have resulted in a connected world. This has many benefits, but unfortunately, unforeseen consequences, such as invasive species. An invasive species is an organism that enters a habitat not its own through various means and can decimate the local ecology of wherever the species goes. An invasive species can be any living creature from an insect, plant, and even mammal. One such species is the Feral Hog, also known as the Wild Hog or Wild Pig. This species has invaded most of the states across America, and two of the worst affected states are California and Texas. This paper will analyze the origins of this invasive species, characteristics of the species, and the damage this species does to these states. Furthermore, using the current population statistics and statistics on current measure being taken to curb this species, an estimate will be calculated to see how the population may grow by the year 2025.

To begin, it is important to learn more about this species. the term “Feral Hog” is a slightly incorrect term attributed collectively to Eurasian wild boars and Feral Hogs. Eurasian wild boars originate from Russia whereas Feral hogs are hogs that were domesticated pigs that adapted to living in the wild. Domesticated pigs are able to become feral hogs within months of being released into the wild. They grow bristles and thick hair, and within a few generations will grow tusks very similar to their Eurasian counterparts. They are also able to interbreed with Eurasian wild boars (Mapston, 2007). Due to this, there are very few boars of pure Eurasian decent, meaning the term “Feral Hog” has become correct as time has passed. Feral Hogs can reach sizes of over 600 pounds and typically have 2 litters in a year with a litter size that can range from one to twelve. The average hog will live roughly 4 years in the wild (Feralhogs, 2019).

 

Concerning the introduction of the eventual feral hog to California and Texas, the species was introduced as far back as the 18th century. Feral hogs in the United States were introduced in the 1700s by Spanish missionaries (Schellman, 2018).  The missionaries would let domesticated pigs loose so they could breed, and with colonization of the area, their population increased as they were considered a good source of food. It’s similar in Texas, however, the Eurasian wild boar was introduced into the population in the 1920s and 1930s by ranchers to hunt for sport, which further added to the population. In the three centuries they’ve been here, the population has grown to the point that in Texas, feral hogs do over $400 million in damages (Morthland, 2011) annually. In California, the damage is estimated at $1.5 billion dollars every year (Schellman, 2018).  The population for California is anywhere between 200,000 and 400,000 (Sabalow, 2018). In Texas, the number is estimated from 1.8 to 3.4 million pigs (Timmons et al., n.d.) ). Each year, the pig population grows by roughly 20 percent, despite control methods that are in place to lower the total population (Timmons et al., n.d.).

 

It important to explain the destruction this species can cause. The United States Department of Agriculture has published 5 areas in which a feral hog can cause damage, they are: agriculture, pets and people, natural resources, property, and cultural and historic sites (USDA, 2016).  This analysis will cover 3 of the most important ones.

Feral hogs affect agriculture by consuming crops or simply trampling over them. They will commonly target sugar cane, corn, grain, wheat, and rice but they will eat nearly any crop they have access to. Furthermore they damage pasture areas by digging for roots of plants, which will kill valuable plants and allow weed species to prosper. Feral hogs can transmit diseases to livestock, and can easily kill the young of livestock species (USDA, 2016).

In regards to people and pets, feral pigs can carry over 30 diseases that can be transmitted to humans and pets. One other notable risk is that feral pigs are known to be territorial and aggressive and can attack individuals but fatalities are rare (USDA, 2016). However, this past November a Texas woman, Christine Rollins,  was killed by a pack of feral hogs in a Anahuac, a town 50 miles east of Houston. It is especially rare for attacks to take place in suburban and urban areas; but according to John Mayer, who published a 2013 study on feral hog fatalities, feral hog presence in these areas has been increasing since the mid-1990s (Bellware, 2019) .

 

The damage to natural resources by feral pigs are due to the impact on wildlife. The pigs will prey on nests and eggs of birds and reptiles. They will compete with deer, bear, and turkey. Furthermore their wallows make for ideal mosquito breeding grounds which also allow disease to spread ((USDA, 2016). In all, the feral pig is an extremely destructive species for the reasons listed and many more.

 

Continuing, there a variety of control methods utilized in an attempt to curb the boar population. The most common method is hunting. In California, the primary method used to control the wild pig population is a firearm, accounting for 84.3% of total takedowns for the 2016-2017 year. Takedowns with bows and crossbows accounted for 5.8% of the total, with the remaining 9.9% method being unknown (Garcia & Raymond,2017) . Texas uses very similar methods to California; however, trapping is also used and is the most common form of population control with 48% of takedowns being reported using the trap method. The second most common reported method is takedown by firearm, accounting for 35% of reported takedowns (Timmons et al., n.d.).

 

With this information, it is possible to make an estimate of what the feral pig population will look like within the next five years if current methods stay the same. First, let’s look at California. Estimates of the feral pig population vary from 200,000 to 400,000. We will use an average of 300,000 for the year 2019 (Sabalow, 2018). The population has the average growth rate of 20 percent each year. Using data from the Department of Fish and Wildlife in 2016-2017, only 4,637 pigs were reported taken for the season (Garcia & Raymond,2017). This is %1.5 percent of the total estimated population. Annually, the feral pig population will grow by %18.5 percent. With this known, the feral pig population will have reached roughly 1,030,000 by the year 2025. Starting with the damage of $1.5 billion annually, the current population shows that each individual pig does an estimated $5000 worth of damage per year.

\[ \frac{1.5 \times 10^{9}}{300 \times 10^{3}}= $5000 \text{ per pig}.\]

If current measures stay the same, California will face over $5.15 billion in damages annually from the feral pig population. Furthermore, when adjusted for an average inflation rate of 2.3% per year (Knoema, n.d.), that number will actually be $5.92 billion in damages in the year 2025.

\[ \text{ California: Population Growth/ Estimated Cost by Year 2025}.\]

 

\[ U (1-d)^n\]

\[ U (1- .185)^6 = 300 \times 10^{3}\]

\[ U (.82)^6 = 300 \times 10^{3}\]

\[ .29U = 30 \times 10^{3}\]

\[ U= 1.03 \times 10^{6} \text{ Feral Pigs}.\]

\[ 1.03 \times 10^{6} \text{ Feral Pigs} \times $5,000 = $5.15 \times 10^{9} \text{ dollars}.\]

\[ \text{ 2025 Estimated Cost Due to Annual Inflation Rate}.\]

 

\[ U (1-d)^n\]

\[ U (1- .023)^6 = $5.15 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ U (.977)^6 = $5.15 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ .87U = $5.15 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ U= $5.92 \times 10^{9} \text{ dollars}.\]

 

Concerning Texas, the population of feral pigs is much higher, with population estimates ranging from 1.8 to 3.6 million. For the purposes of this paper, 2.6 million will be used as the base population for 2019. Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources published a study showing that the average population growth rate annually is 21% (Timmons et al., n.d.) . Using this data, by the year 2025 Texas will have a feral pig population of roughly 10,800,000 with the population increasing by over 1 million each year. With an estimated $400 million in damages annually, the average feral pig causes only $154 in damage, much lower than California.

\[ \frac{400 \times 10^{6}}{2.60 \times 10^{6}}= $154\text{ per pig}.\]

Despite this, by the year 2025 Texas will be dealing with $1.66 billion in damages. When adjusted for inflation with the same interest rate (2.3%) that number is actually much higher at $1.91 billion dollars.

\[ \text{ Texas: Population Growth/ Estimated Cost by Year 2025}.\]

 

\[ U (1-d)^n\]

\[ U (1- .21)^6 = 2.60\times 10^{6}\]

\[ U (.79)^6 = 2.60\times 10^{6}\]

\[ .24U = 2.60\times 10^{6}\]

\[ U= 10.8\times 10^{6} \text{ Feral Pigs}\]

\[ 10.8 \times 10^{6} \text{ Feral Pigs} \times $154 = $1.66 \times 10^{9} \text{ dollars}.\]

 

\[ \text{ 2025 Estimated Cost Due to Annual Inflation Rate}.\]

\[ U (1-d)^n\]

\[ U (1- .023)^6 = $1.66 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ U (.977)^6 = $1.66 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ .87U = $1.66 \times 10^{9}\]

\[ U= $1.91\times 10^{9} \text{ dollars}.\]

 

In conclusion, The feral pig population is increasing at a rate higher than what the current control measures in place are capable of reacting to. Unfortunately, these numbers are only an estimate using data that even experts themselves are not entirely sure of due to the difficulties of trying to track such an aggressively reproducing species. Feral pigs cause billions of dollars worth of damage to the places they take over as well as spreading disease and are even capable of killing people. Despite this, there seems to be very little being done about this issue, and it’s important to know what can happen if things remain the same.

 

Bibliography

Knoema. (n.d.). US Inflation Forecast 2019-2024 and up to 2060, Data and Charts. Retrieved from https://knoema.com/kyaewad/us-inflation-forecast-2019-2024-and-up-to-2060-data-and-charts

Sabalow, R. (2018, June 25).Wild pigs cause millions in damages in California. But hunting them could become easier. Retrieved from https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article213531964.html

Bellware, K. (2019, November 26). A herd of feral hogs attacked and killed a woman on her way to work in Texas. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/26/feral-hogs-kill-woman-texas/

Timmons J., Higginbotham B., Lopez R., Cathey J., Mellish J., Griffin J.,… Skow, K. (n.d.). Feral Hog Population Growth, Density and Harvest in Texas. Retrieved from http://agrilife.org/bexarcounty/files/2012/07/ESP-472-Feral-Hog-Population-Growth-Density-Harvest-in-Texas.pdf

United States Department of Agriculture(USDA). (2016, April 6).Feral Swine- Damage to Natural Resources. Retrieved from https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/operational-activities/feral-swine/feral-swine-damage/feral-swine-natural-resource-damage

Feralhogs. (2019, August 28). Feral Hog Reproductive Biology. Retrieved from https://feralhogs.extension.org/feral-hog-reproductive-biology/

Garcia, J., & Raymond, K. (2017). State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife Wild Pig take Report 2016-2017. Sacramento: Wildlife Branch. Retrieved from https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=142233&inline

Mapston, M. (2007). Feral Hogs in Texas. Texas Wildlife Services. Retrieved from https://tfsweb.tamu.edu/uploadedFiles/TFSMain/Manage_Forest_and_Land/Wildlife_Management/Non-Game/Feral_hogs_TCE.pdf

Morthland, J. (2011, January). A Plague of Pigs in Texas. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-plague-of-pigs-in-texas-73769069/

Schellman, A. (2018, June 4) Invasive Spotlight: Wild Pigs. Retrieved from https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=27344

Posted in Uncategorized, Write and Respond | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Global Commission Report on Economy and Climate

Posted on December 9, 2019 by asr5355

I will be researching and advocating on how we have progressed and increased the friendly climate economic system since the climate change crisis began. In the 21st century, we are making technological, sustainable infrastructure investment and increased resource productivity. These will result in efficient, livable cities, low carbon, protected forests, and most important sustainability. The plan for the future is to keep the temperature below 2 C growth per year. Since the shift to the 21st century and the dawn of climate change crisis, each year we have accelerated and transitioned to a better more inclusive climate-friendly economic system in energy, cities, food, land use, water, and industry.

Clean Energy System:
The first stage of this investigation is to look at how the efficiency of modern cities we are building and seeing the change. To see the change, I will be looking at energy usage in the cities. The article looks at the State of California, where they want to reach renewable energy mix to 33% by 2020. In addition, the California Public Utilities Commission is also cutting energy storage by about 1,325 MW every year. These will lead to less energy being used thus less will be stored to be used, which will be increasing each year. These changes can also be seen in Melbourne, Australia where they are improving energy and water efficiency through an “environmental upgrade charge.” In addition, the use of more efficient energy systems will tend to increase sustainable development in more countries leading to smarter urban development.


Energy Decreased by 2050 in tWh:

\[ 15315.03 \text{TWh} = 0.0160 \text{TWh} (1-0.00135 \text{tWh}) ^{33} \]

The energy from the graph above shows that in 2017, there were 16,000 TWh of energy used worldwide, but by 2050, it predicted that there will be 0.00135 TWh reduction in energy used. Therefore, by 2050, there will be roughly 15,000 tWh being used, decreasing by 1,000 tWh.

Smarter Urban Development:
To continue on investigating better urban sustainable planning, the report indicated about strategic infrastructure. This comes from the fact that using less energy means rewiring of existing cities and infrastructure to be more efficient. Specifically, the article looks at the expansion of public and non-motorized transport networks. Non-motorized transportation means relying on electric powered transport systems to reduce congestion and air pollution. This will add to the idea of electrifying cities thus decreasing carbon emissions by a significant amount. As a result, it will increase economic savings by about 17 trillion US dollars by 2050 and also saving 3.7 gigatons per year of CO2 emissions. Therefore, it will help to stimulate the growth of the economy by improving access to jobs, housing, and population booms in rural cities as everything will be more connected.

Sustainable Land Use:

With more compact and efficient cities, we can start to look at forms of agriculture that can start to give us better economic benefits and generate millions of jobs. The report says that “restoration of natural capital…our forests, degraded lands, and coastal zones will strengthen our defenses and boost adaptation to climate impact.” This comes from the news we all heard about this year with the Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro approving the degradation of the amazon and exploiting its resources for big corporation. The amazon is part of the world’s largest ecosystem that produces more oxygen than anywhere in the world. Degradation of forests leading to hazards such as wildfires produce more carbon-dioxide and carbon-monoxide which is detrimental to the whole world.

Wise Water Management:

“Today, 2.1 billion live without readily available, safe water supplies at home, and 4.5 billion live without safely managed sanitation.” Water is seen as the important part of life, giving life to billions of individuals and also all the animals we see on this earth. Clean water is not something we need but all the organisms relying on clean waters in our oceans, lakes, and rivers to live a healthy life. Due to climate change, we have seen many regions in the world becoming scarce of water leading to a 6% reduction in their gross domestic product (GDP). This can lead to over-priced water available to buy and also decrease in systems that invest in clean water production. By 2050, the commission wants to increase investment into systems that develop clean water. In addition, many countries will need to start deploying improved technology which help to increase water-efficient crops and also invest in public infrastructure. By doing this, the economy and also the climate will benefit.

Circular Industrial Economy

Circular Industrial economy as defined online aims to redefine growth, focusing on positive society-wide benefits. In relation to climate change, is about extracting the maximum value from a product and regenerate products that could be used to the extent. It cuts down the waste of materials that could’ve been used somewhere, which will lead to decrease in carbonization. The report way that global extraction of materials from 1970 to 2010 grew from 22 to 70 billion tonnes. This contributes to the plastic seen in aquatic life, and also seen in our garbage. It also mentions that more than 95% of the plastic packaging material value at $120 million US dollars. If the economy was more circular, we could use all this material to be used again to their extent, leading to less loss of material and dollars. That money that was lost before could now be used to stimulate growth in better climate change and invest in systems to become more efficient and sustainable.
Transitioning to this low carbon growth:
To further understand carbon levels, I will be looking at changes in levels throughout the years, forest changes, and changes in food and land use. Specifically, in India where TESSOL has started to reduce losses in storage and crop protection. They want to reduce and be more sustainable when it comes to protecting the crops that are a year-round process to grow. The transition to low-carbon model could help to generate 65 million new jobs which could stimulate economic growth.

The article West Africa Climate Extreme and Climate Change Indices talks about and compares changes in climate change with low temperatures and how that has impacted climate change in the West Africa. The year 2017 was a devasting year due to series of extreme weather conditions leading to many complications all over the world. Many atmospheric scientific are trying to bring attention to climate caused by human activities. It talks about extreme change with temperature exceeding daily temperature. This period of extreme temperature increasing everywhere has led to global average surfaces temperatures becoming more variable than usual.
Conclusions were drawn from the studies using the temporal and spatial scales. “Temperature-based indices show a consistent pattern of warming trends across the region with warming being observed in all [western African countries] seasons.” There were increases in the frequency of warm days and warm nights but decreases in the cool days and nights. The precipitation across the region was not as consistent as the temperature but show similar patterns recently. There has been more prevalence in wetter conditions than dry season in western Africa. These contributed to heavy rain fall leading to destruction of agriculture and flooding areas of human habitat. By understanding the extreme conditions in West African countries, the countries can use the dataset to anticipate rainfall and plan accordingly. However, it is led to a conclusion that climate change is becoming a global variable not in just West Africa but all over the world.

In conclusion, the change we see all over the globe are impacting how our views on saving this planet change. However, due to the dramatic changes we have seen, all over the world we have seen accelerated and better climate-friendly policies in energy, environment-friendly cities, and more.

Figures:

Graph 1: CO2 level graphs

References:

https://www.co2.earth/

https://community-wealth.org/strategies/panel/green/index.html

https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy

https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1002/joc.5420

Posted in Write and Respond | Leave a comment

Can Carbon Tax be an Effective Approach for Mitigating Global Warming?

Posted on December 9, 2019 by Zhongyi Wang

In 1989, while the unstable political status in eastern Europe was hindering the fall of USSR leading communist system, it is also the year that the Green Group in the European Parliament won 25 seats in the election. What is more significant, this rather small triumph also marks that the Green Party start to act as a major political group, even though their seats were incredibly small compare to normally 700+ seats. Historically, what they got in 1989 will not be considered as a good start, but for all the green parties who dedicated them to the cause of “Greener Future”, the origin sure did start long before than expected. For carbon tax, it is the rise of European environmentalism and green party that finally brought this Pigouvian tax to reality. EU, on another sense, is also the region where the carbon tax is widely adopted, until 2019, all the major countries adopted carbon taxes. (World Bank, 2019) However, besides its popularity in EU and other part of the world, the real effectiveness for this governmental regulation or taxation is still under suspicion. Considering the vast popularity and passion this issue enjoys around the globe, especially developed world, we have reason to believe that the local green party politicians has enough incentive to alienate this essentially technological problem to political scale. History has showed us that the public agitation toward a certain social topic can very possibly push the topic to worse condition, no matter the topic originally proposed with good hope or evil desire. A close examine should be made to conclude if the carbon taxes are truly beneficial to future or another righteous mistake made under collective zealot.

For the examiner of the tax, I will be using three approaches. First, the tax is designed to terminate the externality of human carbon activity that is detrimental to current earth environment, therefore the actual effect of its presence will be taken into measure. Second, as a global climate trend that has been scientifically proven, global warming is an urgent issue that we must face in our generation. But is it the environment really need protection, or it is our modern life? I will investigate where is tax revenue will be spent on and if they will properly solve the problem. Finally, the legitimacy of carbon tax is still contentious, and that is not the only way to solve the problem.

There is no possible way for me to have mass-data analysis to analyze all states that have adopted carbon tax. Therefore, I will focus on French Diesel tax that recently angered many French and provoked waves of violent protest. A liter of diesel obviously has a fixed carbon emission if it is burnt freely in open air, but many of the European carmakers have developed sophisticated ways of carbon reduction, and the emission between cars are also different due to different technology used and different era the car was made. In this calculation, I will be using the average carbon emission for European diesel engine cars, since the Europeans are so fond of diesel engine and even some of the “sportier” cars have been only limited to diesel version. The newest data of average carbon emission of European diesel-powered cars was 122.3g/KM for average European car emission. The current price for French Diesel is around 1.4 euro/L, and up to 59.3% of the price is tax. (VAT/Gst and Excise Rates, Trends and Policy Issues, 2018), and average mileage for a typical European car per year would be 13000 km. (Odyssee-Mure,215) Average fuel economy for diesel cars is 6.5L/100 km .And average carbon price per ton would be $50 per ton (EDF,219), therefore, the overall carbon emission for a typical European diesel car will be 1.5899 ton, combined with social cost of one ton of carbon-dioxide, $50, the overall cost of carbon pollution in one year for a certain European diesel car will be $79.5, which is equivalent to 71.5 Euros, and the tax extracted from using the car will be 701 Euros. The tax extracted from the using of the car is much greater than the actual social cost the car added to environment. The tax therefore should be cut or reduced for over taxation. The French diesel car will only be one specimen on research of the European carbon tax, but for what we have in the conclusion, I think that all the taxes that needed to be paid for driving in France is too much and exceeds the needed money for eliminating the externality of carbon pollution.

\[ 122.3 \text{ g/KM} \times 13000 \text{ KM} \div 1000000 \text{ g/ton} \times 50 \text{ dollars} \times 0.9 \text{ Euro/Dollar} = 71.5 \text{ Euros} \]

\[ \frac{13000 \text{ KM}}{6.5 \text{ L/100 KM}} \times 1.4 \text{ Euro/L} \times 59.3 \text{ %} = 701 \text{ Euros} \]

I am always a big fan for the British motoring show Top Gear and the three TV presenters, Jeremy Clarkson, James May and Richard Hammond. As a sport or leisure that is highly related with petrol, which is an important carbon resource in our daily life, it is very natural that these three must discuss basic information for cars like MPGs or carbon emission. As three old-fashioned motoring enthusiasts, all of them loath the EU regulations of environmental protection, and for the future of motoring industry, they sincerely do not believe that electric vehicle will be solution. But that was more that a decade ago, in their most recent opinion on the electric vehicle, they changed dramatically. Their drastic change on EV opinion really staggered me, especially compare how they have mocked the EV on several obvious drawbacks of it. And all that got me thinking, the if we really have come to an environmental phase that even the most dedicated counter-environmentalist turned their mind?

One of the most profound stereotype people have on environmentalist would be angry activists waving signs and shouting different slogans that demands governmental action. And one of their most famous stands of point will be “saving the environment”, but if we see through the long period of earth history, we will be found that their argument is flawed. If the environmental disaster really befalls on us, the only thing that will be destroyed will be humanity, not earth environmental. The post-apocalyptic period for earth environment will only gradually recovers to pre-industrial time, without human interference, environment will recover better. Another thing that we must note that carbon-emission related manufacturing is still the main way of industrial economic growth. By cutting carbon-emission, the government is also cutting the growth rate of GDP, for an industry that can reduce the unemployment rate for a large share, it should not be ignored. Once the economic growth rate slows down and start to impact general welfare of common people, their anger and fear will further add pressure to government that firstly decided to cut related emission, the whole thing can be trapped into an evil cycle. If the activists really want to make an impact on environmentalism, they should start with non-governmental efforts that gradually transfer people’s mind. Because all the viable means of environmental protection under current technological level, will be built on a basis that our convenient modern life is harmful to environment; and we must persuade people give up or partly abandon the current way of life. Since the current theory argues that societies are formed with individuals, the average individuals should also bear part of the responsibility of maintaining good environment. The environmental activists should not lobby governmental interference on a non-governmental, public issue.

Finally, no matter how government perform as re-distributor of the social resource, carbon tax or similar governmental act will not be able to ultimately solve the problem. For big emissions from industrial manufacturing like I mentioned in the last paragraph, and the necessary emission from basic transportation, they either have high importance in maintaining our society run or basically impossible to add a regulation on it. Our society cannot afford the price for losing these means of transportation. This Pigouvian tax is not the destination, other technological approach also needs to be addressed in finding clean energy and reducing carbon emission. Clean energy may seem to be intangible under current technology, but they are the final solution to the problem. Technologies like nuclear fission will be good alternative for our current energy source. Once human really harnessed this artificial sun, the world electric fee will become an outdated word. Also, even though the tax is widely regarded as a method to partly mitigate global warming, in its essence, it is still new tax. If the implementation of the tax has any flaw, the dissatisfaction may be amplified through negative elements like economic depression or radical political thought, therefore provoke further social instability. For anyone who is familiar with the history of American independence war will clearly remember the reason that triggered the disastrous (For UK) war, and therefore make considerate decision before new taxes. What is more, we have no evidence to prove that this environmentalist activist movement will make the legislative body have the right decision. The incentive behind these taxed may be good and in consideration for the future generation and environment, but good will does not necessarily lead to good outcome, if the law-making process, which its decision makers must remain clam and rational, are tied with things other than responsibility to the public but public agitation and zealotic passion generated from fear, the triumph of pubic opinion over rationality will not be beneficial to general welfare, but a populist disaster, a self-destruction farce.

Bibliography:

Change in distance traveled by car. From Odyssee-mure.  https://www.odyssee-mure.eu/publications/efficiency-by-sector/transport/distance-travelled-by-car.html

Average co2 emissions form EU cars increased to 120.5g/km. From Diesel net https://www.dieselnet.com/news/2019/03jato.php

The true cost of carbon pollution https://www.edf.org/true-cost-carbon-pollution

These countries have prices on Carbon. Are they working? By Brad Plumer and Nadja Popovich https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/02/climate/pricing-carbon-emissions.html

Carbon Pricing Dashboard from the world bank  https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/

Posted in Write and Respond | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Fashion Industry is Thirsty

Posted on December 9, 2019 by cef33

As the issue of environmental sustainability becomes increasingly prevalent and important among Millennial and Gen-Z consumers, retailers are trying to reduce their carbon footprint and increase sales.  The waste created by the fashion industry is causing detrimental effects to our environment and leaving a massive carbon footprint behind.  The 21st century has given the industry the ability to create more sustainable products, lower waste and increase profit margins.  By using harvested fibers and materials, inventing products and shipping materials with recycled materials and taking advantage of technology to lower costs, the fashion industry is taking crucial steps toward a more environmentally friendly industry. Minimalist brands and new technologies have taken significant steps toward the improvement of sustainability in the fashion industry and lowering the immense carbon footprint that has been left behind, but there is still much more we must do to not only lower waste, but also increase profits.   

Consumers used to never think twice about the effects their favorite clothing brands have on the environment, but younger generations are demanding more sustainable products and large companies like Nike are releasing more environmentally friendly products.  Additionally, companies are finding more sustainable ways to manufacture and source their products.  These improvements not only will prove beneficial for the environment, but for retailers as well.  Retailers have been focused on making sure their values have been altered to align with those of the Gen Zers and Millennials, not only to help the environment, but to appeal to a wider range of consumers and drive long-term brand loyalty.  There is great diversity and opportunity for retailers to become more sustainable and increase profits as they do so.   

The waste generated by the fashion industry is alarming, but there are viable solutions to help the environment and create a more sustainable industry.  A 2018 study by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe reported that the fashion industry is responsible for 20% of global water waste, and 10% of global carbon emissions.   By taking advantage of new technology and using sustainable materials, retailers can increase their profit margins by 1-2%.  Many brands are beginning to use sustainable cotton initiatives to reduce water and energy by up to 50%.  By taking advantage of sustainable initiatives, companies will be able to lower their carbon footprint and increase their margins at the same time.  In the next decade, they will be able to revolutionize the fashion industry and increase their profits all by using sustainable materials and consciously thinking about how their actions impact the environment. 

In the Huffington Post article Sustainable Fashion Explain That Yes, They Can Be Profitable, leaders of  ethically manufactured clothing brands were interviewed and shared how sustainability has made their companies successful and are more profitable now than ever.  Kotn, a Toronto based retailer sells “ethically made, sustainable cotton basics”.  Co-founder Remi Helali described Kotn as “farm-to-table, but for your clothes”.  Their website even contains a feature for consumers to learn about every aspect of their supply chain.  Since launching in 2015, Kotn has seen 37% growth month-to-month.  They have expanded their storefronts into the United States and have opened numerous other locations in Canada.  Another brand that prides itself on sustainability is Reformation.  The Huffington Post spoke to the head of sustainability, Kathleen Talbot.  Reformation solely sources eco-friendly materials and has very strict criteria for the materials they use.  Launched in 2009, this eco-friendly brand has grown 60% year-over-year since 2014; in 2017 they brought in 100 million dollars in revenue.  Brands like Kotn and Reformation are proof that sustainability can succeed and consumers are even more inclined to purchase from eco-friendly companies.   

If companies like Reformation and Kotn authenticate the benefits and prosperity of manufacturing sustainable products, why aren’t more companies hopping on the eco-friendly bandwagon?  Talbot and Helali say that the sustainability practices they follow go hand in hand with ethical practices, something fast fashion brands seem to overlook.  The implementation of sustainable and ethical practices are more expensive in comparison to the ways most retailers manufacture their products.  Although these eco-friendly practices have been proven to increase profit margins, bigger fast fashion brands have been slow to join the sustainability movement.  Talbot explains these bigger companies have “bigger ships to turn”, and it is not an easy adjustment.  She says, “They’re giant ships on the open water, and even if they know they’re headed the wrong direction, it takes so much effort and so much more time for them to change direction or pivot”.  Talbot notes that these larger retailers have started to invest in some solutions on a collection-by-collection basis, mostly by using eco-friendly materials, but she believes that it is difficult for them to support larger changes due to their current infrastructure.   

This graphic provided on the Levi’s website describes the details of how they have become more sustainable and how their consumers can contribute.

A main concern of the waste in the fashion industry is the water consumption and waste.  In recent years, big brands like H&M and Levi’s have experimented with sustainability taking various approaches to appeal to consumers and lower the waste the industry creates.  In 2012, H&M launched their Conscious Collection, a line of products made from durable, organic and recycled materials; but this was just the first step toward sustainability for H&M.  As the fashion industry is a water-intense industry, from the growing of cotton to the washing the clothes we wear, water waste is causing detrimental effects to our environment.  In 2018, H&M Group launched their water roadmap for their supply chain as a part of the transformation in the textile industry.  This roadmap lays out goals to reduce water waste and “move towards integrated management that values water as a shared resource”.  One goal H&M Group has prioritized is the recycle 15% of wastewater back into the production processes by 2022.  Additionally, they have implemented five new water recycling solutions for the manufacturing of textiles and clothing.  The denim giant, Levi’s launched their water initiative in 2011 to reduce their water use.  Levi Strauss & Co.’s initiate relies on reducing the number of washes of their jeans and promoting Levi’s Authorized Vintage.  Levi’s Water<Less campaign changed their finishing process in order to use less water.  The company urged its consumers to wash their jeans less in their promotional video when they first launched the campaign.  The Water<Less campaign advocated for 1 wash every two weeks so together we could save 858,400,000 liters of water in spring 2011 when the campaign launched.  Levi’s uses 20 water-saving finish techniques for their denim products.  Since the launch of the Water<Less campaign in January 2011, Levi’s reports they have saved more than 3 billion liters and have recycled 2 billion liters of water.  Although these improvements are impressive, only 67% of Levi’s products are manufactured with these water-saving techniques, their goal is to reach 80% by 2020.  Levi’s confirms they can reduce up to 96% of the water typically used in denim finishing.  Although these are viable solutions that have the possibility to create monumental change, the industry must come together as a whole to become sustainable and lower water waste.  

With Levi’s calculations, if we can save 858,400,000 liters in 6 months, I was curious how many gallons of waste water we could save in a year.

\[ 1,716,800,000 \text{ liters}\times \frac{1 \text { gallon}}{3.8 \text{ liters}} \approx 45,178,947 \text{ gallons of waste water saved annually}\]

This calculation shows the substantial amount of waste water that could be saved if the totality of the fashion industry were to implement the sustainable practices used by Levi’s.

A 2018 study by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe reported that the fashion industry is responsible for 20% of global water waste.  Companies must set high standards for sustainability, take advantage of new, revolutionary technology and using eco-friendly materials, retailers can increase their profit margins by 1-2%.  Many brands are beginning to use sustainable cotton initiatives to reduce water waste by up to 50%.  According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), it can take up to 2,700 liters of water to produce a single cotton t-shirt and a hefty 7,000 liters to make one pair of jeans.  This waste of water is due to the exploitation at every step during the manufacturing process.  First, to mix with chemicals and dyes, then they are rinsed away.  Additives from bleach and dyes contaminate the water which then is discarded as waste.  To put this into perspective, the average woman owns seven pairs of jeans; those seven jeans create about 8,100 liters of wastewater. If retailers can lower their water waste by 96% like Levi’s, this will lower the waste to create one pair of jeans to 324 liters and 100 liters for a cotton t-shirt. This will significantly lower the global water waste that the fashion industry produces.  If more retailers begin to implement water reduction initiatives, they can create a more sustainable brand, reduce waste and increase their profit margins at the same time.  In the next decade, they will be able to revolutionize the fashion industry by consciously manufacturing products that will not cause detrimental effects on the environment. 

Not only are younger generations calling on big fast fashion retailers to create more sustainable products, but the environment is desperately calling on the fashion industry to reduce its water waste.  Not only will these eco-friendly changes help the environment and reduce the carbon footprint of the industry, retailers will profit from making these adjustments in their manufacturing process. Sustainable fashion brands like Reformation and Kotn are paving the way for the rest of the industry and their ethical and eco-friendly manufacturing has proven to be financially beneficial.  Retail chains, like Levi’s and H&M have set a new sustainability standard for bigger companies. Sustainability in fashion has come a long way, but there is still a long way to go.   By taking advantage of new technologies and using sustainable materials to create environmentally friendly products, the fashion industry will decrease their carbon footprint and waste while increasing their profits dramatically.  Not only will using sustainable materials help the environment, but consumers are looking for brands who value sustainability, so this improvement will not only be great for our Earth, but for the industry as well.   

This video was the start of Levi’s Water<Less campaign.  They called upon retailers and consumers to reduce their water waste and implement more sustainable practices.

Posted in Write and Respond | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Wilmington North Carolina today… Will it be here tomorrow?

Posted on December 9, 2019 by heg4

Math 33 | Write and Respond Draft

November 18th, 2019

 

For my topic in Math 33, I chose to sign up for North Carolina’s water levels and climate change. Specifically, North Carolina Wilmington. Listed below I chose to input a graphic of a map for viewers of this paper to see the proximity of the Ocean, on the Atlantic side and the region North Carolina and the selected location.

There is a much-growing concern for this specific area, in addition to the Eastern Sea- Board. Being on the coast, there is always a concern for rising water levels, tropical storms, floods, and any other related in climate weather pattern change. North Carolina often experiences these changes all year round. The boarding towns on the oceanfront such as Wilmington has a lot at stake in the most recent years. My hypothesis is, if growing sea levels continue, North Carolina Wilmington will cease to exists. According to the Atlantic, by Robinson Meyer; the science section they posted about “terrifying sea-level predictions”. This article showcases that over the past decade sea levels have been rising due to climate change. With polar ice caps melting this will account for about a foot of water change/sea level changes. By the polar caps melting this infers that the earth is getting warmer, this article stated that the earth will be warming up almost 3 degrees Celsius in the next 80 years. By this occurring Antarctica and the western ice sheet will no longer be a geographical location on the map. The United States entered Paris’s peace treaty agreement in hopes of keeping the temperature of the earth less than 2-degree Celsius of climbing in further years. Although, if the earth continues this pattern, our future generations will see that the sea level in our oceans could be 26 feet higher in the next few centuries. Although no one can be truly sure of how accurate ocean levels will rise, but as global warming continues there is no telling how rapid or accurate the sea levels could be and affect the residents of that area.

After doing an extensive amount of research of the area and the weather patterns from “best places”, it appears as if overall Wilmington, North Carolina is known to have greater temperatures in that particular area. This ranges from sunny days being 11 days over the average for the United States, totaling to 216/365. Not only is that a good indicator to go off of. But, the fact that the area is above average compared to overall North Carolina and the United States. While Wilmington NC, only receives one inch of snow on average per year compared to a doubling amount nationwide, I thought this was slightly intriguing due to the fact they live on the eastern seaboard and can get horrible storms and specifically cold weather. North Carolina differs from NC Wilmington only amount to 34 degrees in the winter which is the lowest it has been and have a record-breaking 90-degree average in July. Although they beat the national average for rainfall they aren’t that far above. This could be due to the climbing weather patterns, pollution, and greenhouses gasses that have greatly evolved these past twenty years.

Recently, The Washington Post published an article on flooding and rising sea levels of local residents and the severity of a one barrier island. Although Ocracoke is not Wilmington this area is still affected and trickles down to this area as well. Being on the coast allows for hurricanes to decrease the safety of barrier to the inland of North Carolina. As each hurricane or tropical storm comes through, it diminishes the man-made structures that people have built to ensure safety of residents on the coast. As rising sea levels from tropical storms take place and climate change from melting polar icecaps and to other causes of flooding and sea levels rise; this is important to note and take preventative measures. Damages of the rising sea levels are astronomical. Here are some figures to put this into perspective. News reporters from WFMY News to Digital showcased that 20 to 30 feet of beach shores have been eroded. This allows for the next storm to come to the land and cause more destruction. Some calculations to put in mind of the gravity of this problem is.

Calculations:

Items to consider:

$ 700 per year on Flood Insurance in Wilmington

$ 50 – 60 Billion in damages on last hurricane Florence.

Population: 119,045

 

The damages done by Hurricane Florence was estimated to be 50-60 billion dollars, by taking the average 55 billion / dividing that by the population.

55,000,000,000/119,045 = 462,010.164 dollars per person for the damages.

With 700 insurance per year that covers 100,000 in coverage for homeowners and caps out at 500,000 for business.  Living floors such as ground and above, appliances clothing, carpets are included in the 700 dollars per year. A note to cover that there is structural coverage with is the foundation and the structure of the home, and the contents which contain everything inside the home. Such as the examples of items I listed previously. Not only did The Washington Post

publish an article but they have posted multiple articles pertaining to rising sea levels in North Carolina. The second article showcased the severity of the Category 1 storm that sought life-threatening provisions. The picture below shows cases over the course of 10 years and the rising levels and the increasing climate. This picture ranges from least threatening to most threatening with Sea-level rise vulnerability. The red area shows area on the coastal side that is most prone to water and sea-level change. Areas such as the outer banks are covered in red due to the small islands that they are. Next is a bright red area which yet again is also on the coastal side and greatly impacted, and seems to be more centered within the maroon color indicating severe. Orange and yellow are high and moderate this is also due to elevational changes I can assume; the higher above ground the more likely individuals are likely to not be bothered by water levels as much. The four levels indicated by the amount of water in feet. The different colors indicate severity; this can range up to 1.6 feet of water or 6.6 feet of water. For other states such as Florida, that is not only on the coast of the Atlantic but also borders another side of the water as well, The Gulf of Mexico also poses fear for residents. Below is a picture listed below of Florida with rising sea levels. This picture shows the current state of Florida. (dark green version)

The dark green forest color indicates the old and current meanwhile the “new” or remanence of what Florida will look like with 5 meters rise in the sea level. This is equal to 16.4 feet which is a huge disparity. And the lighter blue shows a significance of <10 meters. 10M = 32.8 feet. This is about the same length on a football field of 10 yards. That is a huge significance and has made or break many teams wins and losses based on this distance. All of Southern Florida such as Miami with a population of 470,914 totaling this area to the 6th largest inhabited city.  This state is in the Gulf Coast that Florida gets hit in two ways. This should be concerning to Georgia and Alabama since they too will suffer climate ­­change which in result has increasing levels of water and the rest of the east coast. North Carolina Wilmington’s area can be contributed to some causes to all this is greenhouse gasses. This is related to big companies that do not regulate their emissions. This is like the fallacy slippery slope; companies do not regulate, climate change in one area, which leads to the multitude and population dispersion due to this catastrophe. This then results in global warming and ultimately has huge effects on future generations. Not only does this affect us domestically, but North Carolina’s fishing industry, tourism, and other components of revenue if all other coasts are impacted this then causes stress on their production for that area. This could eventually cause individuals to leave and vacate the area based on their homes being demolished and eroded by the rising water levels from the Atlantic coast. To combat this issue is by trying to eliminate greenhouse gasses, continue our efforts for the Paris treaty in treating global warming. Another preventative measure could be to get sand and build the sand dunes up. Create trenches and have better water dispersant/draining of that so that it does not directly go to homes but say a water plant that can be filtered for drinking purposes or factories for them to have clean water. More barriers from the ocean to the town would be sufficient but a large portion of North Carolina coastal revenue is from tourists and beaches. These are ideas that we need to discuss otherwise Wilmington will cease to exist if we do not act.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography:

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/sea-level-rise-may-not-become-catastrophic-until-after-2100/579478/

 

https://www.bestplaces.net/climate/city/north_carolina/wilmington

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/how-do-we-continue-to-have-life-here-amid-flooding-and-rising-sea-levels-residents-of-one-barrier-island-wonder-if-its-time-to-retreat/2019/11/09/dff076c0-fcab-11e9-ac8c-8eced29ca6ef_story.html

 

https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/hurricane-florence-effect-nc-coastline-changed-after-florence-leading-to-stronger-rip-currents-professor-says/83-9e75d245-4bdc-4c8b-9127-1c61e4159e95

 

 

https://www.newsweek.com/hurricane-florence-damage-could-cost-over-170-billion-1120532

 

 

https://www.trustedchoice.com/l/north-carolina/flood/wilmington

 

Posted in Write and Respond | Tagged | Leave a comment