This Earth Day, stop thinking as an environmentalist and start thinking as an economist.

The Earth seen from Apollo 17.
The Earth seen from Apollo 17. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“In the beginning the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” ~ Douglas Adams

April 22 is Earth Day, and you know what that means. That’s right, the 43rd running of the Eco-catastrophists and Neo-Malthusians! Why, according to the Earth Day Network, “[M]ore than one billion people around the globe will take part in Earth Day 2012 and help Mobilize the Earth™. People of all nationalities and backgrounds will voice their appreciation for the planet and demand its protection.” It gives me chills just thinking about it.

This coming Earth Day, many will be confessing the environmental sins of the green and ungreen alike, sitting in ashes and wearing hair shirts (manufactured from coconut fibers). They will say something such as what was read responsively in churches and synagogues in 1994: “We use more than our share of the Earth’s resources. We are responsible for massive pollution of earth, water and sky…Nobody loves us. Everybody hates us. Guess we’ll go die and feed the worms.” Okay, I made up the last bit about nobody loving us, etc.

It is the Environmentalist’s Creed for The Church of the Fragile Planet: “The water is polluted and the air is worse. We’re washing away topsoil from our farmland; and what we aren’t washing away, we’re paving over. The more industrial products and babies we produce, the less hospitable to Nature our world becomes. Our exploding population and our greedy plundering of resources decreases habitat for every other living thing that we share this tiny and fragile world with. Nature can endure no longer. We have reached the tipping point.”

That’s The Litany: Too many people producing too many babies while chasing too few resources on a fragile planet. It is the truth. . . right?

“It’s manifestly untrue.” says Peter Kareiva, chief scientist of the world’s largest environmental organization, The Nature Conservancy. “In Green rhetoric, everything in nature is described as fragile—rivers, forests, the whole planet.” Yet, most places, and he has data to back his claims, are quite resilient. One example: “Books have been written about the collapse of cod in the Georges Bank, yet recent trawl data show the biomass of cod has recovered to precollapse levels. It’s doubtful that books will be written about this cod recovery since it does not play well to an audience somehow addicted to stories of collapse and environmental apocalypse.”

“…Nature, as opposed to the physical and chemical workings of natural systems, has always been a human construction, shaped and designed for human ends. The notion that nature without people is more valuable than nature with people and the portrayal of nature as fragile or feminine reflect not timeless truths, but mental schema that change to fit the time.”

That schema, or model. that Nature is ‘fragile’ leads to “fortress conservation.” All the ‘sacred places’ need fences and taboos to keep the masses from defiling them. This leads to non-negotiable demands. Says Kareiva, “When things are fragile…it puts you in a position where you do not negotiate. Because, if you just give a little–because it’s fragile–it’ll be broken.”

What is to be the way forward, the vision for the future?

It is not as humorist P. J. O’Rourke indelicately states it, “Going around the poor parts of the world shoving birth-control pills down people’s throats, hustling them into abortion clinics, and giving them cheap prizes for getting sterilized.”

No, the way forward is going to be something that will be tough for many of us to swallow: First, recognize that most places are resilient and can repair themselves. Second, “economic development for all.” With the possibility of work in urban areas, subsistence farmers will abandon their hardscrabble life and allow forests to reclaim the land. A 2010 report concluded that “40 to 70 percent of the species of the original forests” returned when this happened.

I plan to Celebrate Earth Day by reviewing the Copenhagen Consensus list (copenhagenconsensus.com) developed by some of the world’s smartest economists. The sooner the rest of the world catches up to the rich nations, the better for the earth.

Sources:
“Earth Day 2012 – Mobilize the Earth” http://www.earthday.org/2012 (accessed April 10, 2012)
“Green Hearts Project” http://www.earthday.org/green-hearts-project (accessed April 11, 2012)
“CONSERVATION IN THE ANTHROPOCENE,” PETER KAREIVA, ROBERT LALASZ, AND MICHELLE MARVIER (http://breakthroughjournal.org/content/authors/peter-kareiva-robert-lalasz-an-1/conservation-in-the-anthropoce.shtml)
“All the Trouble in the World: The Lighter Side of Overpopulation, Famine, Ecological Disaster, Ethnic Hatred, Plague, and Poverty” by P. J. O’Rourke, 1994
“Conservation on a ‘Spoiled’ Earth” http://breakthroughjournal.org/content/blog/conservation-on-a-spoiled-eart.shtml (accessed April 12, 2012)
“Conservation: Myth-busting scientist pushes greens past reliance on ‘horror stories’ — 04/03/2012) http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2012/04/03/1?page_type=print (accessed April 10, 2012)
“The Breakthrough Institute: So, You Want To Be a Conservationist?” http://thebreakthrough.org/blog/2012/04/peter_kareivas_breakthrough.shtml (accessed April 10, 2012)

Not one of these “Related Articles” relates to this post.

Things to do for an Earth Day Celebration (goneastrea.wordpress.com)
10 Fab Eco-Friendly Earth Day Finds (fabsugar.com)
Earth Day (socialactions.net)
Earth Day!!! (yourlifeoutdoors.wordpress.com)
Bella Bargain: Wash Your Hands With “Grease” on Earth Day (bellasugar.com)
Corner Brook Earth Day Celebrations (wecnl.wordpress.com)
Earth Day Celebrations (nrhatch.wordpress.com)

Weekend Postcard: vineyard in the Alexander Valley

This is another picture of a vineyard in the Alexander Valley, just east of Healdsburg, in Sonoma County of California.

Agriculture is amazing. Long ago, we humans domesticated (formerly) wild plants and animals for our purposes, and changing what they do radically in the process.

This scene looks peaceful, bucolic, and natural. Well, two out of three is not too bad.

Related articles

Pink Slime gone. 1.5 Million more cattle needed to meet US demand.

Description unavailable
(Photo credit: pennstatelive)

Travis Arp is Ph.D. student at Colorado State University studying Meat Science and “grew up on a farm.” He says in the comments section of his post that 1,500,000 additional cattle will need to be raised to meet the shortfall due to the closure of three of four of Beef Product Inc,’s plants. That should drive up the cost of ground beef and move some marginal lands into cattle production and feed production.

 

Reblogged from The Meat of the Issues:

So it has come to this.  Three weeks of reporting on the LFTB controversy and ABC has achieved their goals…some intentional and some maybe not-so-intentional.  Regardless, they have thoroughly and effectively scared the slime out of the U.S. consumer.

For anyone involved in the meat industry, our world has revolved around this topic for the better part of the last month; debunking myths, trying to spread factual information, fielding unending numbers of questions from consumers, and fighting an onslaught of negative press that has snow balled so large it crashed into three of the four BPI plants that produce finely textured lean beef and made them shut their doors.

Read more… 761 more words of Travis Arp’s post.

 

Related articles

 

“Excuse me waiter, there are chemicals in my soup.”

Beef mince
(Photo credit: jkblacker)

My latest article for the Lake County Record-Bee Green Scene page:

Regular readers of the Timberati blog or the Green Chain column know that I am not chemo-phobic. In fact, I enjoy eating chemicals because all foods are chemicals.

To be afraid of chemicals is to fear our world. We cannot escape chemicals; they surround us. After all, water is a chemical, carbohydrates are chemicals, lipids and proteins are chemicals, amino acids are chemicals, and vitamins are chemicals. In a (chemical) nutshell, without chemicals there is no life. We are made of chemicals, and the chemical reactions in our bodies’ cells turn food into energy so that we may function.

As Deborah Blum, a Pulitzer Prize-winning science writer, said about what people mean when they say “chemical-free,” “They mean a product free — so far as they know — of industrial or synthetic chemical compounds. It’s a concept invented by a marketing genius to sell products…”

We chemically fuel ourselves in the morning. You probably start the day with coffee, as I do; it’s a veritable witches’ brew of 2,000 chemical compounds, including: benzo(a)pyrene, benzaldehyde, benzene, benzofuran, caffeic acid, catechol, 1,2,5,6-dibenz(a)anthracene, ethyl benzene, furan, furfural, hydrogen peroxide, hydroquinone, d-limonene, and 4-methylcatechol. Tea is not much better. In fact, all food is naturally loaded with chemical poisons, toxins, carcinogens and mutagens because Nature put it there.

Consider any potato, organically grown or conventionally grown matters not a whit. It provides three times the calories per acre of rye or wheat and it is easy to grow. It is not sexy but it is filling and nutritious. Yet, “the potato is a regular Chernobyl among vegetables,” writes P. J. O’Rourke in his 1994 book, All the Trouble in the World, “Within the dread spud we find solanine, chaconine, amylase inhibitors, and isonavones —which, respectively, cause gastrointestinal-tract irritation, harm your nervous system, interfere with digestive enzymes, and mimic female sex-hormone activity. An extra helping of au gratin and you’re a toilet-bound neurasthenic hermaphrodite with gas. If you live that long. Potatoes also contain arsenic.”

Potatoes and coffee are but two examples, the point is the presence of natural poisons, toxins, carcinogens and mutagens applies to virtually all foods.

The ‘chemicals are bad’ mantra begins, as Deborah Blum points out, when food producers intentionally put chemicals, synthetic chemicals especially (usually for preserving and extending shelf life), in our food. Never mind that people have practiced food preservation using chemicals for several millennia. For instance they have used sodium chloride (salt), dihydrogen monoxide (water) and acetic acid (vinegar) to preserve various vegetables by pickling them to have them through the winter.

Which brings us to the use of ammonia (NH3) and boneless lean beef trimmings (BLBT) or what detractors, such as U.S. Department of Agriculture whistleblower, Gerald Zirnstein, and celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, sneeringly call ‘Pink Slime.’

On March 7, ABC News ran a story titled, “70 Percent of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains ‘Pink Slime’” The story contends that at some time between 1989 and 1993 former undersecretary of agriculture, Joann Smith okayed the use of BLBT over the objections of some USDA scientists, and upon leaving the USDA, was rewarded with an appointment to a board of directors for one of Beef Products, Incorporated’s (BPI) suppliers.

BPI uses centrifuges to separate bits of meat from fat to make BLBT. According to a 2008 story in the Washington Post, around 1998 Eldon Roth and his engineers at BPI, the makers of BLBT, “began working with ammonium hydroxide, a food additive already approved by federal regulators for use in processing cheese, chocolate and soda. It also exists naturally in beef.” Because pathogens such as E.coli O157:H7 are used to the acidic conditions in the intestinal tract, Roth hoped that lowering the pH would “create less hospitable conditions for bacteria.” It did.

There you have it. Around 14 years ago, BPI developed a way to treat bits of meat with a USDA approved anti-microbial food additive that is used in sodas, cheeses and chocolates. In other words, we have been eating ‘Pink Slime’ without complaining for over a decade and swallowing ammonium hydroxide even longer.

No one is accusing BPI of creating an unsafe product, only one that sounds icky.

This is a first-world problem friends, worrying about icky-sounding food. “Until comparatively recently,” Rob Lyons writes in Panic on Plate, “there was only one question that the majority of people needed to ask in relation to food: how will we get enough?”

BPI’s produces safer ground beef, reduces waste and keeps down food costs. Shame on them!

“Waiter, may I have some more chemicals, please?”

Update (3/26/2012):

J. Patrick Boyle of the American Meat Institute has issued a statement about ABC News’ report:

Congratulations, ABC World News. Your relentless coverage and uninformed criticism of a safe and wholesome beef product has now delivered a hook for yet another nightly news broadcast.

Today, a three-week war waged on a beef product called lean finely textured beef came to a painful head as hundreds of people lost their jobs when one of the primary processors shuttered three plants. While lean finely texture beef was given a catchy and clever nickname in ‘pink slime,’ the impact of alarming broadcasts about this safe and wholesome beef product by Jamie Oliver, ABC News and others are no joke to those families that are now out of work.

Lean finely textured beef has been processed for two decades, blended into ground beef at very low levels to enhance the leanness of ground beef and safely consumed. But the frenzy of misinformation that has swirled during the last several weeks gives new meaning to Winston Churchill’s great quote, ‘A lie gets half way around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.’

Sources:

“70 Percent of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains ‘Pink Slime’” ABC News By Jim Avila, Mar 7, 2012 7:52pm http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/70-percent-of-ground-beef-at-supermarkets-contains-pink-slime/ (accessed March 19, 2012)

“All the Trouble in the World: The Lighter Side of Overpopulation, Famine, Ecological Disaster, Ethnic Hatred, Plague, and Poverty” by P. J. O’Rourke, 1994

“Ammonium Hydroxide.” Beef Products Inc. http://beefproducts.com/ammonium_hydroxide.php (accessed March 19, 2012)

“BPI Ground Beef Gets Support From Food Safety Leaders” Food Safety News by Dan Flynn Mar 09, 2012

“Chemical-Free Nonsense” Los Angeles Times By Deborah Blum, January 22, 2012. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/22/opinion/la-oe-blum-chemicals-20120122 (accessed March 19, 2012).

“Eating ‘Pink Slime’: Why It’s NBD (No Big Deal).” JetLagged Magazine. http://jetlaggedmagazine.com/snobby-scholar/eating-pink-slime (accessed March 22, 2012).

“Engineering a Safer Burger” Washington Post by Annys Shin, June 12, 2008. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/11/AR2008061103656.html?sid=ST2008061200002 (accessed March 19, 2012)

“Lies, damned lies and ‘pink slime’.” Panic on a Plate blog by Rob Lyons. http://www.paniconaplate.com/index.php/site/article/liesdamnedliesandpink_slime/ (accessed March 22, 2012)

“Panic on a Plate: How Society Developed An Eating Disorder” by Rob Lyons, 2011

“Q&A with Elisabeth Hagen, Part II: Poultry, ‘Pink Slime’ and Labeling. ” Food Safety News http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/qa-with-elisabeth-hagen-part-ii-poultry-pink-slime-and-labeling/ (accessed March 22, 2012)

“Questions and Answers about Ammonium Hydroxide Use in Food Production.” Food Insight. http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=QuestionsandAnswersaboutAmmoniumHydroxideUseinFood_Production (accessed March 19, 2012)

“Thanksgiving dinner hazard.” American Council on Science and Health. http://www.wnd.com/2002/11/16035/ (accessed March 20, 2012).

“The Truth About Jamie Oliver’s ‘Pink Slime’” Huffington Post – UK. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rob-lyons/jamie-olivers-pink-slimeb1240983.html (Accessed February 2, 2012)

Related articles

The World is Getting Richer, and That’s a Good Thing

Peter Diamandis, X-Prize founder, says the world is getting richer; and that’s a good thing for everybody, especially those living in poverty. Technology in the hands of several billion people will make those who subscribe to Paul Ehrlich‘s IPAT formula blanch. But it should mean a healthier population and a healthier planet. Take a moment and consider how blighted United States, Canada, western Europe are and then how Eden-like poorer countries such as North Korea are.

http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1

Related articles

The Green BS-ometer Checklist: 5 red flags to watch for

My latest Green Chain column for the Lake County Record-Bee:

Do you think that what commercials want to sell you and people promoting a “green” lifestyle are miles apart? They are not as far apart as you might think.

Commercials sell a fantasy world; the message is usually: “If you buy this, you will be sexually desirable.” Commercials come from advertisers whose job it is tell you a story to suspend your disbelief and imagine that you could be cool.

There are also messages targeted by those in the green community: “If you do [this], you will be green” or, more frequently, “People who do [this] are not green—stop them before they do more harm!”

“Slogans and sound bites masquerade as scientific fact,” is what Tom Knudsen wrote in a 2001 Sacramento Bee Special Report titled “Environment, Inc.” Inoculating yourself against bogus bromides requires that you be aware and learn the facts.

A green lifestyle means that you support the wise and sustainable use of our earth’s resources. So, frugality is the ultimate goal and wasting anything–land, wood, paper, minerals, time, energy–is not, by definition, “green.” If you want to “live simply, so that others can simply live,” do not waste your time or treasure on quack products.

Here is a list of some red flags for you to watch for:

1. Claims couched in scientific gibberish

Quacks and charlatans have long used highfalutin gibberish to make a useless product sound legitimate. The Iraqi government bought, to the tune of $40,000 each, 150 “ADE-651” bomb detection devices. Each ADE-651 consisted of a telescoping antenna that swiveled on a palm-sized plastic box with a plastic RFID chip inside. The manufacturer claimed it used “electrostatic magnetic ion attraction” to locate bombs. These worthless pieces of plastic and metal do not do anything and so have meant hundred of deaths and injuries due to bombs going through checkpoints undetected.

2. The product sounds scientific

During the 1940s, Dr. William Koch, a Detroit physician and homeopathic practitioner, claimed that he had synthesized a substance he called glyoxylide. Glyoxylide was an antidote to the “toxins,” that caused ailments including diabetes and cancer. This miracle drug worked even at the minute level of one part per trillion. Glyoxylide was merely distilled water.

3. The product claims to rid the body of toxins

Ridding our bodies of toxic substances are the jobs of our livers and kidneys, and if they are healthy, they do just fine. We send most bad things into a toilet. And, no, it is not possible not to put toxic substances in your body. As examples: honey contains benzyl acetate; chocolate contains an alkaloid, theobromine; brussels sprouts, cabbages, cauliflower, collard greens, and horseradishes contain allyl isothiocyanate; and neochlorogenic acid lurks in apples, apricots, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cherries, coffee, kale, peaches, and pears. These are but a few examples; the list includes all food. (Ames, 1990)

Everything has a toxic dose and everything has a non-toxic dose. Let me repeat that last statement because it is critical to our understanding the world. EVERYTHING we come in contact with can be toxic and harm us, including water and oxygen. Paracelsus, the father of modern toxicology, put it this way: “Sola dosis facit venenum (only the dose makes the poison).”

4. Anecdotes and testimonials alone support the claims

Stories have power. We believe stories. That is why commercials work. Vice-President Dan Quayle supposedly said, “We should develop anti-satellite weapons because we could not have prevailed [against the Soviet Union] without them in ‘Red Storm Rising’.” While a number of my friends, rightfully, knock Quayle here for his naïveté, they see no irony to reference Huxley’s “Brave New World” when explaining their worries over genetic engineering.

Stories alone without numbers to back them up are misleading. The next time you see a diet commercial, check the small print below the celebrity spokesperson: “Results not typical.”

5. Attacks and name calling

When a group or product attacks critics as being in the employ of Big Ag, Big Pharma, Big Oil, or Big Bogeyman, you should wonder about the people making the accusations. Name-calling is a way of ducking an issue and muddying the message without addressing the facts. The meme that big industries are evil is just too trite. You know, the world is not as simple as that.

***

These are but a few of the red flags to watch for. Your time, money, or talent should not be wasted. After all, being wasteful is not green.

Related articles

Weekend Postcard: Our Big Blue Marble

Most Amazing High Definition Image of Earth - Blue Marble 2012
(Image Credit: NASA/NOAA/GSFC/Suomi NPP/VIIRS/Norman Kuring)

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) says this, “‘Blue Marble’ image of the Earth” was “taken from the VIIRS instrument aboard NASA’s most recently launched Earth-observing satellite – Suomi NPP. This composite image uses a number of swaths of the Earth’s surface taken on January 4, 2012″and released January 25, 2012.

Related articles