Moving Susquehanna Valley Forward

Waste: The New American Dream

by

My mom was born in 1929..my dad in 1937. Despite the 8-year age difference, they  shared a common generational characteristic…they were raised during hard times. My mom was born almost exactly one month before Black Monday – the start of the Great Depression.  My dad was born during the Recession of 1937, considered one of the worst recessions of the 20th century. They grew up during WWII, a devastating era which left those on the home front fearing for loved ones overseas, taking on new roles and responsibilities never imagined and experiencing major rationing of, what was once, everyday goods.

During WWII in particular, conservation was not just considered a necessity, it was considered patriotic. Conserving energy, and food, and recycling and salvaging scraps became a way of life since so many materials were scarce due to our nation’s desperate efforts to prepare for war. The government issued ration cards which dictated how much a household could purchase and consume in a given period of time.

With limited supplies of labor and fuel, harvesting and transporting food to market became extremely difficult.  The government encouraged Americans to plant Victory Gardens to help feed their families and others in the community. Nearly 20 million Americans took shovel to dirt and produced 9-10 million tons of fresh vegetables.

Businesses were not precluded from war time efforts. From 1942-1945, Ford Motor Company was required to dedicate all of its resources to building up America’s war arsenal. In these years, Ford built war planes, tanks, jeeps, aircraft engines and needed parts…and no domestic cars.

Growing up, I remember my parents were forever conserving and re-using.  It was ingrained in their minds that waste was not only inefficient and costly, it was unpatriotic and senseless.

My brothers, sisters and I were brought up to turn off lights when we left the room, eat leftovers, eat more leftovers, waste nothing, and learn to love hand-me-downs.  I still remember my mom folding and breaking down non-recyclable materials so that they took up less room in the trash can. I don’t remember her throwing out anything of worth and yard sales were great opportunities to purchase used goods that could be put to good use.

My parents weren’t cheap.  Well, they were what I would call frugal. They weren’t necessarily environmentalists either though I do recall my mom’s concerns over the destruction of the rain forests. My parents were just taught in childhood that waste was wrong.

So fast forward to today when waste is actually encouraged. Not only do we not conserve energy, we actively waste it. We needlessly expend it by purchasing large inefficient vehicles; building exorbitantly large houses; buying tons of worthless stuff.  We waste food, we waste energy and we waste raw resources.

In the relatively short time between my parents’ childhood and the modern childhood, waste has become a way of life.  Consumers are the new hero. We are told that consumption is what keeps our economy moving, growing…we are told that consumption is patriotic.

So we consume and we consume some more. If we can’t afford something, we  buy it with credit. Instant gratification and continued consumption.

So at what point do we conserve? At what point does conservation become patriotic again?

When we’re fighting wars for oil, an American flag magnet on the back of an SUV is the most patriotic we can muster?  When Americans are starving from lack of nutrition, we industrialize and over-process our farms instead of growing real sustainable foods?   When we are facing the greatest calamity of our times — climate change — we continue to burn the dirtiest fuels we can find even though cleaner alternatives are accessible and in our reach?

Consumption has plagued this nation for the last several decades – our endless quest for more has resulted in Americans acquiring huge masses of debt, the loss of millions of acres of land, the fighting of wars for more energy resources, and the release of billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other emissions into our atmosphere.  It has not made our nation as a whole stronger – instead, it has made only a few richer.

Americans need to consider what is really important.  Is it stuff that makes us happy? Or is happiness the stuff that really counts?

End Times, Indeed!

by

While there are some who believe that the “rapture” and “end time” are near, there is mounting scientific evidence the end of civilization maybe approaching, but it has nothing to do with the actions of a deity. The human race through its own actions, greed, and ignorance is putting at great risk the life that is the earth’s biosphere on which we are totally dependent.

This is not a construct based on religious belief. Those who believe the “end time” is near should keep in mind that the very first Christians thought that this event would come in their lifetime. The end we are facing is not something that will happen suddenly like the supposed rapture. It is a process that has already begun. We have already entered a phase which is the sixth mass extinction period on earth. Unlike past extinction periods, it is the result of the actions of one species, us. Every major ecosystem on the earth is in decline. This is not a belief, but a scientifically observable phenomenon.

Since the last mass extinction period 65 million years ago, life has been evolving. This evolution has occurred more rapidly than the extinction of species. Now, species extinction is occurring one hundred to a thousand times more rapidly than in the past. Extinction does not just occur species by species, but there are cascades of extinction as keystone species die out.

There are many causes of this sixth extinction period. There is no greater cause than our economic system which makes profit as its only concern. An economic system which exploits the planet and its resources to increase profits. An economic system devoid of any moral concern, in which greed is praised, and there is no level of profit which is obscene. We now have a corporate system which powerfully influences the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government. It is a system which we have promoted world-wide. I have no problem with a corporation making a reasonable profit if it does so without externalizing its costs. They must no longer profit by exploiting the biosphere, the planet, or its employees.

We now have a consumer culture which much of the world is attempting to emulate. No matter how much “stuff” we already have, it is never enough. We have been brain washed since our earliest childhood to “need” more and more. We believe bigger and newer is always better. We are told that if we can just have the “magical item” our lives will be enriched with unlimited joy. 90% of what we purchase ends up in the landfill within six months of purchase. The earth’s resources cannot sustain our lust for more stuff. We can no longer have an ever expanding economy based on consumption. The earth’s resources are finite.

We are poisoning our planet with more than 80,000 chemicals, most of which have not been tested. There has been little testing of how any interact in the environment. Go into any hardware store and see the shelves lined with pesticides and herbicides which we use with little regard to their ultimate effects. All life is connected and related, yet we willy-nilly spread these and so many more chemicals into the environment. We are poisoning the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. Our bodies are filled with many chemicals that nature never intended. This is true for our fellow creatures.

Climate change and disruption is something that many people are aware of but far too few are willing to accept and act to control. If you are a climate change denier then you are denying the overwhelming scientific consensus that the planet’s climate is changing as a direct result of man’s activities. Observable evidence overwhelming refutes the “beliefs” of climate change deniers. Human civilization developed over the last 10.000 years in a period of a relatively stable climate. Excessive CO2 in the atmosphere was the major cause of the fourth major extinction period on the planet.
All that CO2 we a pumping into the atmosphere is doing more than raise the temperature the atmosphere and the oceans. Much is being absorbed into the oceans. When CO2 is absorbed into the oceans it become carbonic acid. The acidity of the oceans has already increased by 30% threatening much of the life of the oceans. If we destroy the life of the oceans as we now seem intent on doing, we will be putting a large nail in the coffin of humanity.

The sheer numbers of our species on the planet present a great challenge to the continuation of our species. While those in developed countries look to the poor nations of the world, we often forget that a child born in the United States will have a much greater impact on the planet than the children of poorer countries. We can rationalize all we want and hide behind the banner of free choice and/or religion, but we have a responsibility to our children not to go beyond the replacement number of two. If you say you love children, then show real love by adopting a child that so desperately needs a family. The injunction to be “fruitful and multiply” was given to primitive culture that was at constant war and before the expectation that half a family’s children would reach adulthood. We have greatly altered the balance of childhood death and survival using many “unnatural” means. Birth control methods maybe “unnatural,” but no less so than incubators for the premature.

The question is very simple. Do we care and do we have a responsibility to our children, grandchildren, and all who will follow us? How can we say we love them and not do all we can to ensure that they have the same opportunities for a good life that we have been given. Don’t we owe it to them to give all future earthlings a livable planet? You can choose ignorance and apathy. You can say the problem is too big and I can’t do anything to change things. You can choose to believe the corporate profit seekers and the politicians who are in their pocket rather than the scientists whose life studies are the investigation of the life systems on earth. One of Henry Thoreau’s teachings is that we don’t have to wait for others to act before we begin to act. We are a society of one and so we as a society of one can act before our neighbors. Rather than giving your grandchildren another stuffed animal, plastic toy, or electronic gizmo, give them a healthy life on a healthy planet.

While it is true that we must all take on our individual responsibilities, we must help change how our country and world act. We must change those aspects of our present economic system which allows profit no matter the cost. We must have government fully involved in solving the problems that so threaten our children’s future. We must elect leaders who will lead in the creation of a healthier planet rather than for more profit of their corporate donors. We need leaders who choose knowledge over blind adherence to a political philosophy. I wish our country would become a world leader in a fight for the future rather than the leader in producing weapons of war and the numbers of people in our prisons.

No War on Coal…Just War on Clean Air

by

They’re at it again. The cries of wolf are being raised by the right wing with full throats. This time it is the new regulations put out by the EPA for the regulation of CO2 from power plants. A stake through the heart of the middle class is what we are told. But power plants have always been an ill wind in the lungs of our children and those with compromised pulmonary and circulatory systems. Think of all the middle class will save in health bills with cleaner energy production.

We have heard the cry of wolf from the right so often we should learn to take this with a great deal of skepticism. When the clean act and the clean water act were passed we herd it. When seat belts and air bags were required the cry was heard. When we protected the ozone layer and acid rain reduction was implemented doom we were told was in our future. We need good regulations to protect us from the greed which is ever present in our ruthless form of capitalism. The right will fight every regulation on their corporate sponsors no matter the cost to the health of “we the people.”

The right is never as disingenuous as when they express their concern for “jobs”. The coal industry has done all it can to eliminate jobs. International trade deals opened the doors for the millions of jobs that have left our country. Corporations eliminate jobs all the time even when profitable to increase the bottom line. Never a cry of concern has been heard from the right and too many on the other side of the isle when these jobs are lost. They don’t even recognize that clean energy provides three time the jobs that dirty carbon jobs provides.

The pure ignorance of what is said by those on the right with regards to climate change is almost beyond belief. These are not people of limited intelligence, yet they are so blinded by their almost religious fervor for their political and economic ideologies that is allows them to out of hand reject the evidence of objective science. We like to think of ourselves as rational beings yet our emotional self can blind us to empirical evidence.

EPA’s actions regarding coal power plants is but a modest first step. The economic costs of climate change will present us with a much greater challenge than acting to mitigate its effects. Economic transition is never easy. What did the buggy makers in Mifflinburg think about the transition to automobiles? Economic transitions will always be with us as new technologies are created. We need a strong safety net to help all workers who are affected by this change. Unfortunately, the right wing is doing all they can to tear holes in this safety net.

Is there a war on coal? Many certainly hope so when you consider that everything about coal is dirty and destructive. The term “clean coal” is a joke. 60,000 people die prematurely in this country every year from particulate and ozone pollution. Mountains with an area as big as the state of Delaware have been flattened. Power plant pollution costs us $100 billion in health care every year. You should know that if you catch a fresh water fish in this country it will be contaminated with mercury from power plants. Too many steams in Pennsylvania flow orange. Our streams, lakes, and drinking water are contaminated by massive coal ash waste piles. It is time that coal burning be put in the dust bin of history.

Marino Shows No Concern for Future Generations, Only Corporate Profits

by

Recently the House passed the 2015 military budget of $601 billion. A budget which had bipartisan support. This budget contains billions in spending for unnecessary and outdated weapons systems. Weapons the Pentagon does not want. It seems that there is always a bipartisan desire to stay in office by keeping military spending flowing into many congressmen’s districts. Amazing, all those right wing deficit cutters exposing their hypocrisy. But this is not the issue on which I would like to focus.

The House, including Representatives Marino and Barletta, voted to prohibit the military from spending any of the funding in this bill on programs that address climate change. The level at which these gentlemen disregarded the future security of this country for the profits of their corporate masters and ideological beliefs is almost beyond comprehension. It does though present a consistent pattern.

Pentagon planners in their efforts to determine the future needs of the military do risk assessments. These planners have determined that climate change presents great risks all over the planet. Excessive flooding, drought, rising food prices, and mass migrations are just some of the forces that will upset political stability throughout the world. Many people don’t realize that rising food prices were a major causative factor of the “Arab Spring.”

Why would the Congress tie the hands of the military to confront one of the major risks we face? Is this a demonstration of ignorance, a rigid adherence to a flawed political philosophy, or the expression of allegiance to their corporate sponsors? The military is going to be faced with dealing with the results of climate change’s disruptions. Shouldn’t they be allowed to do what is necessary?

The military has been a leader in the development and use of solar energy. In remote areas of Afghanistan the dollar cost of delivering fuel is immense. Fuel convoys are also prime targets for the opposition. The ability to produce electricity in remote outposts without the need for fuel deliveries has been demonstrated to be very valuable asset.

A number of months ago I attempted to find out whether Representative Marino accepted the overwhelming consensus of science that climate change was happening as a result of man’s activity and this change presents great risks. After several calls to both the Williamsport and Washington offices of Congressman Marino, I received a call from one of his people in the Washington office telling me that Mr. Marino accepted the conclusions of scientific community. His voting record certainly doesn’t indicate this. Was I told the truth? Does Representative Marino feel compelled to follow the voting line of his party with no ability to think for himself? Do his reactionary, corporatocracy, and plutocratic political beliefs out rule the basic findings of fact? He has consistently voted for the short term profits of major corporations over the wellbeing of average citizens of this country.

Lack of Will, Not Lack of Solutions

by

I am writing in response to the column by Robert Samuelson titled “Climate–Change: We Have No Solution.” This title is absolutely false. We have many solutions. Solar, wind, geothermal energy sources are just the beginning. Energy efficiency offers a great “source” of energy. Retrofitting our buildings for example represents an immense opportunity for energy savings. Electric and high mileage cars are arriving. Reducing our extravagant waste of energy is another step we must take. As Mr. Samuelson suggests, a carbon tax is a way to stimulate non-carbon based energy. What is really lacking is the will to act.

Just because we don’t all the answers or a “magic bullet” is no reason that we shouldn’t begin immediately to take on this immense challenge. Mr. Samuelson appears to have little faith in our ability to rise to the challenge. Our country’s rise to the challenge of war time production in WWII and the challenge to go to the moon offer but two examples of our ability to confront a challenge.

I like Mr. Samuelson’s am not optimistic. We have failed to take on the challenge for more than 25 years since Dr. James Hanson’s testimony before Congress. The political right has fought for their almost religious belief in free-market capitalism and their big money donors in the oil, gas, and coal industries. We have had few champions on the political left to fight for our future. Too many have their hands out for corporate money. We will pay to repair massive storm damage or pay to take on this challenge. Prevention is much more cost effective.

Our embrace of free-market capitalism may be the biggest obstacle we face. Corporate America operates with profit as their only guiding principle. The cigarette manufactures knew that cigarettes caused cancer in the 1950’s yet lied and distorted the truth for many decades. The lead and asbestos industries did the same. Recently we learned that GM, to save a few dollars, caused the death of some of their customers just like Ford did with the Pinto. The fossil fuel industries have taken a page from the cigarette industry in denying the risks of climate disruption. They have spent millions on “think tanks” to distort the facts and muddy the water with regards to climate disruption. They operate with no social or moral values driven only by the goal of only increasing their profits.

Mr. Samuelson wrote about rhetorical Ping-Pong. This exists because the medial has been presenting the issue as if there is a balance to the arguments present in the climate debates. There is an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that climate disruption is here now and it is the result of man’s burning of fossil fuels. This consensus has warned of the crisis ahead if we don’t act. Simple risk management says we should act now. Even Pentagon planners are preparing for the results of climate disruption.

If your house caught fire, should we just stand around and watch because we don’t have perfect firefighting technology? Shouldn’t we act immediately with our best efforts? Shouldn’t we fight to protect our children and grandchildren? Shouldn’t we work to reduce the economic, social, and political chaos that further climate disruption will cause? Will we continue to do as we mostly have done by putting our heads in the sand and pursuing our own selfish short term goals? We have a daunting task ahead of us. Will we face the challenge? We have failed so far! Thinking like Mr. Samuelson’s is a detriment to all who will confront this issue in the future.