The Call, Column 97 – Further Thoughts on Saving the World

10 06 2018

(June 10, 2018)

The Urban Farmer

Further Thoughts on Saving the World

I almost hyperventilated this morning. In my 25 years, that’s never (almost) happened as much as in the past couple of months.

You see, I was tending to my chickens outside, and realized how out-of-control my raspberry and blackberry patch has become – sprawling, un-pruned, and way-too-infected by weeds for my liking. And that realization spawned another, bitter thought: how comparatively little time I’ve given to my garden this year. There are so many things that I want to do in my garden, so many things that I “need” to do, but I’ve been so busy with other obligations that I haven’t yet been able to give it the attention it deserves and requires. And then, the heavy breathing began…

Why am I telling you this? In my last column, I waxed poetic on the virtues of saving the world. “Saving the World”…really? The point of that column was to try to deal with some of the anxiety that we as woke urban farmers will absolutely feel while trying to both contribute positively to the collective (environmental) good, and also enjoy our own lives…after first, of course, doing those mundane things required to keep ourselves alive. I never pretended to be an expert, but the two weeks since I wrote that have made it abundantly clear how my personal exploration of this topic is both incredibly important to my wellbeing, and ironically, woefully infantile. And also how important that exploration probably is to all of you.

So today, I want to talk about sustainability efforts as expressed by two distinct types of actions: individual/lifestyle changes on the one hand, and collective/legislative/political/community-wide changes on the other. I will preface this discussion with my view that both have a place in our society and each of our lives, but I think we need a lot more nuance in how we talk about, approach, and allocate time to these efforts.

What are the individual changes I’m talking about? These are things like switching to LEDs and other energy efficiency retrofits in your own home, buying sustainably-grown food, turning off lights and water when not in use, recycling, composting, gardening, refraining from creating plastic waste, etc. You get the picture.

They are the sustainability-oriented actions which make us feel the most accomplished – they require the most effort and time, produce the most tangible results, and make us feel more intimately connected with the systems we wish to change for the better. And relative to the 350 million people in the United States, and the 7 billion people in the world, these actions in isolation produce basically no positive effect towards our species’ move to sustainability…Ouch, bet you didn’t see that coming.

What about the collective changes? These are actions in the political and societal realm – lobbying for legislation, voting and otherwise working towards the election of environmental leaders, protesting, contributing to environmental lobbying and action groups, urban farming on a wider community scale, and volunteering. These actions likely produce the most positive change for the time/money/effort spent, but with the exception of volunteering, there is often no concrete, tangible outcome to celebrate. And so effort towards collective change can often leave us feeling empty or unaccomplished. Double “ouch”.

So what are we to do? How should we allocate our time on individual versus collective change, and how can we derive meaning from both? And what does that have to do with my unkempt raspberry bushes? Glad you asked.

The topic of this column was inspired by a couple of different things: an article that I encountered a few weeks ago, about the best solutions to climate change; a couple of very deep conversations with my close friend; and, naturally, a Facebook post about food waste and “sustainability-shaming”. I’ve been thinking a lot about this as of late, and it has actually sort of shifted and fine-tuned my views.

One initial comment, from that Facebook post: “sustainability-shaming”, valuing someone’s commitment to sustainability based on how well they recycle and efficiency-retrofit their home – is ineffective, classist, and ignorant of the actual problem. Climate change and environmental degradation are industry-level problems. You, reading this, did not cause climate change. Your neighbor, who works two jobs and doesn’t always have time to separate her recyclables, did not create the landfill. And your grandfather, who uses an entire bag of salt every time it snows, is not causing soil degradation.

Environmental problems are structural problems, largely perpetuated by the fossil fuel and other industries who stand to gain from (to quote that same friend from above) “internalizing profits and externalizing losses”. The fossil fuel industry’s business model relies on freely polluting the global environment – with particulates, NOx and SOx pollutants, and of course, fossil carbon dioxide – while making money off of you, a necessary consumer of energy who likely cannot reasonably produce it yourself. You, and your neighbor, and your grandfather were simply born into, and more-or-less have to participate in, this incredibly damaging economy. Be wary of anyone who frames environmental issues on the individual scale, because the very industries causing the problems stand to gain by making us blame each other.

Now, our approaches to change-making – the use of our time, money, and personal energy on things beyond our individual happiness – are influenced by two very different motivations. The first is efficiency: which actions produce the most positive change for each dollar, minute, or unit of psychological wear-and-tear they consume? The second is gratification: which actions make us feel most accomplished, give us the best “warm, fuzzy feeling” inside, and satisfy our deep desire for tangible outcomes as the result of our expenditure of money, time, and effort?

Ultimately, it is your personal values, socioeconomic situation, and mental/emotional/spiritual state that should inform how much you weigh each of these motivations, in deciding how to spend your “saving the world” resources. If you are already burned out – from trying to save the world or anything else – it may be better to focus on more actions that produce gratification (individual-level changes) to help alleviate that. If you are just starting out, or find yourself with more than enough time and energy, it may be better to focus on more efficient actions (collective changes). But most of us lie somewhere in between.

In fact, I made a pretty remarkable realization while writing the above: if your goal is to maximize the positive effect you have on the world, it may actually be necessary to divide your time between effective collective action, and gratifying individual action. Wait, what?

I think it may be something like a bell curve, where the extreme left side is hyper-focus on collective action, resulting from the efficiency motivation, and the extreme right is hyper-focus on individual action, resulting from the gratification motivation (any correlation to the political left and right is completely unintentional). Let me explain why.

If you hyper-focus on only efficient actions, especially ones that don’t produce adequate levels of personal gratification, you will probably burn yourself out. So while that next hour or dollar or ounce of emotional drive might be most efficiently spent at another protest or legislative hearing…if doing so then means you then have to sit in your car for an hour, screaming and swearing about how imbecilic certain politicians can be and how climate change is going to be our species’ downfall and we aren’t doing enough about it (definitely not speaking from personal experience or anything)…you aren’t really maximizing your positive effect. Alternatively, while the next hour or dollar or ounce of emotional energy might be most meaningfully spent watching Food, Inc with your vegan club for the 16th time…you aren’t really maximizing your positive effect.

Do you see my point? The truest, most effective way to save the world lies somewhere in the middle of that bell curve. Spend enough time on efficient, collective action to produce results that you often won’t see, but enough time on gratifying, individual action to motivate you to keep trying. I firmly believe that there is a balance that each of us can strike, which will keep us happily saving the world for the rest of our lives.

So that brings us full circle, right back to this morning’s almost-panic-attack. Do you want to know why my berry patch has become so unkempt? Because I have spent a HUGE amount of time in the past few months on collective action, towards climate change and other issues that are important to me. Judging by the fact that a few weeds (like many other things these days) had the effect of making me want to flee into the woods and live as a hermit…I think, maybe, I’m not doing enough of those gratifying, less-efficient actions, like sitting and watching my chickens fight each other over a worm for half an hour. If that’s what it takes to be willing to get up tomorrow and engage again in the political realm, then maybe that’s just what the doctor ordered.

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.

Advertisements




The Call, Column 96 – How to Save the World

27 05 2018

(May 27, 2018)

The Urban Farmer

How to Save the World

There is something that most of you probably don’t know about me: I am an amateur painter. It started almost two years ago, when I signed up for a painting class at Michaels, at my mom’s suggestion. The second my brush hit the canvas, I fell in love.

I loved the subtleness of the techniques; I loved how I could convey feeling and emotion simultaneous to physical imagery through just the bristles of a paintbrush; I loved the power that I felt, being able to turn tubes of paint into art; and I loved how all of this combined, allowing me communicate so deeply with anyone who might see my finished work, even long after I’m dead.

This new passion, made on the coattails of my prior discovery that spoken and written words had value beyond just communicating facts, quickly formed the basis of my newfound appreciation for the power of art in all of its manifestations.

I have gone to these classes pretty regularly in the time since, and have painted a lot on my own. Then, sometime in mid-April, I found out that the instructor who taught me everything I know would be giving her last class.

This was sad, of course, but I was excited for Sylvia, since the decision was made as the result of some good changes in her life. And for our last, celebratory class, she decided we would do something a little different – painting on wooden signs, instead of canvas. I distinctly remember how important the decision felt, about what I should paint…I sat there for at least 10 minutes just thinking, while the others had already started fleshing out designs. And finally, I decided on a simple phrase, “Save the World”.

Now, it’s probably obvious to you that I spend a fair bit of my time working on various projects with the loose, underlying intention of fostering positive change in the world. But that moment, making the decision about what to paint and meditating over the idea as I actually painted it, was the first time I was able to really conceptualize this basic motivation of mine, the driving force that has increasingly compelled my passions and decision-making in the past couple of years.

I was very happy with the final product (depicted), and decided to give it as an “Earth Day present” to my friend Joe, with whom I share a lot of similar philosophies, motivations, and involvement in world-changing activities. But I also replicated it and hung a copy in my room, above my bed.

I have to say, this simple sign is hands down the most thought-provoking, emotionally-fulfilling thing I’ve ever made. The emotional basis for this sentiment has been swirling around the dark, deep ether of my mind for at least the last nine months, and it took this artistic expression of this nominally simple phrase to make me understand how truly, principally important it is to me to…Save. The. World.

That’s kind of an unrealistic request of oneself, don’t you think? It harkens back to this quote that I really identify with, by E. B. White:  “I get up every morning determined to both change the world and have one [heck] of a good time. Sometimes this makes planning my day difficult.”

And now, after 500 words of introduction, we’ve finally arrived at the main purpose of this column. How do we balance doing 1) the things we need to do, in order to keep ourselves alive, with 2) the things we want to do in order to seek fulfillment and happiness in life, with 3) any additional efforts to solve problems bigger than the confines of our own lives…to “save the world”, or at least to try? And how do we “try to save the world” at all?

I’ll be honest with you, this is still something I’m figuring out myself. So let’s first deal with those activities that we need to do in order to live. I’m the absolute last person to succumb to the flawed, boomer-era definition of that list – it certainly does not include manicuring our lawns, watching any TV, any form of conspicuous consumption (new cars or otherwise), or climbing the corporate ladder.

Rather, our basic survival is predicated on having access to adequate food, water, shelter, (arguably) clothing, energy, physical movement, and community. Barring exceptional circumstances, this list translates into a modern life in which we: work, in order to buy those things and create financial stability; perform minimal life-maintenance tasks like shopping, cooking, cleaning, and bill-paying; exercise; and maintain basic social relationships. Other than the last one, I firmly argue that we must minimize the amount of our limited time on Earth – not to mention our emotional and spiritual energy – used to perform these activities, at least in such a way that we can still gain most of the benefits of them. (Read the poem “Dust if you Must”, if you want a tear-jerking reason to believe what I’ve just written)

So, good: we’ve gotten that out of the way and can talk about more important things. Once we’ve done the minimum necessary to keep ourselves alive, how do we balance seeking happiness, fulfillment, and meaning, with putting in effort to try to save the world?

I don’t know. You don’t know. No politician, or doctor, or mechanic, or pastor really knows. But our life experiences, and the experiences of others, can help us to try to figure that out. First, let’s talk about what these activities actually are.

“Seeking happiness, fulfillment, and meaning” is pretty subjective. For me, those activities include spending quality time with my friends and family, traveling, spending time outside, being part of the process of producing my own food, reading, writing, painting and other forms of art, listening to music, building things, learning about and discussing ideas, engaging in progressive activism, and my theology. For you, the list may be completely different, but it’s a good thing to be explicitly aware of it for yourself.

On the other hand, there exists a good, if not incredibly generic definition of what it means to “try to save the world”. There are many well-defined problems in the world – environmental degradation, institutional discrimination and racism, systemic poverty and income inequality, excessive war, human rights violations, the existence of oppressive political regimes…the list could go on and on, and I would argue that most or all of this stems from fundamental flaws in the political and economic systems that we’ve allowed to control our societies. There is also the vague problem of general unhappiness, discontentedness, anxiety, and lack-of-fulfillment experienced by many of the people on Earth. (See how I just brought that full-circle?)

“Saving the world” can take the form of 1) uncovering and making known the problems which exist; 2) seriously discussing solutions; 3) working towards fixing the problems; 4) working towards putting in place systems which prevent these and other problems from arising again; and 5) creating things which add to the general richness and meaningfulness of peoples’ lives (to address that last problem above).

Journalism, getting involved in politics, making art of any form, protesting, lobbying for good legislation, community organization and involvement, conscious decision-making, any profession where you help people directly, engaging in sustainable production (full-scale and urban farming for example), philosophy, protecting wild spaces, volunteering, turning your thoughts and prayers into action, sourcing your food and other products from sustainable production models, being a good person…these are all examples of actions we can take to help save the world.

For a second, try to consider your personal list of things which bring you happiness, fulfillment, and meaning. It’s pretty likely that some of them overlap with this list of world-saving actions, huh? I know quite a few of mine do…and that isn’t an accident.

My recommendation, for balancing personal contentment with saving the world: find things that do both! I’ve taken to calling this “stacking”, and truly I’ll tell you, it has made me a lot more productive as a person. My work with political campaigns and organizations is both personally fulfilling (I am energized by public speaking and the social capital gotten from this involvement) and also helps to improve the world. Spending time outside, working in my garden or with my chickens, brings me an elemental happiness…and also contributes to the sustainable production of the food I eat. The creation of my paintings is emotionally fulfilling…and each of the (thus far, few) instances where I give one to someone, it is a form of solution #5 above.

Some other recommendations: For activities which cannot be “stacked”, you have to make a personal assessment of the relative values of enjoying yourself versus saving the world, and divide up your time accordingly; focus some of your effort on making positive change as part of a group, since it is generally easier than doing so as an individual; recognize that certain save-the-world activities are more effective towards the ends that you personally value than others, and choose appropriately.

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.





The Call, Column 93 – It’s Time to Energize Rhode Island!

1 04 2018

(April 1, 2018)

The Urban Farmer

It’s Time to Energize Rhode Island!

I just wanted to give you all a quick update on some exciting stuff happening in our small but forward-thinking state.

This past Wednesday, I testified in front of the Rhode Island Senate Committee on Environment and Agriculture, along with dozens of others, in favor of the Energize Rhode Island bill.

This bill would form a basic carbon dioxide pricing structure in Rhode Island. That means that for any fossil fuel product sold in Rhode Island, a tax would be levied on the company selling it, based on the carbon dioxide that it would output when burned – this includes gas, heating oil, natural gas, and coal- and natural-gas-derived electricity. The revenue collected from this tax will then be split up, with some of it being reinvested in renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure in our state, and the rest being returned directly to Rhode Island consumers and businesses as a rebate, to counteract the small increase in fossil fuel costs that will result from the tax. I will explain more about the awesome effects of this legislation below, but feel free to go to https://www.energizeri.org/about-the-bill.html for more information about the bill.

This experience of testifying at the State House was exceptionally gratifying for me. For one, the Senate Committee on Environment and Agriculture really, really knows their stuff. I can’t say that enough. They all demonstrated an extensive knowledge on climate change and other environmental issues, and were very vocal in their concerns for the future of our environment, state, and people. Unlike many politicians, they have worked together, both with each other and with the organizations and businesses that have a stake in this legislation, to craft the best CO2 pricing structure they can.

Also, I actually feel pretty confident that this bill may pass this year…after four years of growing in popularity but ultimately not becoming state law. This committee seems very ready to pass the bill, after which it will go to the House and Senate Finance Committees, then the general assembly. There is so much citizen and business support, it seems entirely within the realm of possibility that it will become law in 2018.

But all in all, I think the most gratifying thing was the fact that all of us in the room (short of a few corporate lobbyists who probably didn’t actually personally care) were on the same page, talking on the same level. When I sat at the committee’s table to give my testimony (yes, they actually encouraged us to do that), it felt like I was engaging in this big, 50-person discussion about the future of our planet and state and people. They were actually listening to us – they were actually listening to me, and I to them – and sharing in our concern for the health of the global environment. That was really powerful, and I was very impressed at the Senators that gave me (and probably most others in that room) that feeling…of actually caring.

So now, I want to try to motivate why this law is so important. Like I did for the committee, I will come at this primarily from my perspective as an engineer. This type of legislation is the best way to reduce carbon emissions, while catalyzing the shift towards renewable energies and sustainable infrastructure, and still providing for the wellbeing of taxpayers and small businesses.

Companies – and specifically fossil-fuel companies – make decisions based on the bottom line. But as it stands, they are allowed to abuse our common resource – the global atmosphere – for free. This is called a “negative externality” to their business model, an expense of doing business that, without government protections, they do not have to account for in their financial balance sheets.

Legislation like the Energize RI Act takes the necessary step of internalizing this negative externality, preventing societal freeloading, and removing the unfair advantage being given to producers of polluting, fossil fuel energies but not to those of clean, renewable ones…it simply ensures that environmental harm can’t be caused for free!

And what’s more, this bill will create additional market potential for renewable energy technologies, allowing businesses more freedom to invest early in the energy sources that will power our future. The implementation of this law will drive a huge, necessary shift towards renewable energy by simply allowing businesses to feel the true economic benefits and drawbacks of the energy sources that they decide to sell or use in producing electricity.

So in that way, this legislation is actually very good for small businesses in the State of Rhode Island. It creates a more level playing field, internalizing all costs and benefits associated with an energy-producers’ business decisions, and creates opportunities for energy-related projects that may not otherwise arise.

And of course, this legislation is good for the environment and the people. In (hopefully) passing this, the State Legislature will be helping to grow the renewable energy economy well before scarcity and environmental destruction force us to abandon fossil fuels and find alternatives. They are ushering in a future of plentiful, non-polluting energy sources that could conceivably power human society forever.

When this passes, we will be a national leader on this front. And I don’t know about you, but I am really energized by that thought!

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.





The Call, Column 92 – Some Updates on Environmental Happenings in Rhode Island

18 03 2018

(March 18, 2018)

The Urban Farmer

Some Updates on Environmental Happenings in Rhode Island

We live in exciting times, and an exciting place! Rhode Island is quickly becoming one of the national leaders in environmental action and legislation. This year, our State Legislature is considering a couple of really cool bills, all with the aim of preventing runaway climate change, and ushering in the era of renewable energies and sustainability. In the past few weeks, I have gone to a few events associated with this legislation (and more generally, environmental protection) and today, I wanted to give you a quick update on these happenings.

A few weeks ago, I went to a protest in Providence, organized by Save the Bay, Climate Action RI, and a few other local environmental groups, to oppose opening up Rhode Island’s coastline to offshore drilling. This was in response to a recent push by the federal government, to convince/force many of the coastal states to do this.

The risks from this move are obvious and pressing: oil spills and destruction of the fragile ecosystem of the coastline, absolutely. But even more pressing is the prospect of further, high-impact, binding investments in a dying fossil fuel infrastructure, making it that much more difficult to excise dirty fossil fuel energies and shift towards environmentally-neutral renewables.

The protest was magical! We began at the State House, where a press conference was being held by some of the pro-environmental state legislators, and marched down to the Providence Marriott, where the Federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) was holding an “informational session” intended to convince Rhode Island residents to support opening up our coastlines to the oil companies. After protesting street-side for some time, we went into the conference room at the Marriott, where BOEM was holding their indoctrination session (I mean, “informational session”).

In there, the 200 or so protesters formed (what I came to learn was a) human loudspeaker, wherein we took turns standing on a soapbox and giving short speeches, which were then echoed by everyone in the room. The purpose of this was to “take over” the conference room, and get our point across to the federal and state representatives that were there…and I think we did just that! I, being the super-extrovert that I am, of course took the opportunity to give an ad lib speech.

As a result of that protest, I joined Climate Action RI, the local branch of 350.org, whose basic goal is to end the use of fossil fuels, prevent climate change, and usher in the era of renewable energies and sustainable technologies. It’s an exciting group to be a part of, so if you’re interested in getting involved, their website is http://world.350.org/rhodeisland/.

Next up is the Carbon Pricing legislation in the State House. The action for this bill hasn’t really started yet, so I’ll just tell you about it quickly. Carbon Pricing, which we’ve discussed before in this column, is a basic tax on carbon-dioxide-emitting, fossil fuel products, levied on the distributors of these products and 1) reinvested in renewable energy infrastructure and 2) returned to the taxpayers as tax breaks. The intention of this legislation is to “internalize the externalities” – to actually create a financial incentive NOT to pollute the shared environment with fossil carbon dioxide, thereby financially incentivizing the move to climate-friendly energy sources.

The widespread adoption of this type of bill is absolutely imperative towards the goal of preventing runaway climate change. Rhode Island seems to be close to passing it, and it seems to have a lot of support in the state legislature. I have gotten involved with the group that is promoting this bill. If you want more information, or want to get involved, shoot me an email.

Finally, I want to tell you about a piece of legislation that I only a learned of a few days ago: the Global Warming Solutions Act. As it stands, Rhode Island has codified targets for the reduction in statewide greenhouse gas emissions, and the implementation of renewable energy technologies. But these targets are pretty vague, and there is no regulatory framework put in place to make sure they happen.

This bill would change that! A group of forward-thinking representatives are trying to pass a bill that creates concrete targets for GHG emissions over the next few decades, actual steps towards making those goals reality, and a regulatory framework that ensures their implementation.

This is HUGE! I spoke at a House subcommittee hearing the other day, in favor of the bill (naturally), and it seemed that the subcommittee is looking favorably on it. Like the Carbon Pricing bill (which is very complementary to this one), the work has only just begun towards the passage of this Global Warming Solutions Act. If you want to get involved, again, shoot me an email.

Climate change is happening, it’s our fault, and we need to fix it. That much is clear. But taking it further, as an engineer, I cannot overstate the importance of setting clear targets, formulating paths to meet those targets, and putting in place regulatory mechanisms to make sure we act appropriately…if we actually want to get anything done. Climate change is the most pressing existential threat that we face as a species and a global community, so I am deeply heartened to see this type of action being taken in our state. Stay tuned!

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.





The Call, Column 75 – The Best Parts of Urban Farming

2 07 2017

(July 2, 2017)

The Urban Farmer

The Best Parts of Urban Farming

Ahh, summer! The garden is growing, the chickens are laying and loving the heat, and I’ve been spending a whole lot of time outside – both on the urban farm and off it. I’ve gotten a real, newfound enthusiasm for my homestead this year, in no small part because it’s actually off to a really good start, and poised for a productive season. Since I know we’re all busy, I wanted to take this week to quickly highlight a few of my absolute favorite things to grow and raise, and methods to use, to see if maybe you share my enthusiasm.

Raspberries. And blackberries. It was the ripening of my first summer raspberries a few days ago that really prompted this topic. I have been eating an ultra-strict version of the Paleo diet as an experiment over the past week, which temporarily excludes anything with any measurable about of sugar. But the sight of that first, ripe, plump raspberry on the plant on Thursday afternoon meant I had to make an exception – and I’m glad I did! The crop this year seems like it’ll be really great, so I’m excited for that.

So if I were talking to a new urban farmer, in probably every case I would recommend that they plant bramble fruits (raspberries and blackberries) before anything else…including any vegetables. Not only are they the easiest fruit to grow, but these plants require basically no care. And as I’ve taken to telling people recently, their productive capacity is limited pretty much only by the farmer’s ability to keep them from spreading.

They can be planted in areas with very little sunlight and still produce bountifully, and I’m not kidding when I say that a single cane planted this year, with basically no effort on your part, will be dozens of productive canes in two years’ time. And when it comes to nutritional bang for the buck, bramble fruits might be second only to leafy greens. They are incredibly high in fiber, such that the sugar in them probably won’t create any negative metabolic effects in anyone. Unlike many other fruits, they have a healthy balance both of glucose/fructose and of omega-3/omega-6 fatty acids. And as far as fruit goes, they are pretty dense in micronutrients. All of this, in a tasty, abundantly-growing package!

Mulch. I can’t quite express how much I love mulch, though I confess to not always use enough of it. Straw, leaves, grass clippings, mulched wood/bark…it doesn’t matter. With a few inches of mulch covering your garden’s soil, everything will grow better.

I’ve used more mulch (a combination of straw, a special shredded and heat-treated hay/straw mixture, and grass clippings) this year than ever before, and I’ve seen great improvements in soil health. Just the other day, I pulled back some of the mulch while planting, to find the soil, still damp, cool, and full of earthworms right up to the surface. This was three or four days after the last rainstorm, since when it had been 85°F and dry.

A thick layer of mulch keeps the soil moist and prevents water runoff and evaporation, encourages the growth of beneficial microorganisms and bugs, cools down plants’ roots which aids in growth, prevents most weeds, keeps certain plants (like tomatoes) safe from soil-borne diseases, and preserves soil nutrient from depletion (a big problem in raised bed gardens like mine); not to mention, I think it makes my garden look a lot more natural.

Companion planting. This is a practice that I’ve been doing almost as long as I’ve been gardening (9+ years?!), based heavily on an old masterpiece, Carrots Love Tomatoes by Louise Riotte.

The basic idea is that, certain combinations of plants are mutually beneficial when planted near each other, others are mutually harmful, and yet others are neutral, and in some cases, there are pairs where one sees benefit and the other sees harm by their proximity.

This is a very holistic, inexact science, but I’ve definitely found it useful in deciding how to lay out my garden each year. The harms and benefits between plants come in many shapes and forms, and are causes by many different facets of each plant. In some cases, one plant exudes a compound from its roots and harms or helps others. Other times, the scent of one plant deters some insect pest that would harm the other. And then, like in the case of potatoes and tomatoes (respectively), some plants are vectors for a plant disease that doesn’t harm them, but can harm a related plant if they are close by each other, or planted in the same soil in subsequent years.

The types of effects range from soil-borne chemical exchange, to resistance or attraction of pests or beneficial insects, to disease harboring or prevention, to even shading or windbreak capabilities. You should definitely read a little about this (either in Ms. Riotte’s book, or on the internet), even if you just plan to use it as the baseline from which you plan your garden layout.

Leafy greens. And specifically, certain well-adapted lettuces. As long as you start them right, these are incredibly easy to grow. And like brambles, they yield quite the nutrient-bang for the buck (other than iceberg, that is).

I always grow a lot of lettuce plants of many different varieties, both by direct seeding in the spring and by starting in 72-cell trays (which tends to work better in my case). I stick them between newly planted tomatoes, peppers, eggplants, and even brassicas early in the season. These provide a little protection from the summer heat at first (#companionplanting), but by the time they’re big enough to block the sun, the lettuce is long since harvested.

Organic/sustainable lettuce is pretty pricey, which makes it even better to grow it in your garden. I happen to get lots of leafy greens (at a very good price, when you break it all down) in my CSA share from Blue Skys Farm, so between those and what I’m soon going to start harvesting from my garden, it’s a good thing I eat so much lettuce!

Chickens!!!!! I would be remiss to not mention these feathery little garbage disposals, that I promise would integrate really well into any urban farm. You can supplement their diet with food and garden scraps which they turn into eggs; their penchant for scratching means you don’t really ever have to till your garden or turn over your compost pile; they have no more favorite food than insect pests; their manure can be composted into valuable fertilizer; and they turn very little feed into a valuable protein source, something not otherwise available from an urban farm (legumes don’t count, because in basically every case, plant proteins are biologically-inferior to animal proteins).

Robust, interwoven, holistic, permaculture systems. I know, that was a lot of buzz-words that probably don’t mean much to the general population. I meant to do that, to cover as much ground as possible with this last “favorite thing” of mine.

What I mean by this, is that I really value truly sustainable agricultural systems where nature is artfully emulated, where human knowledge is used instead of toxic, artificial chemicals and large machines, in order to produce and maintain a complex, productive, resilient ecosystem that is capable of both benefiting the natural world and feeding human beings. Wow, that was a mouthful!

I try to do this with my urban farm, between my chickens, fruit plants, garden, and compost, and I think everyone should. The basic idea is to use the inedible outputs of one entity as the inputs to another entity (i.e. chicken manure into compost and then into soil fertility), which steps your urban farm closer to true sustainability and minimizes the streams of external inputs and wastes.

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.





The Call, Column 66 – Acting on Climate Change

26 02 2017

(February 26, 2017)

The Urban Farmer

Acting on Climate Change

 

This is the 21st century, and the science is beyond settled. Climate change is happening, it’s our fault, and we need to stop it. This is no longer up for debate. In the last two columns about this, I discussed the science of how climate change works, and gave you an idea of the grand scheme of society-level actions that need to occur in order to solve it.

Today, we’re going to narrow focus down to the radical individual action that is required of each of us, in order to prevent the disastrous effects of climate change and usher in an age of environmental sustainability.

Action on the individual/familial level. There are a variety of ways that we, as individuals, can reduce our carbon footprints and contribute to the remediation of climate change.

Energy efficiency is the first that comes to mind. It may seem mundane, but reducing our demand for energy not only literally prevents some of the carbon dioxide from being released into the atmosphere that otherwise would, but also eases the strain on our fossil-fuel-dominated energy sector, giving renewable energy sources an economic foothold to take over.

Change your light bulbs to LEDs as soon as you can get to Job Lot or Walgreens. National Grid heavily subsidizes LED light bulbs in our area, to the point where the difference in cost between them and incandescents (and even CFLs) can be made up by the electricity bill savings after a few months of use; that isn’t even counting the fact that LEDs last like 23 years, compared to incandescents’ 8 months. This change alone would reduce a normal household’s electricity consumption by almost 10%!

There are companies, like RISE Engineering, that you can bring in to do a free energy efficiency audit on your home. They determine if you are losing heat through your windows or air leaks or inadequately-insulated walls, and more generally look at your energy usage to find ways you can save. And then, they give you access to heavily discounted solutions.

It sounds cliché, but you can do a lot by simply paying attention to your energy usage, and working to reduce it. Turn off lights and electronic devices (like computers and TVs) when not in use. Lower your thermostat’s temperature (or turn off your air conditioner) when you aren’t home. Walk and bike and take public transportation wherever you can. In short, behave as if energy is a precious, limited commodity…because until we move to fully-renewable energy, it absolutely is.

The food we eat can also be a huge source of carbon emissions – or, if we source it right, it can actually remove carbon dioxide from the air. The basic idea is to eat foods that require as little fossil fuel input, and as little soil tillage, as possible, while encouraging perennial planting that sinks carbon dioxide into the soil.

Grains and legumes are the basis of non-sustainability in agriculture, as is anything that relies on them – like grain-fed animals. They uniquely require large amounts of fossil-fuel based fertilizers, and other fossil fuel inputs in the form of large farm machinery (to till, plant, spray, and harvest), not to mention the carbon dioxide released into the air during tillage. This immense release of greenhouse gas is to the tune of 10 units (i.e. Calories) of fossil fuel energy for each 1 unit of food energy produced!

The effect is exacerbated when livestock are fed mostly grains and legumes, especially ruminants like cows, which convert grains to meat less efficiently than other livestock (because they are supposed to eat grass!).

So what does this mean for our individual food choices? As urban farmers, I don’t need to tell you the benefits of growing your own. Generally speaking, growing your own anything is better for the environment than buying it as a product of conventional agriculture. It requires less fuel to transport and store, it takes basically no fossil fuel inputs (unless you have a backyard tractor you aren’t telling me about), and in the case of chickens, a portion of their conventionally grain-based diet is instead made up of pasture plants and insects.

Beyond that, sourcing food from the local foodshed, irrespective of growing methods, generally reduces carbon outputs from transportation; and buying from truly sustainable and/or organic farms means that artificial (carbon-based) fertilizers were not used, and the overall environmental impact is minimized. When it comes to meat, grass fed is a must whenever it is natural to the animal (cows, goats, sheep…any ruminant), and pasture- or forest-raised for any other animal (poultry, pigs) so their diet is maximally supplemented with foods other than grains. Extra points if you get these from the local foodshed, to reduce transportation outputs.

Finally, each time a piece of food is wasted, all of the carbon emissions associated with growing it were emitted for naught. We are all guilty of it – forgetting about something in the fridge, or in the pantry, and only finding it once it’s past its prime. By keeping animals (like chickens) that are perfectly willing to eat foods that are unpalatable for us but still “edible”, we can reduce the damage by a pretty big factor. But we should all practice better management to avoid food waste in general.

On a slightly higher grade of individual action, we all have the power to literally supplant dirty energy sources with clean ones. The easiest way to do this is to pay a little more for electricity to guarantee that it comes from 100% renewable sources. For National Grid, this is called the GreenUp program (https://www9.nationalgridus.com/narragansett/home/energychoice/4_greenup_provider.asp). I only just discovered this, but will immediately be signing up for it. For a normal household’s energy use, $14 more per month means that 100% of your electricity comes from renewable resources!

In addition, a radically-active household can supplant the fossil fuels burned in their name by having renewable energy systems installed – whether that be solar panels on their roof to provide electricity, an electric car in their driveway, or passive solar heating to heat their water and home. This is a greater commitment of time and effort than paying the above, but it can actually cost less – renewable energy installers often have pricing structures available that allow you to pay off the loan for the system with no more than your electricity or heating bill would have been; this, on top of the subsidies available from the state and federal government for these types of systems.

Action on the community level. They say that change starts at home, and it’s certainly true in this case. If every person in the Western world woke up tomorrow and decided to implement the changes above, climate change would be solved. But we know that isn’t going to happen. The costs associated with these actions, the accessibility of renewable food and energy resources, the time to implement these changes, and knowledge about what to do are all reasonable roadblocks that make radical individual action difficult on a wide scale. There is also the nagging problem of science denial, which plagues a fraction of people in basically no other country but our own.

It is incredibly important to do as much of the above as possible, because the ultimate goal is for it to be the norm if we wish to solve climate change. With that said, solving the problem in an acceptable timeframe means using the government for what it’s for: protecting the common welfare, the valuable things (like environmental health!) that aren’t naturally protected by markets or individual action.

I promise, I will write more about this in the future as specific possibilities arise (I’m really running for that state-level carbon tax I wrote about last time!). But for right now, there are a few things you can do at the community level to foster change.

Call your representatives! Let them know you support comprehensive climate change legislation (cap and trade and a carbon tax), divesting from fossil fuels, and investing in renewable energy projects and sustainable agriculture. And when these types of projects are discussed at planning and zoning and city council meetings, be there to offer support.

Attend the March for Science (https://www.marchforscience.com/) on Earth Day, April 22nd. One of the central goals of this nationwide march is for action on climate change. By a happy accident, I had already planned a trip to Washington, DC for that weekend, so I will be attending the main movement. But I expect them to hold marches in Providence and Boston, so stay tuned for your opportunity to participate.

The last bit of advice I have seems minor, but I think it could stand to be the most powerful. We have to educate people. Our children. Our families. Our friends. We have to tell people that climate change is happening, that it’s because of fossil fuels, and that there are ways we can solve it together. Dispel the myths spread by politicians who don’t understand the science and industries who have a financial gain in denial. The time to act is now.

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.





The Call, Column 65 – The Time to Act is Now!

12 02 2017

(February 12, 2017)

The Urban Farmer

The Time to Act is Now!

Back in December, I wrote a short column describing the basic scientific reasoning behind the fact of global climate change. The gist was this: human activity has thus far released unprecedented amounts of fossil greenhouse gases; this has raised the atmospheric concentration of those gases; they, in turn, are increasing the average global temperature; and within the next century, this warming will result in an ecologically dangerous situation, and a general threat to our comfortable existence on this planet. 1) Climate change IS happening, 2) it’s OUR fault, and 3) the outcome will NOT be fun. But there is a fourth piece to this, and that’s what today’s column is about.

4) We. Need. To. Act. On. Climate. Change. We need to act right now, on every level of action that exists – individual, familial, community, municipality, state, federal, international. Some elements of this action are achievable as individuals, and some by forming relationships with our representatives. But others are much grander, and will take a lot more work by the people smart enough to recognize the problem, passionate enough to want to help, and with adequate means to do so. Those aspects still need to be stated loud and clear, and this column is as good a place as any (or better). So don’t fret when “enact an international climate treaty” isn’t a reasonable thing to put on your monthly to-do list. As a community, a country, a world, and individuals, we will get it done. And here’s precisely how we do it.

We need to stop investing in climate change. Loads of taxpayer and shareholder capital are being irresponsibly dumped in order to prop up a dying energy system; a system based in the exploitation of finite, dwindling fossil fuel resources and the resulting destruction of the local and global environments. Oil and gas pipelines are being built as I write this, by private companies with embarrassing endorsement by our federal government. This infrastructure not only damages local environments, trespasses on protected lands, and poisons people, but encourages the use of the resources that cause climate change and therefore threatens our future.

Not only are private companies literally investing in fossil fuel infrastructure with the government’s blessing, though. The government itself is investing your hard-earned money into causing climate change. Fossil fuels are literally subsidized, of course. But environmentally-destructive projects are approved and endorsed by the government. And the might of the American military is also used – read: soldiers’ lives are sacrificed unnecessarily – to secure steady streams of fossil fuel resources from countries that don’t like us. This direct and indirect subsidization makes fossil fuels appear to be cheaper than they actually are, and keep us as far as possible from feeling financial pressure to adapt to alternative sources of energy.

We need to stop denying science, and start sharing it. This is the 21st century, and the science is beyond settled. Climate change is happening, it’s our fault, and we need to stop it. This is no longer up for debate, especially when the only debate comes from deniers whose logical reasoning is that they own the oil fields or pipelines. As smart, passionate urban farmers, it is our job to make these facts abundantly clear, and expose unscientific climate change denial for what it is: cleverly disguised corporate interest.

Now, I would be lying if I said that the federal government is generally a good source for scientific information. But their climate page (https://tinyurl.com/WHclimatechange) is a good starting point. Also, the scientists at the EPA, the National Park Service, and NASA regularly share information about the latest climate science via their Twitter and Facebook accounts. Their twitter accounts can be found at https://tinyurl.com/jl3y4lz, https://tinyurl.com/zhnopeu, and https://tinyurl.com/jeg2nqj, respectively. It is incredibly important, both on the subject of climate change and elsewhere, that information is allowed to flow, unrestricted, between the scientific community and the public. In all countries but fascist regimes like North Korea, the internet is uncensored and allows this to happen.

We need to regulate carbon emissions. This one probably won’t make me any friends, but the future of our planet requires that some form of regulation be placed on carbon emissions. The basic idea is this: the greenhouse gases released by burning fossil fuels (and also clear cutting forests, tilling the land for grain and legume monocropping, and raising animals in feedlots) cause short- and long-term environmental damage. But because there is little regulation on this, that damage is charged to the people, the environment, and the future without needing to be accounted for by the company causing the damage (in economics, this is called a “negative externality”). By implementing a regulation structure, the government (as a representative of the people, the environment, and the future) can “internalize” this negative externality, forcing fossil fuel companies to factor the damage they cause to our climate into their business model.

There have been some ingenious ideas proposed for these much-needed regulations. The first is called Cap and Trade. This is a regulatory structure on the federal level, which basically makes the “right to pollute” into a commodity, whose amount decreases over time. The federal government starts out by limiting the total amount of carbon dioxide pollution that can be released (the “cap”) by the fossil fuel and other related industries, and creates pollution credits, which are essentially commodities that allow the holder to release x-amount of fossil carbon dioxide for one year. These credits are doled out to the applicable companies, and the companies are allowed to buy and sell credits (the “trade”) over the course of the year. This enables companies that make efforts to reduce their carbon pollution – by supplanting fossil fuel power plants with renewable ones, by planting forests, by adopting more efficient technologies or developing better processes – to benefit from this by selling their rights to pollute that they no longer need. Each year, the government ratchets down the total amount of credits (so each company has, say, 98% of the previous year’s credits), and the process continues. This cap and trade system forces the dirtiest, most polluting companies to shut their doors, and indirectly provides a huge incentive for the development and implementation of renewable energies and non-carbon-intensive processes.

Another, much simpler-to-understand solution is a carbon tax. This can be done on a state or even municipal level, and is therefore much more likely to come to fruition in the near future than any action on the federal level. Essentially, any fuel that releases fossil carbon dioxide is subject to a tax on its value, levied on the company that sells it (the gas station, power plant, or electricity distributor). In most versions, the collected tax money is used to fund renewable energy and given directly back to the taxpayers. This is the case with the carbon tax proposed by RI Representative Aaron Regunberg. Studies indicate that his bill’s tax structure would REDUCE energy expenses for the average RI taxpayer (https://tinyurl.com/RIcarbontax), all while disincentivizing further use of fossil fuels and therefore promoting the use of alternative energies.

We need to fund climate science and subsidize renewable, clean energy sources. This, of course, is the direct result of a carbon tax structure, like the one discussed above. But as a nation, we need to continue to fund research into climate change and renewable energies – allowing scientific organizations like NASA, the EPA, NREL, etc to do their jobs. Because…

Eventually – sooner than we realize – we need to stop using fossil fuels. Every action item in this column points in that direction. Sometime, probably within the next century – but hopefully sooner – and by some economic or environmental pressure – but hopefully before we have no other option – we will no longer use fossil fuels for energy. That is a good thing, a necessary thing. It is the last page in the history book of our exploitive energy economy; the happily-ever-after written long before you or I were born, the moment that a human being burned their first lump of coal. This period in human history can’t last forever; it never could.

It’s going to take action on your part, and on my part, and on our leaders’ parts. It won’t consume our lives, but it’s something we’re going to have to care about. It’s something I hope we already do care about. Next column, we will talk about how to do that.

My column appears every other Sunday in The Woonsocket Call (also in areas where The Pawtucket Times is available). The above article is the property of The Woonsocket Call and The Pawtucket Times, and is reprinted here with permission from these publications. These are excellent newspapers, covering important local news topics with voices out of our own communities, and skillfully addressing statewide and national news. Click these links to subscribe to The Woonsocket Call or to The Pawtucket Times. To subscribe to the online editions, click here for The Call and here for The Times. They can also be found on Twitter, @WoonsocketCall and @Pawtuckettimes.