Earth Day at UWF

Last Tuesday morning, I strolled out of the library and walked past a sign promoting the university's Earth Day celebration. I've never really been one to observe the holiday, but I figured why not check it out? It's for a grade, too. So win-win.

The first Earth Day was on April 22, 1970 and was founded by Sen. Gaylord Nelson. Here's a little something written by the man himself on how it all started: http://earthday.envirolink.org/history.html. The day  consisted of a national grassroots movement that brought public awareness of environmental issues and concerns.

There were several speakers at the university's event, and people sporadically laid out on the Cannon Greens. It was surprisingly a beautiful day to be outside, despite being warned of rain from the forecast earlier that morning. Having done a bit of research on the first Earth Day, it seemed awfully quiet in comparison to what I initially expected (not that I wanted to experience a riot or a protest).

Most of what was said was a whole lot of mumbo-jumbo in my opinion. There was nothing that really spoke to me about how any of this concerned or related to the Earth and its environment. Ramblings about art and philosophy? And a dude dressed as Gandalf from Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings? It didn't make any sense to me, so I decided to look around at what the vendors at this farmer's market had to offer instead.

Most of the vendors looked familiar to me. Oh, right! A majority of them sell their stuff at Palafox Market during the weekends, too. It was neat browsing at all the locally produced goods, and I definitely seized the opportunity to help out these local businesses. Shopping around was fun, but I still felt something missing. Where was the connection to Earth? Where's all the activism that used to be prevalent in the 1970s? I see hippies, but no cause for making a difference.

I stopped by a booth selling fresh eggs and flowers (the most amazing sunflowers I've ever seen, so big and bright). The owner was Mary Bartlett. She owns Bartlett Meadows Farms in Pace. I talked to her a bit about this assignment, and she gave me a lot of insight on the differences in modern activism compared to how it was then.

We discussed the whole "occupy" movement. She said that it's really a shame that people don't take the time to be more informed and how Earth Day is more of a party now than anything.

"Like the whole "occupy" thing, people just don't take the time to do their own research and put more money towards what they believe in anymore," Bartlett said. "They should have it ingrained in their minds that in order to make a difference, you have to know exactly what you're doing and what you're getting into."

She told me more about how the government regulates organic products and what she values about her business and other local businesses.

I was satisfied with that small talk. It was brief, but Bartlett brought something to my attention. Although we perceive a majority of society to be naive and gullible about environmental concerns, there still are people out there who take time and do whatever they can to provide us with information and the stuff to spark conversation about the important things.

With that said, I think there's still hope. The event at UWF was extremely mild in my opinion. It left out a huge chunk that could have been said to the bystanders and observers. No, I don't think Earth Day, nationally, is swaying from its main focus and ignoring the issues. Our voices just aren't loud enough, but someday, I hope we get there.

Why'd They Kill the Electric Car?

“Who Killed the Electric Car?” dives into the development and destruction of the electric vehicle. The documentary film begins in 1996,  when electric cars were first introduced in California. No gas was needed to fuel the vehicles, and releasing zero emissions, they provided a more safe and sound choice for the automobile consumer. About ten years later, all electric cars were killed off.

It’s evident that the film takes a side about the issue with electric cars, easily shown by the title “Who Killed the Electric Car?” The film itself shows mostly members of the community in support of electric vehicles. The film even opens with a scene of an actual funeral enacted by the community. Although one-sided, it does compensate with interviews and facts, utilizing sources from all sides of the big issue.

Seven suspects were picked off in the film, the car companies, oil companies, batteries of the electric vehicles, the California Air Resources Board, consumers, the federal government, and the hydrogen fuel cell. I think that some of the suspects involved had selfish motives in killing the electric car, especially the car and oil companies.

Hydrogen fuel cells were introduced by the oil companies. Need I say more? Author of  “The Hype About Hydrogen,” Joseph Romm, highlights the five miracles needed for hydrogen fuel cells to actually work in place of natural gas.

Oil feeds the economy financially, and I’m assuming that the reason behind the California Air Resources Board and the government were caught up in the mix for that reason. Car companies need the oil industry to fuel theirs, so I suppose to keep making money they went all cannibalistic on the electric car.

You can tell that the film’s purpose is to advocate for the electric car because in one scene the filmmaker, Chris Paine, ousts the car companies for hiding the electric vehicles from the public and initially destroying their creation. This side of the story relates to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.  In a sense, the electric car was the second female creature. Frankenstein creates something, but sets out to destroy it instantly because of a certain fear.

The film’s perspective compares the electric car controversy to the story of David and Goliath. The film emphasizes on a statement made by a source, in which it is said that “if there are enough Davids in the world maybe we can win.”

For the consumers, it was an issue that was under the radar. They had no knowledge that they took part in the crime. The public will be able to recognize an opportunity they missed out on through this film. By recognition of the issue, a reincarnation and revival of the electric car may take place.

A Beacon of Hope for the Environment

“A River Reborn” captures the restoration of Fossil Creek in the Mogollom Rim of Arizona, a process that took fifteen years. Environmentalists, Native Americans, Arizona Public Service, and others involved with the process of restoring the creek reached a compromise without litigation to decommission and dismantle the dam that once existed where the body of water now flows freely.

According to Jack Stanford, director of Flathead Lake Biological Station, dams decrease biodiversity and increase the population of harmful and non-native species. There were also flaws found by many environmental agenices in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission concerning the source of hydroelectric power. The flaws moved the agencies to campaign and collaborate for full-flow creeks. In October of 1998, litigation finally moved to negotiation. Together, the parties involved reached one common goal to preserve a part of nature, to restore Fossil Creek.

"The decision to decommission had many facets to it. And as we looked at the opportunity to give the residents of the state of Arizona a perennial stream in the desert, there is no option to that. We can find other ways to generate electricity. We cannot find other perennial streams in the desert," said William Post, chairman of the Arizona Public Service.

The “model” for Fossil Creek can be implemented into the situations presented by the Florida Department og Environmental Protection and the ones mentioned in the New York Times (which include saving the California Condors and keeping wolves out of gunsights). As Ted Danson introduces the documentary film, he says that the decision to decommission “provides a beacon of hope and an inspiring model for the restoration of degraded streams and waterways.” With this statement, I have to agree.

With cooperation and collaboration, the environmental agencies and industries can work together to sustain the environment. East Bay Oyster Restoration and the seagrass salvage conducted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection is a step headed in the right direction. Continued efforts on both parts of the agency and the community to restore ecosystems will preserve the environment and create more natural resources.

The people involved with the situations in Montana and California can learn a thing or two from the restoration of Fossil Creek. The problem was presented by the Fish and Wildlife Services for both states, but no collaborative efforts with hunters and the government have been established. I also think some ignorance has hindered any progress.

In the article by Tia Grose, Ted Novin, spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation said,"This is about choice. Absent sound science demonstrating a wildlife population impact, sportsmen and women should be free to choose for themselves the type of ammunition they shoot."

The environmental and human health impacts in the affected regions have to be taken into consideration. As suggested in “A River Reborn,” it all depends on human stewardship.

(Word Count: 471)