SGC Admin Eco News

FYI: David Suzuki: A good economy versus happy, healthy people!

From the Editor: From our inbox to you….

For me the following article is fabulous, it’s like Mr. Suzuki got inside my head…. Thank you for voicing my thoughts guys.☺

 

Occupy Christmas

On November 25, referred to as “Black Friday” in the U.S., a woman pepper-sprayed fellow customers at a California Wal-Mart during a mad rush to get a bargain-priced Xbox. In North Carolina, it was police who used pepper spray to subdue shoppers hell-bent on getting deals on electronic gadgets during the biggest shopping day in the country.

Despite these and other incidents, including shootings, U.S. business leaders are buoyed by an expected rise in consumer spending – to nearly $500 billion this year – in the shopping season, which begins the day after U.S. Thanksgiving.

Meanwhile, Adbusters, the Vancouver magazine that sparked the worldwide Occupy protests, is encouraging supporters to “Occupy Christmas“ by boycotting holiday gift shopping, among other actions. (Adbusters also popularized Buy Nothing Day, which fell on Black Friday this year.) The prospect of a seasonal shopping boycott isn’t making people in the retail industry jolly. Retail Council of Canada spokesperson Sally Ritchie said such protests would hurt businesses and working people when the global economy is in turmoil.

The argument is that without the seasonal scramble for gadgets and gizmos and disposable goods, businesses will fail and people will lose jobs. So, if you want to keep the economy strong, go out and buy as much stuff as you can, even if – or especially if – it will end up in the landfill!

Here are some other ways you can help keep the economy strong, according to John de Graaf and David K. Batker, authors of What’s the Economy For, Anyway? You could have a car accident. That would mean money spent on repairs, insurance, investigations, and maybe even a new car. You could get a divorce. All that money spent on lawyers and court services is good for the economy. On a larger scale, you could hope for a massive oil spill. Cleanup costs contribute to a growing economy. 

Forget about protecting a forest or conserving a wetland, though. Ducks and bears don’t spend money. And services that nature provides, such as carbon storage, water filtration, and habitat for plants and animals, don’t factor into most economic equations. That’s because the measure most of the world uses to gauge the “health” of the economy is the Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services a country produces in a year.

One month of crazy consumerism won’t have a huge impact on the world’s teetering economies. We need something bigger – a war perhaps. That would get money flowing. And we need to drill for more oil, dig up more minerals, convince people to throw out old stuff and buy new. We won’t be any happier and we won’t be healthier – quite the opposite. But the economy will be stronger. And that’s all that counts, right?

Sadly, for many political and business leaders, it is all that counts. But it shouldn’t be. We need a new way of looking at what it means to live well within the Earth’s natural systems. We need to consider what we truly need to be happy and healthy. It’s not more stuff, and it’s not working harder for longer hours at often tedious, pointless, or environmentally destructive jobs so that we can produce more stuff and get money to buy it.

Occupy Christmas is mostly symbolic. It won’t change global economic systems, and it could hurt businesses and workers. But it might get us thinking about what really is important to us as we head into the holiday season. I’d argue that spending time with friends and family or helping out people in need are more important and satisfying than getting a new Xbox.

Not that gift-giving is bad. If it’s sincere rather than just an obligation, it helps us connect with people. And meaningful gifts really do contribute to the betterment of the community – locally produced items or services, something you made yourself, donations to charities the recipient supports, invitations to partake in a shared activity.

The holiday season should be a time for resting, sharing, and celebrating, not for being stressed and overwhelmed at the mall. My wish for the season is that all of you are able to take the time to relax and reflect, and enjoy time with loved ones.

By David Suzuki with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation editorial and communications specialist Ian Hanington.

Image Credit: if winter ends via Flickr

SGC Admin Eco News

FYI: From David Suzuki: The D Word is obscene…..Living in a disposable word…

From the Editor: From our inbox to you:

Something to think about as we shop for Christmas…. Durable is better…… Please visit The David Suzuki Foundation website for Eco Friendly ideas and informative articles. 

green earth Stock Photo - 8164235

A kerfuffle is raised every time a comedian, politician, or businessperson uses the F-word or the N-word. I understand that. But to me, the D-word is the most obscene. I’m referring to disposable. Let me explain.

When I was a boy, we were poor and it was a big deal when my parents bought me a new coat. I would quickly outgrow it, and it would be passed on to my sister. My parents boasted that three of their children had worn the same coat. They weren’t concerned (nor were we kids) about gender differences or fashion; it was the coat’s ability to keep the wearer warm and its durability (now there’s a good D-word) that mattered.

We now have an economic system in which companies must not only show a profit each year, they must strive for constant growth. If a product is rugged and durable, it creates a problem for even the most successful business — a diminishing and eventually saturated market. Of course, any product will eventually wear to a point where it can no longer be patched, so the market will continue to exist to replace worn products.

But that’s not good enough in a competitive world driven by the demand for relentless growth in profits and profitability. So companies create an aura of obsolescence, where today’s product looks like a piece of junk when next year’s model comes out. We’ve lived with that for decades in the auto industry.

I’ve always said a car is simply a means of getting from point A to point B, but it’s become far more than that. Some cars convey a sense of power, and cars become safe havens when loaded with cup holders, sound systems, and even TVs and computers. Some people even name their cars, talk to them, and care for them like babies — until next year’s models come along.

It’s similar with clothing, even with outdoor attire beloved by environmentalists. We have a proliferation of choice based on colour, sexiness, and other properties that have nothing to do with function. I don’t understand torn blue jeans as a fashion statement, and I wish people would wear their pants till they spring their own leaks rather than deliberately incorporating tears. All of this is designed to get us to toss stuff away as quickly as possible so the economy can keep spinning.

Nowhere is this more obvious than with electronic gadgets. When my wife lost the cord to charge her cellphone, she went to seven stores. None had the necessary plug for her phone. Finally she went back to the retailer that sold her brand only to be told that the cords for the new models don’t fit the old ones and hers was so old, it wasn’t even on the market any more. It was a year-and-a-half old.

I remember when I was given the first laptop computer on the market. It had an LED display screen that let me see three lines at a time and a chip that stored about three pages of writing. But it was small and had word processing and a port to send my pieces by telephone. It revolutionized my life. I was writing a weekly column for the Globe and Mail and was able to send articles from Russia and even remote towns in the Amazon.

A couple of years later, a much better laptop hit the market. It had an LCD screen, a huge memory, and it displayed almost a full page. I got one. A year later, I got a new model, and then half a year after that, another. Each served me well, but every year, new ones would appear that were faster, smaller, and lighter, with longer-life batteries and more bells and whistles.

Try to get one fixed or upgraded, though. As with digital cameras, I was repeatedly told that it would cost more to fix an old laptop than to buy a new model. This is madness in a finite world with finite resources. At the very least, products should be created so components can be pulled apart and reused until they wear out.

You see why I think the D-word is so obscene.

By David Suzuki

SGC Admin Eco News

FYI: David Suzuki & The Pacific North Coast & Prime Minister Harper’s decision to back out of funding Plan.

From the Editor: The following information was received in my inbox this morning. ☺

Go to fullsize image

The Pacific North Coast is in trouble. The federal government just backed out of a funding partnership that supported the health and sustainability of Canada’s Pacific marine environment. Why? Because the shipping industry convinced the government that this partnership and the establishment of marine protected areas might challenge their plans to run oil tankers through the home of orca whales, salmon, rare coral reefs, and thousands of people whose livelihoods depend on the ocean. The Prime Minister might think accommodating oil tankers is more important than healthy oceans, but we don’t, and we’re letting him know. Send a letter to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Fisheries, telling them that you think the well-being of the Pacific North Coast marine environment is more important than the oil tankers that threaten it.

SGC Admin Eco News, News and views

FYI: From David Suzuki: RE: Boreal Caribou

The latest email in my inbox from David Suzuki and The Nature of things

By David Suzuki

As a nation and a global community, Canada has a history of ignoring environmental crises until it’s all but too late. Many of us remember the 1990s, when tens of thousands of Canadians in the Maritimes lost their livelihoods after overfishing wiped out fish stocks.

The boom-and-bust history reflected in the collapse of the East Coast cod fishery, and in logging communities and mining towns, should teach us that when an opportunity to get something right on the environment comes along we must take immediate action or suffer the inevitable ecological and social consequences of our own short-sightedness.

Such a window of opportunity, to protect one of Canada’s most threatened wildlife species, has opened with the long-awaited release of the federal government’s draft recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou. The boreal caribou is an iconic species threatened with extinction from the Yukon right across the country to Labrador. (The draft strategy is open to public comment until October 25, at www.sararegistry.gc.ca.)

A major prey species for wolves and other animals, including humans, woodland caribou are critical to sustaining the health of complex food webs that have evolved over millennia and to the well-being of hundreds of Aboriginal communities in the North that depend on the animal for sustenance and survival.

Although woodland caribou were once abundant throughout much of Canada and the northern United States, they have since lost around half of their historical range because of logging, mining, seismic lines, roads, hydroelectric projects, and other developments that have disturbed and fragmented their forest habitat.

One endangered herd in Alberta’s tar sands region west of Fort McMurray is at great risk of disappearing. Clear-cutting and no-holds-barred oil and gas exploration and development have affected more than 60 per cent of the habitat of the Red Earth caribou herd, leaving little undisturbed forest where it can feed, breed, and roam.

If there is good news, it is that the science is clear about what must be done to save this species from extinction. A recent analysis by experts with the International Boreal Conservation Science Panel concludes that governments need to ensure that large stretches of woodland caribou habitat are protected from industrial disturbance. Specifically, herds will need at least two thirds of their ranges to be maintained in an undisturbed condition or restored to such. In core areas this could mean from 10,000 to 15,000 square kilometres of old-growth boreal forest being set aside.

Under the federal Species at Risk Act, recovery strategies must use the best available science and traditional Aboriginal knowledge to identify habitat the species needs to survive and recover. The government must also set population objectives and identify threats to species survival and how these threats can be reduced through better management.

The federal government has incorporated some of the important ideas advanced by scientists. Under the recovery strategy, core habitat will be protected for about half the herds left in Canada. However, the strategy suffers from serious shortcomings. Many herds, deemed not to be self-sustaining, appear to have been written off to remove barriers to further industrial activities in their habitat, such as tar sands development in Alberta. Instead of protecting and restoring the remaining habitat of these herds, the government is proposing controversial band-aid measures like killing thousands of wolves and other predators. This kind of management is aimed at stabilizing declining caribou populations rather than recovering them – a contravention of Canada’s Species at Risk Act.

Canada’s official recovery strategy and supporting science show that if caribou are to survive, huge areas of the boreal will need to be protected, and we will have to embark on a more ecological approach to industrial development in those places that we exploit for timber and drill, frack, and strip-mine for fossil fuels. Environmentalists and forestry companies are already attempting that by working together under the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement to develop joint caribou conservation plans that protect habitat while ensuring that the economic viability of companies is maintained.

The federal government’s plans will help those herds that have been deemed self-sustaining, but they fall far short of what is necessary to ensure that dozens of herds won’t perish. As such, it is a compromise that is too costly for caribou, and ultimately our own country, to bear.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Terrestrial Conservation and Science Program director Faisal Moola and biologist Jeff Wells.

SGC Admin Eco News

FYI: From David Suzuki’s Queen of Green… ☺

 

David Suzuki's Queen of Green header

 

Here’s a summery four-step program to protect nature, on or off the grid:

1. Stop your neighbours from spraying toxic pesticides

2. Don’t compost invasive plant species

3. Learn to ID critter poop and protect wildlife trees

4. Renovate green and reduce waste destined for the landfill:

 How to ask your neighbours to stop spraying pesticides Ever asked anyone not to spray pesticides where children play or near your organic vegetable garden? How’d that go over? I suggest putting up a “Pesticide Free” lawn sign. (Congrats to eight lucky blog readers who won their very own!) Read the full story.

Stop the spread of invasive plants Invasive plants are good at wreaking havoc. But many wouldn’t be so successful if they didn’t have our help. Make sure you aren’t aiding and abetting (plant) invaders! Make amends. Maybe become an ivy buster? Read the full story.

The poop on scat… and other wildlife skills Enrich your next outdoor adventure – whether it’s a walk in the woods at the family cabin, or a trip into the back country. Did you know that moose poop looks like chocolate-covered almonds? Or that dead trees house an abundance of wildlife? Read the full story

Green your next home renovation Back in the 1800s, Levi Strauss never imagined scraps from manufacturing denim jeans would have value as non-toxic home insulation. An old toilet could be reincarnated as your kitchen counter. Now, that’s reusing! Read the full story.

 

Lindsay Coulter: Queen of Green: ☺