Group Summary

housewithoutplanet

In our research we found that the coverage of on the environment in society is more ubiquitous among social media than the more traditional media outlets. When we researched “solar AND wind” among four major newspapers in the past 3 months, only 9 stories came up in the results. Whereas we also found that people were actively commenting on Wal-Mart’s Facebook page concerning their sustainability initiative. Books and academic journals generally had good information, but sometimes it was difficult to find stories that were up-to-date.

What does this mass media trend say about our society and the environment?

We would like to suggest that this denotes a marked difference between how mass media channels and individuals view the environment. The trend within social media indicates that individuals see that the environment is important, and that the way we utilize our natural ecosystems has a direct effect on society. On the contrary, mass media outlets seem to brush over certain environmental debates. This is despite the fact that, as we have shown, the way in which we understand and care for the environment is very pertinent to the more covered healthcare, energy, global warming, affordable housing, and food discussions.

Whether or not this phenomenon is actual in practice or purposeful on the part of traditional mass media outlets remains to be seen. However, our observations do have an interesting application to the ideas we have been discussing in class. First, the comparative increase of environmentalism among social media outlets over traditional media channels supports the active user theory. If users are creating media of a different variety than the traditional media, clearly, they are filtering out certain elements and engaging media critically.

Also inherent when discussing mass media and the environment are the issues of political controversy and the media’s “watch dog” role. By cutting corners on certain environmental issues the media has certainly ceased to function as a watch dog. When our blog focused on food, it was clear to see that there are problems with our system, but very few media outlets focus on this. This failure is closely tied with political controversy. A large degree of political change would have to occur in order for our society to become better in tune with the environment and reap more of its benefits. Presently, more traditional media outlets are obviously not ready to incite this change.

But why? Fear of advertising revenues? It could be that conglomerates, which own other companies that engage in environmentally irresponsible business practices, own certain mass media channels. Perhaps it could be explained by demographics. Newspapers might run fewer stories about the environment and more stories on health care, because there readers are generally elderly. Similarly, different television news channels may present skewed view of environmental issues that are more in line with their average users’ political idealology. That being said, more coverage is needed on how our society and the environment can mutually benefit, rather than hurt, one another.

Sustainability and its Economic Functions

What is sustainability or something that is sustainable?

While there are many definitions, the two seem most relevant are:

1. From New Zealand’s Ministry of Economic Development:

sustainability:

A movement towards redesigning the ways society’s needs and wants are met so that they can be accommodated within the long-term carrying capacity of the environment.

2.  From weblife.org

sustainable:

Able to be continued indefinitely without a significant negative impact on the environment or its inhabitants.

The concept of sustainability has become very popular over the last few years, especially since global warming and climate change have become such a hot-topic issue.  Not only has the media grasped onto the idea, the concept of sustainability and “going green” has become a capitalistic phenomenon.

In an article from The Harvard Business Review, Nidulu, Prahalad, and Rangaswami say in “Why Sustainability is Now the Key Driver of Innovation” that, “Sustainability isn’t the burden on bottom lines that many executives believe it to be.  In fact, becoming environment-friendly can lower your costs and increase your revenues.”

In a New York Times article titled “Debating Sustainability,” Alice Rawsthorn questions, “ How can the rest of us be expected to measure the sustainable impact of the things we buy? And how can we be confident about the way in which they were designed, manufactured, shipped, and will eventually be disposed of?”

She brings this up because in order to be sustainable, everyone must be sustainable.  It is a process that will only work if adhered to by all.

In something more close to home, The Greenville News article titled “New GSP airport terminal to be energy efficient” talks about how “ the building was designed to incorporate sustainability features, including large glass windows, which allow the building to be lit by daylight and improve productivity of employees.”

This article shows the growth of sustainability and the impact it has on us locally.

Solar Power!

Solar panels are very instrumental in the process of building a green home.  Solarpanelinfo.com says, “Solar panels (arrays of photvoltaic cells) make use of renewable energy from the sun, and are a clean and environmentally sound means of collecting solar energy.”

According to howstuffworks.com, you must have a roof that has the correct orientation or angle of inclination to take full advantage of the sun’s energy, as well as the proper choice in battery.

hubpages.com tells of the pros and cons of solar paneling:

Pros:

  • solar panels do not release any pollutants into the air. The only pollution that is caused is when the panels are manufactured, the transportation of them, and the installation. Once they are installed they are not harmful to the environment.
  • Electricity that is produced through the use of solar panels is quiet unlike most machines that run on fossil and renewable fuels.
  • Solar energy has the ability to harness electricity in locations that are remote and are not connected to any national grid
  • the amount of money that you will save. When starting off you will have to invest a large sum of money. But once it is installed it will help to provide a free source of electricity that will pay itself off over the years.

Cons:

  • the amount of money you will need to start using it. The average price of highly efficient solar cells can be more than $1,000 and many houses and companies will need more than one
  • the weather will greatly affect the solar cells and the power that they can harness
  • The level of pollution in the area can affect the way that solar cells work. Businesses that want to use solar energy in highly polluted areas will have a harder time with this.

Suppress the Will to Till

One very little known fact about global warming prevention is that soil plays a significant part in the process.  Simply put, soil retains carbon dioxide that would normally be in the air.  Therefore, the tilling soil may actually hurt the environment.  According to a Fairfax County document, no-till practices can be a good short-term fix for large amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

No-till farming is accomplished by high crop rotations and cover crops.

The benefits of no-till practices are:

  1. Reduced labor requirements
  2. Time savings
  3. Reduced machinery wear
  4. Fuel savings
  5. Improved long- term productivity
  6. Improved surface water quality
  7. Reduced soil erosion
  8. Greater soil moisture retention
  9. Improved water infiltration
  10. Decreased soil compaction
  11. More wildlife
  12. Reduced release of carbon gases
  13. Reduced air pollution

This video talks about how properly handled soil can help our climate change problem:

Soil & The Environment

Organic farming also prevents global warming, according to the Rodale Institute.  They say: “The key lies in the handling of organic matter (OM): because soil organic matter is primarily carbon, increases in soil OM levels will be directly correlated with carbon sequestration. While conventional farming typically depletes soil OM, organic farming builds it through the use of composted animal manures and cover crops.”

A “Com-Post”

According to biosolids.com, composting is a process in which solid organic materials are broken down by micro-organisms in the presence of oxygen. Biosolids are mixed with sawdust, wood chips or other organic material. High temperatures generated during this process kill harmful micro-organisms. A rich, soil-like product is the end result.

Composting is something that can be done easily in your own backyard, as Laura Kelly explains in this YouTube video: Backyard composting for vegetable garden

According to the Sierra Magazine, composting can be an easy way to help control global warming. The article says, “In the oxygen-deprived environment of a landfill, rotting food produces methane, a gas with 72 times the global-warming potential of carbon dioxide. Landfills are the largest human-made source of methane emissions in the United States, with a greenhouse-gas impact equal to one-fifth of that produced by the nation’s coal-fired power plants.  ‘While we’re working on getting cars off the road and shutting down coal plants, composting is the fastest, easiest, cheapest way to deal with greenhouse-gas emissions right now’, says Linda Christopher, executive director of The Grassroots Recycling Network.”

Scientific Blogging adds to this issue of global warming saying, “Applying organic fertilizers, such as those resulting from composting, to agricultural land could increase the amount of carbon stored in these soils and contribute significantly to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, according to new research published in a special issue of Waste Management & Research.”
Composting is a very easy way to fertilize a garden or yard while reducing amount of waste in landfills and helping the problem of global warming.  Why shouldn’t you do it?

Vegetarians vs. Meat Eaters

Whether or not to be a vegetarian has always been a widely debated issue.  There seem to be a wide range of pros and cons on both sides of the spectrum. Today will discuss the positives of vegetarianism.

In an article in the Vegetarian Times, titled “22 Reasons to Go Vegetarian Right Now- benefits of vegetarian diet,” Norine Dworkin discusses the positives of living the vegetarian lifestyle:

  • Vegetarians usually live about 7 years longer
  • a British study that tracked 6,000 vegetarians and 5,000 meat eaters for 12 years found that vegetarians were 40 percent less likely to die from cancer during that time and 20 percent less likely to die from other diseases.
  • The average bone loss for a vegetarian woman at age 65 is 18 percent; for non-vegetarian women, it’s double that.
  • The EPA estimates that nearly 95 percent of pesticide residue in our diet comes from meat, fish and dairy products.
  • Vegetarians have a more regular digestion cycle. Eating a lot of vegetables necessarily means consuming fiber, which pushes waste out of the body.

Jonathan Safran Foer was interviewed about his book, “Eating Animals” by  Elizabeth Weise who writes for USA Today.  He says, “My book is not a case for vegetarianism. It’s a case against factory-farmed meat. Basically, that’s meat where animals are raised in enclosures, where they don’t get to see the sun, don’t get to touch the Earth, and they’re almost always fed drugs to keep them from getting sick or make them grow faster.”

Factory farmed meat has been an ever-growing issue in the United States.  As people have become more aware of where their food is coming from, there has been a stronger resistance to the ample amounts of “cheap meat” on the supermarket shelves.

http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/2001/06/images/farm1.jpg