ENVIR 239 - Final
technical nutrient
a material or product that is designed to go back into the technical cycle into the industrial metabolism from which it came.
Dormitory residents reduce electricity consumption when exposed to real-time visual feedback and incentives
On college campuses, the vast majority of energy consumption takes place within buildings, and the environmental consequences of this consumption are considerable. For example, in 2004, the per-student consumption of resources in buildings at Oberlin College included 18,000 gal of water, 3 ton of coal, 23,000 ft3 of natural gas and 8,000kWh of electricity (data from Oberlin Office of Facilities Operations). A comprehensive study of greenhouse gas emissions conducted by Rocky Mountain Institute, a prominent environmental consulting firm, found that 92 percent of the 46,500 ton of CO2 equivalents released by Oberlin College in 2000 could be attributed to heating, cooling, lighting and other energetic services provided to buildings (Heede and Swisher, 2002). A substantial percentage of total campus resource use takes place within dormitories. Previous studies have estimated that occupant activities and choices control up to 50 percent of residential energy use, while the balance depends on physical characteristics of buildings and building equipment over which occupants have no control (Schipper, 1989). Students living in dormitories have a high degree of control over electricity and water use. Personal choices, such as how long they shower, and whether they leave lights, stereos and computers on, have the potential to reduce consumption of electricity and water. Three interrelated factors are necessary to stimulate building occupants to exhibit practices that conserve resources: knowledge, motivation, and control (other terms used to describe necessary conditions include "concern, capacity and physical condition" Janda et al., 2002). Computer and internet technology as mechanisms for introducing socio-technical feedback Modern "smart building" control systems are designed to use technological feedback to regulate building functions with a minimum of occupant input. In contrast, socio-technical feedback systems engage human beings as key decision-making elements in loops that involve technology. A well-designed socio-technical feedback system essentially allows building users to teach themselves how to conserve resources by trial and error (Darby, 2000). The question is, how should such a system be designed and implemented in a residential setting so as to maximize resource conservation? Recent developments in metering and datalogging technology, software, and the internet enable new mechanisms for this sort of feedback. All components of the monitoring and display system were developed between June 2004 and January 2005. Between February 1, 2005 and January 2006 (the date that this paper was submitted for publication), the monitoring system for the two "high-resolution," intensively monitored dormitories was in continuous operation. Every 20 s, the following sequence of events occurred in this system: . sensing stations located in the mechanical rooms of the two monitored dormitories collected data from electricity and water flow sensors; . data were processed by the receiving datalogger into several discrete packets and transmitted by radio signal from the sensor station through intermediate relay stations to a base station; . data received by the base station were inserted into a database that resided on a PC server; . raw data delivered to the database were processed by the server to create derived variables; . derived variables were made available to the internet; and . when the web site was called, graphics software created and "played" time-series graphs on the web site of the visitor's computer. Research methods for determining impacts of feedback on behavior and interest A two week long campus-wide "Dormitory energy competition" was employed to provide an incentive for conservation and a context for advertising, educating and delivering feedback on resource use within college dormitories. Publicity and education included posters announcing the competition and fliers and posted materials describing the environmental impact of water and electricity use. Because the authors were interested in the extent to which students could "self teach" themselves to conserve, these materials intentionally excluded specific suggestions on how students might conserve water and electricity. To reduce bias, informational materials and advertising were distributed at similar densities in all participating dormitories. The most popular 29 strategies included (percentage utilizing each strategy included in parentheses): turning bathroom lights off when unoccupied (71 percent), keeping lights off when dormitory rooms were unoccupied (70 percent), using natural lighting during the day (59 percent), shutting off computer monitors while not in use (50 percent), using less hot water in showers and clothes washing (45 percent), turning off hall lights (42 percent), and turning computers off when not in use (39 percent). The most popular strategies used to conserve water included (percentage reported included in parentheses): ensuring that faucets were not dripping (55 percent), taking shorter showers (48 percent), turning off water while brushing teeth (48 percent), washing clothes less often (35 percent), taking fewer showers (27 percent), and flushing toilets less frequently (26 percent). There was considerable division over the issue of toilet flushing; 17 percent of the text comments on water conservation were complaints that not flushing was an unacceptable method of water conservation.
Some of our stuff ends up in oceans
Plastic breaks down but does not disappear In some places, six times more small plastic fragments than zooplankton (pacific garbage patch, microbeads)
Privatized water - what are the problems ---
Plastic waste, downcycled - not recycled Manufactured demand Bottled water is less regulated than tap water in the US Must beat competition - equity issues
The story of bottled water ---
Bottled water companies try to make tap water look bad and scare people into buying their bottled water but its really just filtered tap water. Bottled water plastic is also super unsustainable.
Seattle rainwater harvesting ---
Decreases demand and improves water quality A water right is not required for rooftop water harvesting
Benefits to cycling -
Environmental Health Equity Economic
UW sustainability action plan
Goal: plan must be a blueprint for meaningful, implementable actions that institutionalize sustainability at UW Spring 2020
Energy use in buildings
In the US we spend 90% of our lives in buildings Residential and commercial uses a large portion of our energy Must improve environmental performance of buildings: tech and behavior
Seattle watershed water resources
Increasing demand puts supply at risk Pop growth Declining groundwater levels Impacts of climate change SPU "firm yield" annual average 172 mil gallons/day and demand is 125 mil gallons/day Most if already legally spoken for
US primary energy consumption
Petroleum and natural gas - most renewable energy is small fraction
Seattle GHG emissions by sector
Sustainable choices - our choices drive these numbers
Carbon offsets ---
These should be additives! Not your entire plan for carbon reduction Electric cars vs gas powered cars Electric - better for earth but disposing them is unsustainable and they're way more expensive so not feasible for everyone Gas powered - less sustainable in use but cheaper Millennial driving habits -- What are the differences between baby boomer driving and millennial driving? Fewer millennials drive to work
Direct water use
Toilets, taps, garden hoses 25% of total water usage
Most important rule for recycling
follow directions! Only put into recycling what is accepted where you are. "Wishcycling" & "dirtycycling" makes other recyclables trash.
What are GMOs?
genetically modified organisms genetically engineered organisms Different from standard agricultural breeding -- includes genetic techniques to splice one portion of genome into another organism Benefits Risks Current use
Food miles:
number of miles that food travels from the point of final production to the point of final purchase. What is local? Your backyard? 100 miles? 250 miles? WA state? PNW? USA? Local trap? Final delivery from producer to retail account for only 4% of the US systems greenhouse gas emissions. Upstream miles associated with things like transport of fertilizer, pesticides and animal feed matter Transport accounts for about 11% of the food systems emissions and agricultural production 83%
Energy introduction:
renewable energy - wind, solar, hydroelectric, biomass, and others Non renewable - fossil fuels including coal, oil, and natural gas, nuclear fuel Seattle GHG emissions by sector Sustainable choices - our choices drive these numbers We choose from available options Change our choices but also change the options
Microbeads
synthetic particles used in products that don't dissolve
Borunda (2019). This is a National Geographic article. Inequality is decreasing between countries- but climate change is slowing progress.
"The countries that are most responsible for global warming are different from the countries that are bearing the brunt of global warming." The Goldilocks zone Economists, development experts, and world leaders have long warned that climate change is likely to hurt poor countries more than rich ones. Recovering from disasters like hurricanes or floods or drought is more challenging when resources are thin, and extra heat hurts more when humans and crops are already near their limits— the case for many countries in the climate-sensitive tropics. It didn't matter if a country was rich or poor: The Goldilocks-esque relationship held. Colder countries didn't produce as much. Nor did hotter countries, and their economic penalty was even greater, especially when average temperatures crept above 20 degrees Celsius, or 68 degrees Fahrenheit. Many of the countries in the temperate Goldilocks zone, which already tended to be richer, had even seemed to gain some slight ineffable economic benefit from the warming. As temperatures in many of those countries crept up, so did their economic output.
Product or service ---
Buy the use of a product for a given amount of time When you are done - or upgrade, the manufacturer replaces it
Cradle to cradle -
100% renewable energy use Water stewardship clean water output Social responsibility positive impact on community Material reutilization Material health design processes mimics the cycling of chemicals in natural ecosystems. Eliminate the concept of waste.
What does organic mean?
3rd party certified Crops: No irradiation, sewage sludge, synthetic fertilizer/pesticides/herbicides or genetically modified organisms Animals: 100% organic feeds, no antibiotics/growth hormones, access to the outdoor, met animal health and welfare standards Processed foods: Organic: 95% organic Made with organic ingredients: 75% organic Certification: Must be certified to use the word organic Certification is expensive (favors larger companies)
Fast fashion - An opposite of sustainable design
80 billion new clothing items purchased annually worldwide Made in developing countries, worn in more developed countries 85% of clothing Americans buy is thrown away - 80 pounds per year per person
Biomimicry
An innovation method that seeks sustainable solutions by emulating nature's time tested patterns and strategies, The goal is to create products, processes and policies -- new ways of living -- that are well adjusted to life on earth over the long haul
You're obsessing about the wrong home energy uses By Heather Smith on Jun 4, 2015
As a consequence, we tend to relatively underestimate just how much energy it takes to keep the air and water in our homes at a temperature we like. In general, people estimate that the appliances they interact with the most (computers, light switches, televisions, stoves) use the most energy, and that the ones that they just leave running in the background (like the furnace and the hot water heater) use less. In fact, home heating is one of the biggest energy sucks out there — about 20 percent of home energy use, on average, instead of the 7 percent that the participants in one study estimated, on average. The only highly interactive household appliance for which the study's participants tended to underestimate energy consumption was the car. (On average, Americans use even more energy driving around than they do heating their homes.) But then, most people don't think of driving as household energy consumption — possibly because most cars live outside houses, and don't show up on the monthly utility bill (unless they're plug-in electrical cars).
What can you do?
Be kind to your clothes Wash carefully Wash less Repair Buy second hand Local thrift store or buynothing Thredup If you buy new choose, your company and clothing wisely Host a clothes swap Shop your own closet
UW strategies for reducing emissions
Behavior Technology Offsets
Seattle cycling
Bike master plan Increase ridership Decrease collisions, injuries, fatalities Increase connectivity Equity - access to the above
Active transportation advocacy
Bike works, rainier valley greenways and walkable washington Promote cycling/walking Sustainable citizens
Two ways to design products
Biodegradable inputs to biological cycles Closed loop technical cycles
Political ground is shifting
Candy taxes Soda taxes School lunch bills (healthier foods) Banning soda and sugary drinks from school Calorie labeling
Impacts of fast fashion
Carbon emissions Water use & pollution Chemicals (growing, dyeing) Microfibers Worker health impacts Environmental degradation Equity
Terracycle -
Collect hard to recycle items Cigarette butts, pens, ocean plastics, plastic gloves, caps Paid programs - zero waste boxes Free programs - paid for my manufacturers and retailers LOOP - eliminate single use products Loop - another terracycle idea Online marketplace Another way to eliminate waste Rather than recycling - refilling Zero waste versions of your favorite brands Moves us towards a circular economy - off the one way throw away system
How to support local farms ----
Community supported agriculture (CSA) Farmers markets
Food in America --- pollen
Compared to people throughout history, we spend Less time on food Less money on food Supermarkets Food from everywhere, from all season, all the time Novel food products = edible food like substance
Pimental et al (2005) study
Conventional Organic animal based (manure) Organic legume based 3 treatments Replicated 8 times (24 times) Repeated for 22 years Main finding in organic: Less chemical inputs Less soil erosion Water conservation Improved soil matter and biodiversity Soil organic matter (carbon) and nitrogen were higher in organic systems. Erosion was lower. Nitrate leaching was similar to conventional. Biodiversity higher in soil and above ground in organic systems. Labor is higher in organic systems (7-75% higher) Productivity and profits: organic roughly equals conventional
The UW climate action plan (2009)
Describes strategies and goals to reduce GHG emissions Goals: reduce emissions below 2005 levels (15% by 2020, 36% by 2035), achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 reducing co2 Aim to be a world leader in research and education on climate change science, impacts, policy, mitigation
Sustainable design ideas
Design things that don't have to go to the landfill or cause issues in our bodies
Seattle's rate of car ownership saw the biggest drop among big U.S. cities — by far
Evidence is mounting on the health-enhancing potential of cycling. Health benefits of moder- ate, habitual daily such physical activities as walking and cycling, are well documented (Oja et al., 1998; Pollock et al., 1978). Walking and cycling are more sustainable and effective means of being active for currently sedentary people (Dunn et al., 1999). It is also more cost effective than highly vigorous and structured activities (Sevick et al., 2000). is lacking. Previous transportation research has focused on quality of route, such as traffic con- ditions, signalization, bicycle and vehicle lane design, curb and surface conditions, slope, weather, lighting, safety, accessibility to specific land uses, etc., as environmental factors associated with cycling (Landis et al., 2001; Moritz, 1998). A number of instruments have been developed to cap- ture the bikability of environments. Many provide measures of Level of Service or similar indices, assessing the cyclistÕs safety based on the route-related variables just mentioned. The validity and reliability of the instruments remain insufficiently tested (Moudon and Lee, 2003). A small num- ber of empirical studies address environmental factors associated with cyclistsÕ levels of stress, comfort, and satisfaction (Landis et al., 1997). Barriers to cycling include insufficient or unsafe cycling infrastructure, shortage of cycling amenities, and undesirable land use conditions (Gold- smith, 1992; Litman, 2000).
Externalities in our food system
Externalities associated with cheap meat Pack meat into incredibly tight scales Fed cattle meat and blood from other cattle (illegal since 1990s, early 2000s) Routinely administer antibiotics to food animals Waste from these operations contaminates water Agricultural chemicals Health risks Lives of farm workers
How to increase water in vegas? How is water allocated? Who decides?
First in time, first in line Allocation rules allow nevada to pay for conservation projects in other states and use the conserved water LV wants to build san diego desalination plants in exchange for some of their colorado river allocation 2008 report examined shipping water from Alaska & piping water from the Columbia 2015: proposal to ship water from AK to CA
Improving seattle water quality --
Green stormwater infrastructure (GSI) - bioswales, rain gardens Act as biofilters, moving sediments and pollutants such as heavy metals from the water Treat anthropogenic
Seattle city light as a green utility - green up program
Green up program Voluntary green power SCL buys electricity from independent companies producing electricity from renewable sources. Community solar program Benefits to solar $$ to buy and install: barrier to solar in SEA isn't climate, it is awareness, infrastructure and $ Community solar is about pooling resources. Individuals buy solar units in a project
CSF projects must
Improve sustainability of our campus Demonstrate student leadership and involvement Include education and outreach components Cultivate awareness and engaged campus community Be feasible Have or attain technical knowledge Fund encourages the use of staff or mentor
The Water Is Already Low At A Florida Freshwater Spring, But Nestlé Wants More
In Florida, Nestlé is taking heat from environmental groups and others concerned about the future of one of the state's most endangered natural resources — its freshwater springs. Florida has more than a thousand freshwater springs, which provide drinking water, important natural habitat and places for recreation. Nestlé wants to begin taking more than a million gallons of water each day from Ginnie Springs, a popular destination in north Florida for swimming, canoeing and tubing. Environmental groups are pushing for Florida to adopt something it doesn't have now: a water use fee. Right now, the only money the state collects for the water is a one-time $115 application fee paid by the company doing the pumping, Seven Springs. Nestlé won't say how much it's paying Seven Springs for the water. But Smart, of the Florida Springs Council, says that under the current system, companies make millions of dollars from a public resource for which they pay little or nothing.
Bush (2019) Wall Street spends millions to buy up Washington state water (Links to an external site.).
In Washington state, there's little water left unclaimed, according to the state Ecology Department. In the future, scientists expect less snowpack, more variable precipitation and more frequent summer water shortages. Amid a changing climate, a population boom in Washington and churning development, Peterson's client plans to buy, lease and sell water in a privately operated water market of its own creation. Crown's activities here are unprecedented in scope for a private firm. The company's aggressive pursuit of water could put it in the vanguard. Or it could all evaporate. Ongoing negotiations between the U.S. and Canada over the Columbia River could shift flows, potentially draining demand. In Washington, water is a public resource that can't be owned. But the right to use water is exclusive and treated like a property right. Water rights transactions are notoriously hard to track. The state does not keep centralized data on water sales, said Harry Seely, of the consulting firm WestWater Research. Sales are often tied to land or farm assets. Water rights sales are subject to real-estate excise tax, but they aren't always recorded and categorized in the same way. Market research often relies on word of mouth.
Pollen food movement rising -----
In the wake of these food safety scandals, the conversation about food politics that briefly flourished in the 1970s was picked up again in a series of books, articles, and movies about the consequences of industrial food production.Beginning in 2001 with the publication of Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation, a surprise best-seller, and, the following year, Marion Nestle's Food Politics, the food journalism of the last decade has succeeded in making clear and telling connections between the methods of industrial food production, agricultural policy, food-borne illness, childhood obesity, the decline of the family meal as an institution, and, notably, the decline of family income beginning in the 1970s. For some in the movement, the more urgent problem is environmental: the food system consumes more fossil fuel energy than we can count on in the future (about a fifth of the total American use of such energy) and emits more greenhouse gas than we can afford to emit, particularly since agriculture is the one human system that should be able to substantially rely on photosynthesis: solar energy. It will be difficult if not impossible to address the issue of climate change without reforming the food system. This is a conclusion that has only recently been embraced by the environmental movement, which historically has disdained all agriculture as a lapse from wilderness and a source of pollution.1
Where does our stuff go?
Landfills Composting facilities US Recycling facilities US and abroad Oceans, earth, rivers Our bodies
carbon offsets by Lindsey at Shinkthatfootrpint
Main issues --- Wrong motivation Quality of project not as advertised Carbon offsets --- Cut carbon footprint Leadership Demonstrate criteria Real reduce Against baseline Permanent Third party standard comparison - VCS, gold standard Go for something you like
Smith 2015 ---
Majority of power in our homes comes from things wed ont think about because we don't interact with all the time Heating Air Conditioning Water heating Driving How to reduce? Turn down thermostat Shorter showers Turn down your hot water heater When your hot water heater breaks, replace it with a smaller one If you need to replace home heating, consider a heat pump Air conditioning? Energy state: US EPA voluntary program Superior energy efficiency saves people $ and protected our climate/resources Wahe dishes - disposable dishes, dishwasher - don't prewash Energy vampire - devices not in use in "stand by" power Personal choices make a big difference Occupant activities and choices control about 50% of residential energy use To reduce energy, people need knowledge, motivation, empowerments and control Petersen paper King County considers burning landfill waste to convert into energy McDonough and Braungart's famous 2002 book, "Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way we Make Things." Recycled carpet parts were not meant to be part of a carpet This book is not a tree. It is printed on a svnthetic"paper" and bound into a book
Problems with the heavy use of synthetic pesticides -
Manure - fertilizers
Food politics: the food movement
Many movements Sometimes at cross purposes May be coming together Even PETA may fight for small scale, more humane animal agriculture Recognizes that today's food and farming economy is unsustainable Restoration agriculture - RESTORE ecosystem Sustainability of the american diet ¾ of american spending goes to chronic issues to treat our diets
Challenges with organic agriculture --
More expensive
Environmental, Energetic, and Economic Comparisons of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems DAVID PIMENTEL,
Other aspects of conventional agriculture also have adverse effects on environmental and human health, as well as a high price tag. Nutrients from fertilizer and animal manure have been associated with the deterioration of some large fisheries in North America (Frankenberger and Turco 2003), and runoff of soil and nitrogen fertilizer from agricultural pro- duction in the Corn Belt has contributed to the "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico. The aim of organic agriculture is to augment ecological processes that foster plant nutrition yet conserve soil and water resources. Organic systems eliminate agrochemicals and reduce other external inputs to improve the environment and farm economics. The National Organic Program (a pro- gram of the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service; 7 CFR pt. 205 [2002]) codifies organic production methods that are based on certified practices verified by independent third-party reviewers. These systems give consumers assurance of how their food is produced and enable consumers to choose foods on the basis of the methods by which they were produced. The measurements showed significantly more water in the soil farmed using the organic legume sys- tem than in the conventional system (Pimentel et al. 2005). This accounted for the higher soybean yields in the organic legume system in 1999 The crop yields and economics of organic systems, com- pared with conventional systems, appear to vary based on the crops, regions, and technologies employed in the studies. However, the environmental benefits attributable to reduced chemical inputs, less soil erosion, water conservation, and improved soil organic matter and biodiversity were consis- tently greater in the organic systems than in the conventional systems. In the short term, organic systems may create nitrogen shortages that reduce crop yields temporarily, but these can be eliminated by raising the soil nitrogen level through the use of animal manure or legume cropping systems, or both. Several organic technolo- gies, if adopted in current conventional production systems, would most likely be beneficial. These include (a) employing off-season cover crops; (b) using more extended crop rota- tions, which act both to conserve soil and water resources and also to reduce insect, disease, and weed problems; (c) in- creasing the level of soil organic matter, which helps conserve water resources and mitigates drought effects on crops; and (d) employing natural biodiversity to reduce or eliminate the use of nitrogen fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides. Some or all of these technologies have the potential to increase the ecological, energetic, and economic sustain- ability of all agricultural cropping systems, not only organic systems.
Plastics are downcycled
Quality degraded with each use Often only one or two lives
Climate Change Is Darkening Seattle's Water Forecast By Robert McClure
Quietly unveiled to regional water managers over the summer, the admittedly incomplete — and yet extremely sobering — calculations show the amount of water Seattleites can count on could be reduced by as much as half over the next 35 years and nearly three-quarters by the end of the century. That's assuming a lot of things, including not killing off salmon runs and rarely asking anyone to cut back on water use. But still, the magnitude of the potential water loss quickly caught utility managers' attention. In short, climate is suddenly much more of a threat to Seattle's water supply. Scientists have long predicted that climate change will cause the Northwest to receive more rain and less snow. Hotter, drier weather causes more evaporation — and increases water demand. The scenario that played out this year included all of that.
What can individuals do?
Reduce our consumption that go down the drain Vote with our dollars: buy better products Make a change. Be a sustainable citizen.
Water is a renewable resource but...
Renewal takes time Current rate is unsustainable Groundwater mining/overdrafting "Fossil water"
Food, family life, community
Rise of fast food damages family life and community 40% of americans watch tv during meals Snacking all day rather than eating meals
Barriers to cycling as transportation
Safety fitness/health Identity Weather Lack of bike lanes Nowhere close to go
Privatizied water - what can we do?
Stop drinking bottled water Water infrastructure is underfunded in the US by 24 billion dollars. Advocate and vote. Lobby to increase drinking fountains/bottle fill stations or ban the sale of bottled water at school, work, city
Campus sustainability fund (CSF)
Student driven Desire to increase student voice while increasing UW sustainability Fosters positive change by giving the community the funds to develop, create and implement their ideas
Reasons to eat locally ----
Supports farmers Resilience - diverse food produced, ensures food in disasters and long term Farmland - habitat, ecosystem services Healthier Ask farmers - ask they about their production and pesticides
Brooks et al (2017) Fashion, Sustainability, and the Anthropocene
The emerging concept of the Anthropocene can help to destabilize the false dichotomy between humans and nature, and the idea can frame an understanding of both how industrial society shapes ecosystems and how best to respond to environmental concerns. Relentless material hyperconsumption, which goes beyond functional use, has produced an abundance of waste. Aluminum, alloys, and plastics are found in trace concentrations of sediments, forming man-made "technofossils" that will stain the geologic record.16 Fish and other aquatic species are ingesting tiny plastic fragments, which include arti- ficial microfibers released when polyester garments are laundered.18 Though the fibers themselves—smaller in diameter than a human hair—are all but invisible, the potential impacts upon sea life are substantial. Organisms of all sizes have been found to consume fibers and other microplastics that can take up space in the digestive system yet are unpassable, reducing both survival and reproduction, as well as increasing the uptake of chemical pollutants that bind to the fibers.19 Such impacts can bioaccumulate through the food chain, including to humans through the consumption of freshwater and marine organisms. Britain's clothing and textile factories were at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution. The spinning jennies of northern England, which depended on imported cotton, pump primed cycles of clothing production and consumption that accelerated across the next two and a half centuries. James Watt's innovations in steam engineering helped launch a fossil fuel economy, which began with the first commercial use of coal steam power in a cotton mill in Nottinghamshire in 1786. This event provides another poten- tial candidate for the start date of the Anthropocene. The "great accelera- tion" in economic activity and population growth of the eighteenth century set in motion the transformation of the global economy and ecology. Clean clothes usefully facilitated public health, although laun- dering evolved into a preoccupation with using technology and detergents to work against entropy and reproduce wardrobe items as "like-new" garments. These changes led to the evolution of new laundry routines, which were far more resource-intensive The year 1945 was chosen by the International Geological Congress as the start date for the Anthropocene. The final year of World War II saw the first detonation of nuclear weapons, in a test in New Mexico and later in action with horrific effects in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Humankind's mas- tery of nuclear physics demonstrated a step change in our capability to dev- astate environmental systems; however, it was the more mundane, yet rapid progression in hydrocarbon use after 1945 that had far-reaching impacts on the global environment. Burning fossil fuels for transport and energy gen- eration has underpinned the escalating anthropogenic transformation of the environment. Historians identify a second phase of great acceleration associated with the oil-fueled boom in global economic activity and phe- nomenal growth in population. Critical work on fashion and environmental sustainability has focused on a plethora of challenges such as water usage and water resource pollution in the production phases. This includes the unsustainable extraction of water to enable cotton growing in water-scarce environments such as around the Aral Sea region. When clothes are laundered, fibers from the fabric sur- face are abraded, break off, and are released into the laundry water; they are then discharged from the washing machine, enter the sewerage network, and can accumulate in waterways. Biodegradable natural fibers pose few prob- lems in comparison with artificial fibers. The problem of artificial microfiber pollution is a signature example of the challenges of the Anthropocene MacArthur discusses the initiative in uto- pian terms: "The Circular Fibres Initiative aims to catalyse change across the industry by creating an ambitious, fact-based vision for a new global textiles system."45 Another advocate of a circular clothing economy is WRAP (the Waste and Resources Action Programme), which highlights the benefits that can be brought about by changes in laundry practice. Incentivizing the public to return garments and put- ting widespread collection systems in place is one challenge. Other practical challenges include finding cost-effective methods to accurately identify and sort used garments. This is especially difficult when clothes tags are faded or missing, as the identification of any treatments or finishings on the garments (which can make recycling unfeasible) and the separation of blended-fiber garments pose substantial technical obstacles to recycling. A closed-loop model would be a shift away from the current pattern of clothing reuse popularized by organizations such as Oxfam and Marks & Spencer to one of recycling. Within environmental management the maxim "reduce, reuse, recycle" is a neat turn of phrase that simply encapsulates how the best way to alleviate the impact of consumption is, first, to reduce purchases; second, to reuse objects in the manner for which they were first intended; and third, to make a new thing by recycling the material. The third option represents much greater use of energy and physical processes and so is less favorable than reusing There is a strong draw to eco-modernism, which sees the capitalist market and new technol- ogy as the solution rather than the most important driver of change in the Anthropocene. Technology has an especially fetishistic appeal that compels policy makers to look for magic bullets rather than questioning the validity of the current economic model and embracing new political ideas.
Bick, Halsey and Ekenga (2018) The global environmental injustice of fast fashion
The global health costs associated with the production of cheap clothing are substantial. While industrial disas- ters such as the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire have led to improved occupational protections and work standards in the United States, the same cannot be said for LMICs. The hazardous working conditions that attracted regulatory attention in the United States and European Union have not been eliminated. the social costs involved in the production of fast fashion include damages to the environment, human health, and human rights at each step along the production chain Environmental justice is defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, as the "fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies" [5]. In the United States, this concept has primarily been used in the scientific literature and in practice to describe the disproportionate placement of superfund sites (hazardous waste sites) in or near communities of color. However, en- vironmental justice, as it has been defined, is not limited to the United States and need not be constrained by geo- political boundaries. The textile and garment industries, for example, shift the environmental and occupational burdens associated with mass production and disposal from high income countries to the under-resourced (e.g. low income, low-wage workers, women) communities in LMICs. The health hazards that prompted the creation of textile labor unions in the United States and the United Kingdom in the early 1900's have now shifted to work settings in LMICs. In LMICs, reported health outcomes include debilitating and life-threatening conditions such as lung disease and cancer, damage to endocrine function, adverse repro- ductive and fetal outcomes, accidental injuries, overuse injuries and death [9-11]. Periodic reports of inter- national disasters, such as the 2013 Rana Plaza factory collapse which killed 1134 Bangladeshi workers, are stark reminders of the health hazards faced by garment workers. These disasters, however, have not demonstrably changed safety standards for workers in LMICs Second-hand clothing not sold in the United States market is compressed into 1000-pound bales and exported overseas to be "graded" (sorted, cate- gorized and re-baled) by low-wage workers in LMICs and sold in second-hand markets. Clothing not sold in markets becomes solid waste, clogging rivers, greenways, and parks, and creating the potential for additional en- vironmental health hazards in LMICs lacking robust municipal waste systems. The fast fashion model thrives on the idea of more for less, but the age-old adage "less in more" must be adopted by con- sumers if environmental justice issues in the fashion in- dustry are to be addressed. The United Nation's SDG 12, "Ensure sustainable consumption and production pat- terns," seeks to redress the injustices caused by unfet- tered materialism. Consumers in high income countries can do their part to promote global environmental just- ice by buying high-quality clothing that lasts longer, shopping at second-hand stores, repairing clothing they already own, and purchasing from retailers with trans- parent supply chains.
Wendell Berry - the pleasure of eating
The industrial eater is, in fact, one who does not know that eating is an agricultural act, who no longer knows or imagines the connections between eating and the land, and who is therefore necessarily passive and uncritical — in short, a victim. When food, in the minds of eaters, is no longer associated with farming and with the land, then the eaters are suffering a kind of cultural amnesia that is misleading and dangerous. The current version of the "dream home" of the future involves "effortless" shopping from a list of available goods on a television monitor and heating precooked food by remote control. But as scale increases, diversity declines; as diversity declines, so does health; as health declines, the dependence on drugs and chemicals necessarily increases. As capital replaces labor, it does so by substituting machines, drugs, and chemicals for human workers and for the natural health and fertility of the soil. The food is produced by any means or any shortcuts that will increase profits. And the business of the cosmeticians of advertising is to persuade the consumer that food so produced is good, tasty, healthful, and a guarantee of marital fidelity and long life. What can one do? Here is a list, probably not definitive: Participate in food production to the extent that you can. If you have a yard or even just a porch box or a pot in a sunny window, grow something to eat in it. Make a little compost of your kitchen scraps and use it for fertilizer. Only by growing some food for yourself can you become acquainted with the beautiful energy cycle that revolves from soil to seed to flower to fruit to food to offal to decay, and around again. You will be fully responsible for any food that you grow for yourself, and you will know all about it. You will appreciate it fully, having known it all its life. Prepare your own food. This means reviving in your own mind and life the arts of kitchen and household. This should enable you to eat more cheaply, and it will give you a measure of "quality control": you will have some reliable knowledge of what has been added to the food you eat. Learn the origins of the food you buy, and buy the food that is produced closest to your home. The idea that every locality should be, as much as possible, the source of its own food makes several kinds of sense. The locally produced food supply is the most secure, freshest, and the easiest for local consumers to know about and to influence. Whenever possible, deal directly with a local farmer, gardener, or orchardist. All the reasons listed for the previous suggestion apply here. In addition, by such dealing you eliminate the whole pack of merchants, transporters, processors, packagers, and advertisers who thrive at the expense of both producers and consumers. Learn, in self-defense, as much as you can of the economy and technology of industrial food production. What is added to the food that is not food, and what do you pay for those additions? Learn what is involved in the best farming and gardening. Learn as much as you can, by direct observation and experience if possible, of the life histories of the food species.
UW sustainability action plan
Today, we expand our vision beyond the Climate Action Plan with a new Sustainability Strategy built on five Guiding Principles addressing student learning outcomes, research impact, diversity equity & inclusion, responsible use of our resources, and of course, decarbonization of our energy sources. At the top level, five Guiding Principles are intended to be permanent, directional beacons that ensure we don't lose touch with our primary vision and intentions. The second level consists of quantitative Targets that call for increases or reductions of measurable performance indicators, over 2- to 10-year time horizons. Finally, within each Target a collection of Actions is designed to induce achievement of the Target. We will reduce consumption of energy, reduce consumption of materials, shift to renewably-produced materials, and increase reuse, recycling, and composting. Double Student, Staff and I. Faculty Sustainability Engagement by 2024 One UW-Wide II. Sustainability Framework by 2022 Double Sustainability- III. Oriented Research Projects by 2025 Comprehensive IV. Equitable Purchasing Targets by 2022 5% Lower Emissions V. from Professional Travel by 2025 35% of Food Is VI. From Local Sources by 2025 12% or Less of VII. Commutes are Single- Occupancy by 2028 15% Lower Energy VIII. Usage Intensity by 2025 10% Less Solid Waste by 2025 45% Reduction of X. Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2030 In 2010 uw was #1 in sustainability and 2015 we are #10 UW sustainability Established in 2008 Campus Sustainability - UW sustainability Supports to increase campus sustainability
Waste not, Want not Royte, Elizabeth.
Wasting food takes an environmental toll as well. Producing food that no one eats-whether sausages or snickerdoodles-also squanders the water, fertilizer, pesticides, seeds, fuel, and land needed to grow it. The quantities aren't trivial. Globally a year's production of uneaten food guzzles as much water as the entire annual flow of the Volga, Europe's most voluminous river. Growing the 133 billion pounds of food that retailers and consumers discard in the United States annually slurps the equivalent of more than 70 times the amount of oil lost in the Gulf of Mexico's Deepwater Horizon disaster, according to American Wasteland author Jonathan Bloom. These staggering numbers don't even include the losses from farms, fishing vessels, and slaughterhouses. If food waste were a country, it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world, after China and the U.S. On a planet of finite resources, with the expectation of at least two billion more residents by 2050, this profligacy, Stuart argues in his book Waste: Uncovering the Global Food Scandal, is obscene.
Indirect water use or footprint
Water consumption and pollution behind all the goods and sevices you buy Much larger than your direct water footprint 95% total water usage 2000 gallons per american per day
US water
Water demand rising Pop increasing Irrigation increasing Agricultural irrigation and turf farms Multi state water negotiations Supreme court jurisdiction Essentially irrelevant whether headwaters of a river begin in one states or another - states cannot hoard water Even in drought, many places do not restrict new users Hydro-illogical cycle
How do we think about water?
Water quantity How much is available? Sustainably available? How is it allocated among humans? How is it allocated between humans and ecosystems? Water quality What is the waters condition relative to requirements of One of more species Direct water use/ direct water footprint Toilets, taps and garden hoses at home, work, school Average american family - 100 gallons per day 5% of our total footprint
Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States CHRISTOPHER L. WEBER* AND H. SCOTT MATTHEWS
food-miles", roughly a measure of how far food travels between its production and the final consumer, has been a consistent fixture in the debate on food sustainability since an initial report from the UK coined the term in 1995 (4-8). The focus on increased food-miles due to increased inter- national trade in food has led many environmental advocates, retailers, and others to urge a "localization" of the global food supply network (9), though many have questioned the legitimacy of this because of different production practices in different regions or the increased storage needed to "buy locally" through all seasons (6-8). Other advocates, pointing to research on the environmental effects of livestock pro- duction (10), have urged consumers to shift dietary habits toward vegetable-based diets (11). The assumed energy and carbon intensities of each type of transport are given in Table 1. Note that the carbon intensity of gas pipelines includes U.S. Regardless, the focus on food-miles and transport must be analyzed in terms of the overall climate impact of food. Results in Figure 1c show the breakdown of total life-cycle GHG emissions associated with household food, in terms of final delivery, supply chain (nondirect) freight, production, and wholesaling/retailing. Total GHG emissions are 8.1 t CO2e/household-yr, meaning delivery accounts for only 4% of total GHG emissions, and transportation as a whole accounts for 11%. Wholesaling and retailing of food account for another 5%, with production of food accounting for the vast majority (83%) of total emissions. Thus, a majority of food's climate impact is due to non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, mainly due to nitrogen fertilizer application, other soil management techniques, and manure management, are prevalent in all food groups but especially in animal-based groups due to the inefficient transformation of plant energy into animal- based energy. Methane (CH4) emissions are mainly due to enteric fermentation in ruminant animals (cattle, sheep, goats) and manure management, and are thus concentrated in the red meat and dairy categories. it is clear that the average household analyzed here is not representative of the actual placement of any single home in the United States One potential change since 1997 which could affect the average results is the increase in imports to the U.S. (34), which would increase the average distance to market for some foods and increase the supply chain length for all commodities The first major uncertainty is ignoring land use impacts, which is estimated to contribute up to 35% of total GHG impact of livestock rearing
American water crisis -
valuable, exhaustible resource that we treat as valueless and inexhaustible Limitless quantity of high quality water for less $ than we pay for our cell service Landowner wells In many places - water right follow a use it or lose it approach Existing supplies are at capacity but we expect US to growth by another 110 mil by 2050 We have traditionally engineered our way out of water shortage problems