Environmental Reform Tip time! See, I'd never miss two weeks, I promise. Here's a great tip I can give you all. Works like a charm...
When you are going to put food in the refrigerator, check to see if the food is warm. If it is (and this won't result in you getting food poisoning) leave the food on the counter until it cools down. If you put it in to the fridge hot, it takes much more energy to keep the refrigerator at a cold temperature because the food is warmining it up. Think of how hard your poor refrigerator must have to work!
You'd be surprised how much energy (and money!) this saves! Have a great week everyone, and a wonderful Turkey-day! Eat lots of good food, I know I will.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Sunday, November 18, 2007
When Deer Attack...
I apologize sincerely for my lack of Environmental Reform Tip this past Monday! It is the week before Thanksgiving Break and I have been frantically working to get as far ahead as possible so that I don't have to work too much during visit home. (My theory is, I haven't seen my family since October, I deserve to spend some homework free time with them!)
But...I can't let a Sunday pass without my Environmental Learning Tale! I have a good one too, for this week. But first I must answer two questions from my last post.
1st. of all: a HUGE shout out to Brenna's brilliant sister Meag, for correctly replying that last week's post title was in fact from the Disney Movie "Pocahontas" (what a ridiculously inaccurate movie, by the way...) You rock Meag!
However, no one tried to answer the environmental question, tsk tsk. That's okay though, its a pretty cool answer. Planting a cover crop like beans actually prevents soil erosion. If you plant cover crops while you're not using the plot of land, much less soil will wash away. Preventing erosion is good for so many reasons, not the least of which being preventing sediment deposition in waterways. Yay cover crops!
Okay, here is my Environmental Learning Tale for the week...
"Hey! Get That Deer Out Of My Living Room!"
If you are from Pennsylvania (or Maryland...or Delaware...or New Jersey...etc) you are familiar with road signs encouraging you to watch out for the deer that might commit hara-kiri by throwing themselves in front of your car late at night.* Not very nice for the deer, or the car owner. The fun doesn't end there though, some deer have even been known to take a bite or two out of houses. What's up with that? But as there come to be more and more deer (and less and less deer food) our houses start to look like a five star meal.
But where the heck did all those deer come from?
Well, there are lots of ways you could take that question. But here's the environmental answer. A long time ago in the lower 48 states there used to be large packs of roving dogs known as wolves. For all of you who just recoiled in terror, wolves are no where near as bad as the media makes them out to be. They are actually pack animals who care for their pups, and even watch out for the sick and injured members of their pack. Yes, they kill and eat large animals, and yes, they are really good at what they do. But they are not the vicious, blood thirsty beasts that popular culture has made them out to be.
In case you can't tell, they are my favorite animal...
Back to the deer though. So there were lots of wolves running around North America, and they were eating the deer that also were running around North America. For that matter, the people running around North America were also eating the deer, but the point is, everything was in balance.
But then, man decided that wolves were going to eat their children (MYTH!!!! NOT REAL!!!!) and so they killed them all and were really proud of themselves.
Many years passed.
And now man is putting up signs on the side of the road and insuring their cars because deer keep jumping in front of them. The connection? With out the wolves to eat the deer, the deer began to over populate the forest. In some places they actually strip the land of vegetation. What's a farmer to do?
Clearly, they need to hire hunters to snipe out the deer.
Sounds like a good plan, right? Well, in theory, but not really in practice. The hunters are actually not helping the deer (or the people) very much at all. You see, wolves are pretty cool critters, they are good at running, and at jumping, but the one thing they can't do is run down and take out a healthy adult deer. They have to go after the sick ones instead, because those are the only ones they can bring down. Kinda puts a crimp in the idea of wolves as vicious killing machines doesn't it? I mean, deer aren't that big...
People don't have that problem though, and if it has four legs, antlers, and is deer-like, the hunters working to control the population will shoot it. Unfortunately, more often than not, the dead deer was actually a perfectly healthy adult. And if there are no healthy adults, guess who gets to repopulate the herd?
In short, because we killed off the deer's natural predator, the wolf, we now have diseased deer leaping in front of our cars late at night, and eating our houses.
I think the deer got the short end of the stick when the wolf went out, and I think we did to. In fact, I begin to wonder if there was ever any long end to the stick at all...maybe the deer ate it.
So that's that. I hope you enjoyed that tale as much as I enjoyed writing it. To go along with it, here's the environmental question for the week.
Environmental Question: What is the scientific name for the Gray Wolf?
* Deer do not actually commit hara-kiri because they aren't committing ritualistic Japanese suicide using a Katana. They're just trying to cross the road.
But...I can't let a Sunday pass without my Environmental Learning Tale! I have a good one too, for this week. But first I must answer two questions from my last post.
1st. of all: a HUGE shout out to Brenna's brilliant sister Meag, for correctly replying that last week's post title was in fact from the Disney Movie "Pocahontas" (what a ridiculously inaccurate movie, by the way...) You rock Meag!
However, no one tried to answer the environmental question, tsk tsk. That's okay though, its a pretty cool answer. Planting a cover crop like beans actually prevents soil erosion. If you plant cover crops while you're not using the plot of land, much less soil will wash away. Preventing erosion is good for so many reasons, not the least of which being preventing sediment deposition in waterways. Yay cover crops!
Okay, here is my Environmental Learning Tale for the week...
"Hey! Get That Deer Out Of My Living Room!"
If you are from Pennsylvania (or Maryland...or Delaware...or New Jersey...etc) you are familiar with road signs encouraging you to watch out for the deer that might commit hara-kiri by throwing themselves in front of your car late at night.* Not very nice for the deer, or the car owner. The fun doesn't end there though, some deer have even been known to take a bite or two out of houses. What's up with that? But as there come to be more and more deer (and less and less deer food) our houses start to look like a five star meal.
But where the heck did all those deer come from?
Well, there are lots of ways you could take that question. But here's the environmental answer. A long time ago in the lower 48 states there used to be large packs of roving dogs known as wolves. For all of you who just recoiled in terror, wolves are no where near as bad as the media makes them out to be. They are actually pack animals who care for their pups, and even watch out for the sick and injured members of their pack. Yes, they kill and eat large animals, and yes, they are really good at what they do. But they are not the vicious, blood thirsty beasts that popular culture has made them out to be.
In case you can't tell, they are my favorite animal...
Back to the deer though. So there were lots of wolves running around North America, and they were eating the deer that also were running around North America. For that matter, the people running around North America were also eating the deer, but the point is, everything was in balance.
But then, man decided that wolves were going to eat their children (MYTH!!!! NOT REAL!!!!) and so they killed them all and were really proud of themselves.
Many years passed.
And now man is putting up signs on the side of the road and insuring their cars because deer keep jumping in front of them. The connection? With out the wolves to eat the deer, the deer began to over populate the forest. In some places they actually strip the land of vegetation. What's a farmer to do?
Clearly, they need to hire hunters to snipe out the deer.
Sounds like a good plan, right? Well, in theory, but not really in practice. The hunters are actually not helping the deer (or the people) very much at all. You see, wolves are pretty cool critters, they are good at running, and at jumping, but the one thing they can't do is run down and take out a healthy adult deer. They have to go after the sick ones instead, because those are the only ones they can bring down. Kinda puts a crimp in the idea of wolves as vicious killing machines doesn't it? I mean, deer aren't that big...
People don't have that problem though, and if it has four legs, antlers, and is deer-like, the hunters working to control the population will shoot it. Unfortunately, more often than not, the dead deer was actually a perfectly healthy adult. And if there are no healthy adults, guess who gets to repopulate the herd?
In short, because we killed off the deer's natural predator, the wolf, we now have diseased deer leaping in front of our cars late at night, and eating our houses.
I think the deer got the short end of the stick when the wolf went out, and I think we did to. In fact, I begin to wonder if there was ever any long end to the stick at all...maybe the deer ate it.
So that's that. I hope you enjoyed that tale as much as I enjoyed writing it. To go along with it, here's the environmental question for the week.
Environmental Question: What is the scientific name for the Gray Wolf?
* Deer do not actually commit hara-kiri because they aren't committing ritualistic Japanese suicide using a Katana. They're just trying to cross the road.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
You Think I'm An Ignorant Savage
"And you've been so many places I guess it must be so/But still I cannot see/If the savage one is me/How can there be so much that you don't know?"
Bonus Question: If you can name that Disney Movie you get a really BIG shout out in the next post.
Okay, before I tell you how all that relates to my next Environmental Learning Tale I should answer the question from last week's post. Also, shout out to Brenna who got pretty close to the real answer. Here it is...
Lake Eutriphication comes about because of the deposition of nutrients into a lake. Things like nitrogen and phosphorus run off from farmland and wind up in the water. Now, algae gets really excited when that happens (because it loves nutrients) and starts to grow like crazy. This isn't the best plan, however, because it quickly runs out of nutrients, dies, and sinks down in the lake where it is broken down by little decomposer organisms. These organisms need oxygen to do their job, so they suck up all the oxygen in the lake and use it all (greedy things). As as result, the lake has no oxygen left at all. And that, my friends, is Eutriphication. It is worst in lakes because the water has no where to go to get more oxygen. It just hangs out and makes lots of fish unhappy.
So, to tie this back to the title of this post, here is the Environmental Learning Tale for the week....
Too Bad About The Europeans...
This is a story about the importance of observing what is going on around you.
When the European's landed in America and decided that they discovered it, they were pleased with what they found. Seemed to them like America was a pretty neat place (all those trees and things) but they really thought that it could do with some domestication, so they cleaned up a few patches of troublesome forest and set up a couple farms. The Native Americans (who actually lived here before the Europeans arrived, calling the nature of the white man's 'discovery' into question) weren't thrilled.
The Europeans, for their part, weren't too thrilled with the Native American's either. Generally they thought they were savages (hence the title of the post, despite the hideous inaccuracy of the movie from whence it came.) So when they caught sight of what the Native Americans called 'farms' they laughed up their sleeves.
This was because the Native American's excelled at what is known as Polyculture. They actually grew multiple plants on the same patch of land. The crops they grew (corn, beans, and squash) were known to them as The Three Sisters, and the commonly held view was that they didn't grow well unless they were planted all together.
Well, the Europeans thought this was pretty silly (Three Sisters? Come on! Corn doesn't have a sister...) So they planted their crops separately and patted themselves on the back for being so civilized.
Until, that is, their croplands began to fail.
They just couldn't figure out why they had to keep finding more cropland (and cutting more forests down while they were at it). What was wrong with the soil? Moreover, WHY THE HECK WEREN'T THE NATIVE AMERICANS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM?!?!?!?!*
Because, my friends, the Native American's knew something that the Europeans did not. Namely that The Three Sisters really DO grow better together. That's because the squash vines can grow up the cornstalks, and the beans can fix nitrogen in the soil for the corn and squash to use. All in all, a happy little field. Sister's, after all, work well together (most of the time.)
Tragically the Europeans did not figure this out, and while they did get enough food to sustain themselves, it took a lot more work than it would have if they'd stooped to taking a lesson from the people who'd lived on this continent since the Pleistocene.
So, who were the ignorant savages in the end?
*Note: The Native Americans actually did have to move their cropland around every so often, it was just MUCH less often than the Europeans. Also, when they did rotate their cropland, they would let the forest reclaim the portion that they had abandoned. When they needed that patch of land again they would burn the growing wood down and let the ash fertilize the soil even more. Which was pretty good planning on their part.
Well that's my tale for the week, I hope you all enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it. To follow up, here is my Environmental Question.
Environmental Question: If you don't need to farm a given patch of land for a few years, why is it a good idea to plant a cover crops like beans (excluding the benefits of nitrogen fixing in the soil)?
Bonus Question: If you can name that Disney Movie you get a really BIG shout out in the next post.
Okay, before I tell you how all that relates to my next Environmental Learning Tale I should answer the question from last week's post. Also, shout out to Brenna who got pretty close to the real answer. Here it is...
Lake Eutriphication comes about because of the deposition of nutrients into a lake. Things like nitrogen and phosphorus run off from farmland and wind up in the water. Now, algae gets really excited when that happens (because it loves nutrients) and starts to grow like crazy. This isn't the best plan, however, because it quickly runs out of nutrients, dies, and sinks down in the lake where it is broken down by little decomposer organisms. These organisms need oxygen to do their job, so they suck up all the oxygen in the lake and use it all (greedy things). As as result, the lake has no oxygen left at all. And that, my friends, is Eutriphication. It is worst in lakes because the water has no where to go to get more oxygen. It just hangs out and makes lots of fish unhappy.
So, to tie this back to the title of this post, here is the Environmental Learning Tale for the week....
Too Bad About The Europeans...
This is a story about the importance of observing what is going on around you.
When the European's landed in America and decided that they discovered it, they were pleased with what they found. Seemed to them like America was a pretty neat place (all those trees and things) but they really thought that it could do with some domestication, so they cleaned up a few patches of troublesome forest and set up a couple farms. The Native Americans (who actually lived here before the Europeans arrived, calling the nature of the white man's 'discovery' into question) weren't thrilled.
The Europeans, for their part, weren't too thrilled with the Native American's either. Generally they thought they were savages (hence the title of the post, despite the hideous inaccuracy of the movie from whence it came.) So when they caught sight of what the Native Americans called 'farms' they laughed up their sleeves.
This was because the Native American's excelled at what is known as Polyculture. They actually grew multiple plants on the same patch of land. The crops they grew (corn, beans, and squash) were known to them as The Three Sisters, and the commonly held view was that they didn't grow well unless they were planted all together.
Well, the Europeans thought this was pretty silly (Three Sisters? Come on! Corn doesn't have a sister...) So they planted their crops separately and patted themselves on the back for being so civilized.
Until, that is, their croplands began to fail.
They just couldn't figure out why they had to keep finding more cropland (and cutting more forests down while they were at it). What was wrong with the soil? Moreover, WHY THE HECK WEREN'T THE NATIVE AMERICANS HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM?!?!?!?!*
Because, my friends, the Native American's knew something that the Europeans did not. Namely that The Three Sisters really DO grow better together. That's because the squash vines can grow up the cornstalks, and the beans can fix nitrogen in the soil for the corn and squash to use. All in all, a happy little field. Sister's, after all, work well together (most of the time.)
Tragically the Europeans did not figure this out, and while they did get enough food to sustain themselves, it took a lot more work than it would have if they'd stooped to taking a lesson from the people who'd lived on this continent since the Pleistocene.
So, who were the ignorant savages in the end?
*Note: The Native Americans actually did have to move their cropland around every so often, it was just MUCH less often than the Europeans. Also, when they did rotate their cropland, they would let the forest reclaim the portion that they had abandoned. When they needed that patch of land again they would burn the growing wood down and let the ash fertilize the soil even more. Which was pretty good planning on their part.
Well that's my tale for the week, I hope you all enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it. To follow up, here is my Environmental Question.
Environmental Question: If you don't need to farm a given patch of land for a few years, why is it a good idea to plant a cover crops like beans (excluding the benefits of nitrogen fixing in the soil)?
Monday, November 5, 2007
Saving the World: One Laundry Room At A Time
Thanks for checking in on Monday's Environmental Reform Tip! This is an easy one for everyone to do (its a favorite of mine too!)
When you're drying things in the laundry, throw a dry towel in with the clothes before starting the dryer up. Your things will dry so much faster! If you have a moisture sensor on your dryer, your stuff will be done sooner. If you're like me and therefore are a college student who lives in a dorm, you can check your stuff after like half an hour and it'll probably be done (depending on how large the load). Since most college dryers are programmed to run for an hour, you can throw another load of wet stuff in and use the remaining half an hour to dry that load. This will save money, time, and energy! Plus it will eliminate those pesky laundry room pile ups (since the washer takes half an hour and the dryer takes an hour...sigh, you can do the math as well, if not better, than I can)
Hope that helps! Have an awesome Monday!
When you're drying things in the laundry, throw a dry towel in with the clothes before starting the dryer up. Your things will dry so much faster! If you have a moisture sensor on your dryer, your stuff will be done sooner. If you're like me and therefore are a college student who lives in a dorm, you can check your stuff after like half an hour and it'll probably be done (depending on how large the load). Since most college dryers are programmed to run for an hour, you can throw another load of wet stuff in and use the remaining half an hour to dry that load. This will save money, time, and energy! Plus it will eliminate those pesky laundry room pile ups (since the washer takes half an hour and the dryer takes an hour...sigh, you can do the math as well, if not better, than I can)
Hope that helps! Have an awesome Monday!
Sunday, November 4, 2007
The Lake Water is Always Bluer On the Other Side of the Country (or Why Chicago Should Keep A Close Eye on Lake Michigan)
First of all, a big thanks to my roomie for providing me with this interesting (though slightly more than disconcerting) environmental current event.
That's right everyone! Its time for my weekly Environmental Learning Tale. Here goes...
Why We All Wish We Were Chicago
I am a proud Philadelphian (E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES! Except we always lose, and when we do, there is looting so, not really) but I have to admit that I realized a few days ago that Chicago has one thing that Philadelphia does not have (and cheese stakes, Pat's OR Gino's just doesn't make up for it.)
They have.....
LAKE MICHIGAN!
That's right, its big, it pretty cold (being a glacial lake and all) and it is a pretty significant source of drinking water. My roommate, being from outside Chicago actually gets her drinking water from the lake. Good for her. However, most of the rest of the nation, barring the east coast and northern California, really wish they had that darn lake. Until recently, however, they restricted themselves to gazing longingly towards Chicago and its nearby glacial lake.
Well, no more! Because, well, the South West just really doesn't think its fair that Chicago should have all that water while they are mostly just desert. For some reason (oh shoot, my own views are going to color the next sentence) it never occurred to them that they don't have water because THEY ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT! Lack of water is actually part of the definition of a desert. Therefore, I'm not sure anyone should be confused as to why they don't get much rain when there is a cactus in their back yard.
Of course, the Southwest doesn't see it that way, and I sort of understand it. After all, everyone needs water. But I think they've taken it a little far.
In short. They want Lake Michigan.
This actually happened. Please refer to the link of the side of the page entitled "Great Lakes Key Front in Water Wars." Basically the idea behind the article is that the Southwest wants water from the Great Lakes and Chicago just doesn't want to give it to them.
Can you really blame them?
No. Because there are tons of environmental reasons why you don't want to ship water half way across the country to give it to a desert. Of course, there is the obvious reason that if you are going to pipe water somewhere you must have, of course, a pipe. This will take money, and resources. Enough said.
But why stop there?
It is also a bad idea because, as it stands now, water used in Chicago will drain back into Lake Michigan because Chicago is part of the lake's drainage basin. The Southwest is not. If some one pours a glass of water on to the ground it will wind up in the ocean, not in Lake Michigan. I'm not dissing the ocean here, it needs water too, but unfortunately if Chicago ships its water to the Southwest, its gone, and its not going to come back.
Which makes the third objection I have to this situation all the more important. When lake Michigan runs out of water (assuming its being piped out) the Southwest is going to be in BIG TROUBLE. It will have no more water, at all.
Chicago better keep an eye on Lake Michigan. I for one hope that it stays where the glacier put it.
To be fair, however, the Southwest should probably figure out how to get something to drink. I'd be pretty thirsty if I was in the middle of a desert. Desert frogs, for instance, bury themselves in the mud and soak up water through their skin. That might not be a possibility for people though. I don't know, I'll have to look into it.
So here's my environmental question for the week:
Environmental Question: What is the definition of Eutriphication and why is it so bad in lakes?
Post answers! And have a great week!
That's right everyone! Its time for my weekly Environmental Learning Tale. Here goes...
Why We All Wish We Were Chicago
I am a proud Philadelphian (E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES! Except we always lose, and when we do, there is looting so, not really) but I have to admit that I realized a few days ago that Chicago has one thing that Philadelphia does not have (and cheese stakes, Pat's OR Gino's just doesn't make up for it.)
They have.....
LAKE MICHIGAN!
That's right, its big, it pretty cold (being a glacial lake and all) and it is a pretty significant source of drinking water. My roommate, being from outside Chicago actually gets her drinking water from the lake. Good for her. However, most of the rest of the nation, barring the east coast and northern California, really wish they had that darn lake. Until recently, however, they restricted themselves to gazing longingly towards Chicago and its nearby glacial lake.
Well, no more! Because, well, the South West just really doesn't think its fair that Chicago should have all that water while they are mostly just desert. For some reason (oh shoot, my own views are going to color the next sentence) it never occurred to them that they don't have water because THEY ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DESERT! Lack of water is actually part of the definition of a desert. Therefore, I'm not sure anyone should be confused as to why they don't get much rain when there is a cactus in their back yard.
Of course, the Southwest doesn't see it that way, and I sort of understand it. After all, everyone needs water. But I think they've taken it a little far.
In short. They want Lake Michigan.
This actually happened. Please refer to the link of the side of the page entitled "Great Lakes Key Front in Water Wars." Basically the idea behind the article is that the Southwest wants water from the Great Lakes and Chicago just doesn't want to give it to them.
Can you really blame them?
No. Because there are tons of environmental reasons why you don't want to ship water half way across the country to give it to a desert. Of course, there is the obvious reason that if you are going to pipe water somewhere you must have, of course, a pipe. This will take money, and resources. Enough said.
But why stop there?
It is also a bad idea because, as it stands now, water used in Chicago will drain back into Lake Michigan because Chicago is part of the lake's drainage basin. The Southwest is not. If some one pours a glass of water on to the ground it will wind up in the ocean, not in Lake Michigan. I'm not dissing the ocean here, it needs water too, but unfortunately if Chicago ships its water to the Southwest, its gone, and its not going to come back.
Which makes the third objection I have to this situation all the more important. When lake Michigan runs out of water (assuming its being piped out) the Southwest is going to be in BIG TROUBLE. It will have no more water, at all.
Chicago better keep an eye on Lake Michigan. I for one hope that it stays where the glacier put it.
To be fair, however, the Southwest should probably figure out how to get something to drink. I'd be pretty thirsty if I was in the middle of a desert. Desert frogs, for instance, bury themselves in the mud and soak up water through their skin. That might not be a possibility for people though. I don't know, I'll have to look into it.
So here's my environmental question for the week:
Environmental Question: What is the definition of Eutriphication and why is it so bad in lakes?
Post answers! And have a great week!
Saturday, November 3, 2007
In Which I Discover My People
For all those people in Blog-land!
Alexis: You are so close with the cow comment. Way to go!!!!!!! Even though you deleted the answer you were going to type, I think you were right, so here is your shout out.
ALEXIS IS BRILLIANT!
Brenna: You also rock because you knew the first environmental question. So you get a shout out as well. Because you have a history blog, I am going to try to make your shout out historic.
BRENNA, much more intelligent than your average Roman Emperor. Thank God Plutarc is dead and cannot write a biography about you.
In other news, I have returned. I am sorry for my long absence. I wish I could say I was off doing something fun and environmental (although, part of my time was spent this week examining rocks for my Exploring the Solid Earth class and determining their classification). However, I was not. Which, of course, I am sad about.
Since I have nothing new and environmental to tell you about, I will fill you in on an amusing anecdote from my summer volunteer stint with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
Here you go...
Well, as the EPA is a government organization, I arrived to begin my work with them in a somewhat heightened state of agitation. I have never worked for the government before. In fact, I have spent a portion of my life at protests attempted to reform the government. So this was new for me.
Of course, what I found was not as intimidating as I feared it might be. I envisioned, on the anxious SEPTA ride down to Suburban Station Philadelphia, a crowd of black-suited individuals sitting around discussing (in serious voices) the need for such-and-such in so-and-so's contract. Etc. I had hoped the word "green" would come up perhaps twice a day, and optimistically I anticipated perhaps no more than one reference to "environmental reform."
Boy, did I underestimate the EPA.
What I found was a gaggle of very dedicated environmentalists who passionately advocated environmental change and were sorely discontented with the amount of pressure being put on them by the current administration (my political views are obvious to all who know me, but I hope to keep them out of this blog. However, the pressure on the EPA is so resoundingly apparent that this is entirely a bi-partisan observation). In short, I found that I fit right in.
It did however, confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt, a past employers observation that the environmental field is peopled by "hippies and malcontents."
I was deeply impressed by the amount of dedication that I found. These people worked tirelessly to make environmental change. What's more, they did what I am not sure I could ever do, which is go through the political red-tape necessary to make those changes in a way that conforms with America's governmental procedures. Impressive.
They arrive every day to an over-air-conditioned office in a crowed heat-island of a city (I love Philly, by the way) and used high tech computers to navigate a number of chilly political frontiers. And they very rarely complained.
But they did express a nostalgia for what is known in to environmentalists far and wide as "The Field."
The Field is a magical place, where the sky is blue (or, alternatively, engaged in torrential downpour) and the grass is green (or, possibly quicksand. The Field is not for the weak of heart) In short, though, The Field represents a kind of Mecca.
This conversation actually happened.
Character list: (all EPA employees have been give fake names)
Me
Mike
Fred
John
Sara
(Each time a person says "The Field" they should be imagine to have a dreamy quality to their voice)
SARA: (with sigh) John is in...The Field today.
FRED: (longingly) really? Its been so long since I was in..The Field.
MIKE: (happily) John is going to bring me a turtle.
ME: (hesitantly) I was in The Field...once.
(all turn in unison towards me in my little cubical)
SARA: really? What was it like?
ME: Um...I tested the health of a lake...
MIKE: (excitedly) Was there algae? What was the Dissolved Oxygen content?
(A conversation about lake eutriphication ensued)
FRED: (shyly) I have new hiking boots.
MIKE: Really! Did you buy socks too?
ME: um...cool?
FRED: (nodding) I'm wearing them RIGHT NOW!
EVERYONE BUT FRED: NO WAY!!!
(Fred rolls his pant leg up to show brand new timberland hiking boots. All exclaim enviously)
SARA: So will you go out into..The Field soon?
FRED: Yes! Next week.
ALL: TAKE ME WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
In other news, I did go out into the field once that summer. I saw a turtle, and a baby turtle. John was with me, he spent a good deal of time trying to catch a snake. To the disappointment of all, he was unsuccessful. The turtles, however, were wonderful. There was heated debate as to the species, but it was generally agreed upon that they were snapping turtles.
It was a good day.
Alexis: You are so close with the cow comment. Way to go!!!!!!! Even though you deleted the answer you were going to type, I think you were right, so here is your shout out.
ALEXIS IS BRILLIANT!
Brenna: You also rock because you knew the first environmental question. So you get a shout out as well. Because you have a history blog, I am going to try to make your shout out historic.
BRENNA, much more intelligent than your average Roman Emperor. Thank God Plutarc is dead and cannot write a biography about you.
In other news, I have returned. I am sorry for my long absence. I wish I could say I was off doing something fun and environmental (although, part of my time was spent this week examining rocks for my Exploring the Solid Earth class and determining their classification). However, I was not. Which, of course, I am sad about.
Since I have nothing new and environmental to tell you about, I will fill you in on an amusing anecdote from my summer volunteer stint with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
Here you go...
Well, as the EPA is a government organization, I arrived to begin my work with them in a somewhat heightened state of agitation. I have never worked for the government before. In fact, I have spent a portion of my life at protests attempted to reform the government. So this was new for me.
Of course, what I found was not as intimidating as I feared it might be. I envisioned, on the anxious SEPTA ride down to Suburban Station Philadelphia, a crowd of black-suited individuals sitting around discussing (in serious voices) the need for such-and-such in so-and-so's contract. Etc. I had hoped the word "green" would come up perhaps twice a day, and optimistically I anticipated perhaps no more than one reference to "environmental reform."
Boy, did I underestimate the EPA.
What I found was a gaggle of very dedicated environmentalists who passionately advocated environmental change and were sorely discontented with the amount of pressure being put on them by the current administration (my political views are obvious to all who know me, but I hope to keep them out of this blog. However, the pressure on the EPA is so resoundingly apparent that this is entirely a bi-partisan observation). In short, I found that I fit right in.
It did however, confirm beyond a shadow of a doubt, a past employers observation that the environmental field is peopled by "hippies and malcontents."
I was deeply impressed by the amount of dedication that I found. These people worked tirelessly to make environmental change. What's more, they did what I am not sure I could ever do, which is go through the political red-tape necessary to make those changes in a way that conforms with America's governmental procedures. Impressive.
They arrive every day to an over-air-conditioned office in a crowed heat-island of a city (I love Philly, by the way) and used high tech computers to navigate a number of chilly political frontiers. And they very rarely complained.
But they did express a nostalgia for what is known in to environmentalists far and wide as "The Field."
The Field is a magical place, where the sky is blue (or, alternatively, engaged in torrential downpour) and the grass is green (or, possibly quicksand. The Field is not for the weak of heart) In short, though, The Field represents a kind of Mecca.
This conversation actually happened.
Character list: (all EPA employees have been give fake names)
Me
Mike
Fred
John
Sara
(Each time a person says "The Field" they should be imagine to have a dreamy quality to their voice)
SARA: (with sigh) John is in...The Field today.
FRED: (longingly) really? Its been so long since I was in..The Field.
MIKE: (happily) John is going to bring me a turtle.
ME: (hesitantly) I was in The Field...once.
(all turn in unison towards me in my little cubical)
SARA: really? What was it like?
ME: Um...I tested the health of a lake...
MIKE: (excitedly) Was there algae? What was the Dissolved Oxygen content?
(A conversation about lake eutriphication ensued)
FRED: (shyly) I have new hiking boots.
MIKE: Really! Did you buy socks too?
ME: um...cool?
FRED: (nodding) I'm wearing them RIGHT NOW!
EVERYONE BUT FRED: NO WAY!!!
(Fred rolls his pant leg up to show brand new timberland hiking boots. All exclaim enviously)
SARA: So will you go out into..The Field soon?
FRED: Yes! Next week.
ALL: TAKE ME WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!!
In other news, I did go out into the field once that summer. I saw a turtle, and a baby turtle. John was with me, he spent a good deal of time trying to catch a snake. To the disappointment of all, he was unsuccessful. The turtles, however, were wonderful. There was heated debate as to the species, but it was generally agreed upon that they were snapping turtles.
It was a good day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)