Author: Serina Mathew

This article called “How Much Food Do We Waste? Probably More Than You Think” by Somini Sengupta speaks about the massive amount of food we as a nation. The article begins with a shocking statistic; globally, we throw out about 1.3 billion tons of food a year, or a third of all the food that we grow. This food waste plays a role in sustainability of the global population as well as in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Sengupta). On the global scale, waste comes in a variety of forms and illustrates the inequality that exists between nations. In poorer countries, food waste is from the farm or on the way to the market. For example, in South Asia, half of all the cauliflower that is grown is wasted simply because there is not enough refrigeration. In these areas, food waste is not because the food is thrown out by the consumers—it’s much too precious for that. On the other hand, in wealthy countries, like the United States, around 40% of wasted food is just thrown out by consumers (Sengupta). This is a result of many factors; we as a nation buy too much food, we don’t finish our food and a much smaller portion of our incomes go towards food (Sengupta). The US as a whole wastes more than $160 billion in food a year (Sengupta). Food waste is the single largest component going into landfills in the US, and this waste quickly generates methane and contributes to making landfills the third largest source of methane in the US, which also contributes to greenhouse emission (USDA).

The implications of this data are far-reaching. Food waste and food loss has a massive carbon footprint: 3.3 billion tons of carbon equivalent, to be exact. In addition, wasting this much food leads to more water wasted as well (Sengupta). Some solutions to the problem as already underway, including using metal for grain silos to prevent fungus ruining grain stocks in places like Africa and encouraging farmers in India to collect tomatoes in plastic crates instead of in sacks to prevent squishing and rotting, which are more simple solutions. On a larger scale, supermarkets are making an effort to change the way the “best before” labels are used to discourage consumers from throwing out food that is in fact safe to eat, and by trying to sell misshapen fruits and vegetables instead of immediately throwing them away (Sengupta). Now that food waste is being recognized as a major problem to be addressed, these initiatives in addition to other ones that are occurring around the world are working to cut down on waste.

https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/faqs.htm

This article entitled, “Score One for Corn: In Battle Over Biofuel, a Rare Setback for Big Oil” by Hiroko Tabuchi speaks about our current regulations on fuel. Our fuel is partially derived from corn and soy due to an old federal mandate. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program created under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, requires refiners or importers of gasoline or diesel fuel to blend renewable fuel into transportation fuel (“Overview”). Last month, the Trump administration decided to stick closely to the current guidelines in place, so refineries must blend about 20 billion gallons of biofuel into the nation’s gas supply (Tabuchi). This decision supports farmers since much of the biofuel is ethanol made from corn, but is a setback for the oil industry (Tabuchi). Though it may be helpful for our national agriculture, many environmental and health groups oppose the mandate, arguing that ethanol is no better than gasoline and isn’t truly helping environmentally (Tabuchi). The RFS program was enacted to reduce the country’s oil dependence, help out struggling corn and soy farmers in the area, while also control the rising greenhouse gas emissions (Tabuchi).

This article is significant because it provides another source of energy that could potentially be useful and sustainable. However, if biofuels actually do what they were intended to do is highly debated. Recent research shows that the predicted environmental benefits of biofules are difficult to achieve, in part because a group of more advanced biofuels has not grown as hoped. The corn and soy farming industry has grown, but arguably too much. According to the Department of Agriculture, 40% of domestic corn and 30% of domestic soy go towards making ethanol, and biofuels make up about 10% of the gasoline used in the nation (Tabuchi). However, this massive growth has pushed cultivation into neighboring, previously untouched lands, which hurts biodiversity and lowers the land’s ability to store carbon. Scientists also warn that bioenergy can also increase competition for land because food crops are taking over livestock grazing areas (Tabuchi). In addition, the underlying issue of helping greenhouse gases is also under scrutiny. A study published last year by the University of Michigan Energy Institute concluded that biofuels had increased, rather than decreased, the nation’s carbon dioxide emissions and these results are still being debated. These appear to be the first steps in moving towards a clean energy source, however there is much more research and work to be done in order to achieve a lasting solution that is effective.

https://www.epa.gov/renewable-fuel-standard-program/overview-renewable-fuel-standard

This article entitled, “Lessons from Hurricane Harvey: Houston’s Struggle Is America’s Tale” by Michael Kimmelman talks about the continued effects of the Hurricane, months after the fact, and how Houston’s overexpansion played a role. Flooding from the hurricane came not only from the sky, but from Katy Prairie, 30 miles west of downtown Houston. Water used to drain naturally in this area of Texas, but since Houston has grown to a much larger size than initially anticipated, the city has expanded over these floodplains that once pushed water from the prairies into the sea (Kimmelman). After a devastating flood in 1935 and an earlier one in 1929, authorities worked with the Army Corps of Engineers and made boundaries for two large reservoirs (Gonzalez). But, for years local authorities have been ignoring these boundaries and allowing runaway development to occur. Thousands of homes have been built next to, and even inside, the boundaries of the reservoirs (Kimmelman). Many of these unsuspecting residents had no idea they slept in harm’s way—until they were flooded by the prairie waters. This was the third big storm to hit Houston in the past three years, which suggests that more can be expected.

This story of Harvey and the city of Houston, Kimmelman argues, is far too typical of the United States. We as a nation force the land to our will—imposing our own desires onto it—often without thought of the geography and geology of the land and the impact it may cause later on. Houston willed itself into a great city as our nation’s energy capital, home to oil and carbon-producers, the space industry, medical research and engineers of all kind (Kimmelman). Unfortunately, all of these things contributed to the destruction Harvey unleashed. Though politicians make big promises post-disaster, many of the major problems are not solved. Proper precautions include things like resettling neighborhoods, making certain places off-limits to development and creating dikes and reservoirs—all of which are challenging both financially and politically. These precautions take a long time—long enough for memories to fade and for people to forget just how important these measures are—and residents just want their lives to go back to normal, so soon enough all of the precautions are thrown out (Kimmelman). In addition, it doesn’t help that there is a deep political divide: Houston is a Democratic city in an overwhelmingly Republican state and agreeing on change is hardly easy. With climate scientists in increasing agreement that climate change will make storms worse, Harvey serves as a reminder and a warning for Houston and for all of the nation that change must be made before further destruction strikes.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/11/climate/houston-flooding-climate.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fclimate&action=click&contentCollection=climate&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/bayou-city-history/article/Houston-s-devastating-flood-of-1935-6293100.php

This article entitled “In Antarctica, Two Crucial Glaciers Accelerate Toward the Sea” written by Jugal K. Patel speaks about two major glaciers on the continent of Antarctica. The Pine Island and Thwaites glaciers at the edge of Antarctica have become of increasing concern because of their massive sizes and their recent movements. Together, the glaciers hold back ice that, “if melted, would raise the world’s oceans by nearly four feet over centuries, an amount that would put many coastal cities underwater” (Patel). Glaciers, in general are basically long rivers of ice. These Antarctic glaciers collect ice from parts of the larger ice sheets that cover the continent and due to their massive size, are able to move very slowly just like rivers (“All”). From the Pine Island glacier, the amount of ice that could flow into the glacier and subsequently into the sea would, over the course of time, raise the global sea level by more than a foot and a half. The Pine Island glacier in just the years from 2014 to 2017, has released an iceberg larger than 100 square miles, twice (Patel). From 1973-2010, Pine Island has increased its speed by 75%, and it evidently does not appear to be slowing down. The Thwaites glacier also is observed to be releasing more and more into the ocean, and the ice from this glacier could eventually increase the sea level over two feet (Patel). Scientists say these shifts are a result of warmer waters in front of the glaciers. Though luckily the movements were not in regions critical to keeping the glacier intact, they provide an insight into how the ice shelves respond to rapid environmental changes and how future fragmentation of these glaciers and many others may look.

This article presents just how important it is for humans to be conscious of their actions, and what can result from them. The burning of fossil fuels and release of greenhouse gases traps heat in the atmosphere and warms it up. Over 90% of the extra heat ends up in the ocean, which impacts glaciers, storms, marine life and much more (Abraham). Studies show that warming is occurring 13% faster than previously thought and is getting faster (Abraham). So, articles like these that show the consequences of human-driven change serve as calls for change. Observing and studying glacial patterns in general is important not only to monitor issues like global warming, but also things like sea level changes which greatly impact coastal cities. A major glacial break can cause massive waves and/or flooding and can be the difference between survival and destruction of entire communities. Studying patterns like the speed at which glaciers break and how much breaks off can help scientists have a better idea of what to expect in the future and maybe even predict another major event.

References:

Abraham, John. “Earth’s Oceans Are Warming 13% Faster than Thought, and Accelerating.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 10 Mar. 2017. Web.

“All About Glaciers.” What Is a Glacier? National Snow and Ice Data Center, 2017. Web.

Patel, Jugal K. “In Antarctica, Two Crucial Glaciers Accelerate Toward the Sea.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 26 Oct. 2017. Web.

This article titled, “The Real Unknown of Climate Change: Our Behavior” written by Justin Gillis talks about the impacts of human behavior on climate change. The main example he cites is that of Hurricane Harvey. People were warned of rain “falling in feet, not inches,” and other associated risks but many did not take the threat seriously enough (Gilles). Moreover, much of the general public still ignores the greater issue at hand: climate change. High levels of atmospheric emissions as a result of human activity made the ocean waters much warmer than they should have been, which likely contributed to the strength of the hurricane. In addition, scientists say that the brutal heat waves we experience today will likely become normal in just decades, sea levels are rapidly rising, and coastal flooding will worsen and force the displacement of millions (Gillis). However, these warnings have not been enough. There are massive discrepancies in climate policy worldwide, and even within our own nation. Gilles stresses that if action is not taken, more will suffer the consequences.

These facts are important because a large portion of what we see occurring more and more often is within our control. There are certain gases, known as greenhouse gases, that remain in the atmosphere for varying amounts of time and prevent heat from escaping by absorbing it, leading to what is known as the greenhouse effect—the warming that results when the atmosphere traps heat radiating from Earth toward space (“Causes”). These gases are released through activities like the burning, production, transportation and combustion of fossil fuels, deforestation, agricultural and industrial activities, and more. According to the EPA, greenhouse gases from human activities are known to be the largest contributor to observed climate change since the mid 20^th century, yet from 1990-2010, worldwide net emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities increased by 35% (“Indicators”). Though there are many uncertainties in climate science, the largest of them is how much more humans will contribute to the problem (Gilles). But, of one thing climate scientists are sure—we, as a society, are running massive risks (Gilles). By ignoring the problem and not doing more to stop our contribution to it, we risk the stability of human civilization and the planet as a whole.

“Climate Change Causes: A Blanket around the Earth.” NASA, NASA, 10 Aug. 2017, climate.nasa.gov/causes/.

“Climate Change Indicators: Greenhouse Gases.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 22 Feb. 2017, www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases.

Gillis, Justin. “The Real Unknown of Climate Change: Our Behavior.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/climate/climate-change-denial.html.