• Menu

    • Home
    • About Andy
    • Blog
    • Newsletter
    • Donate
    • Voter Information
    • Videos
    • Contact
  • Home
  • About Andy
  • Blog
  • Newsletter
  • Donate
  • Voter Information
  • Videos
  • Contact
Throwing Out “Reduce. Reuse. Recycle.”
August 3, 2008

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  You can read it in its original context here.

The Old Mantra

For a long time one of the defining mantras of the environmental movement has been “Reduce. Reuse. Recycle.” It’s the kind of simple message that is easy to remember and makes for fantastic bumper sticker reading, yet it’s also a message that utterly fails to inspire.  The problem with the “Three R’s” of environmentalism is that they are representative of flawed thinking: that in order to reconcile humans with nature, humans must restrict themselves while engaging in several select token activities, such as recycling, changing light bulbs, or buying hybrid cars. Yet these activities are just that: token. They can’t begin to scratch the surface of global climate, energy, poverty, water, and health issues.

A New Mantra

All this is not to say that we should not do what we can in our personal lives to affect change; rather, it means that we need a new, inspiring message, one that presents global problems as opportunities, galvanizes people to action, and unleashes human potential and creativity.  We simply won’t “Reduce.  Reuse. and Recycle” our way to Utopia.  The scale of global problems requires a message that invites big thinking and reaches all segments of society. So I propose a new mantra, not just for environmentalists, but for all those working toward the common good.  It is a mantra that just so happens to still be simple and concise enough to fit on a bumper sticker: Invent. Invest. Implement.

Read More
No Comment

environment  / Huffington Post  / philosophy

A New Ethics of Consumption
July 27, 2008

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  Click here to see it in its original context.



Last week I visited Rhode Island’s central landfill to do some research on recycling and composting.  As I sat in an office overlooking the dump, I couldn’t help but marvel at the endless stream of trucks filling the valley with what I like to call the by-products of bad design and carelessness.  Bad design because almost nothing we buy is designed to be re-used at the end of its life, and carelessness because so much of what we discard could be re-used or recycled if only the items were placed in the proper bin.  All this got me thinking about the ethics of consumption, and what it would mean to eliminate the concept of waste.

Being Less Bad is No Good

Under the current model of consumption it is very difficult to be an ethical consumer. One can essentially choose between “bad” and “less bad” products; organic and free trade labels help, but greenwashing has become an insidious problem, making it difficult to distinguish truly green advances from baseless claims.  But even more importantly, for the conscious consumer consumption is a necessary evil at best, and a scourge on the Earth at worst.  What we forget is that all living things consume, the only difference is that humans are the only life forms that actually deplete, destroy and pollute natural resources.  That doesn’t have to be the case.  It’s possible to manufacture products that are healthy for ecosystems, human society and the corporate bottom line.

Read More
No Comment

Huffington Post

My Challenge to America: Don’t Ignore Gore’s Speech
July 20, 2008

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  The article can be seen in its original context here



Last Thursday Al Gore gave a speech, the full text of which can be read here, that challenged America to “to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.” It was a speech that should have inspired and excited Americans of all walks of life at least as much as, if not more than, President Kennedy’s famous speech calling on America to put a man on the moon within a decade. Instead, Mr. Gore’s idea has been met with a chorus of criticism, with the naysayers claiming that it would be too costly, too impractical, and too risky to attempt to meet such a goal.

Apollo and Gore’s “Moon Shot”–A Flawed Comparison

The comparisons between America’s mission to the moon and Gore’s “moon shot” proposal, while useful, are flawed.  Both represent great challenges, yet it must be remembered that in 1961 we did not possess the technology to get to the moon; we do, however, have the technology to achieve 100% renewable energy.  But perhaps more importantly, although the Apollo program was great for national pride and beating the Soviet Union, it was by no means essential to our nation.  Switching to renewable energy, on the other hand, can not only dramatically reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, it can also help us regain our stature in the world, create jobs, rein in unpredictable energy costs, lower health care costs, get us off foreign oil (provided we also electrify our transportation system) and force American companies to innovate in ways that will be good for them and good for America.

Read More
No Comment

environment  / featured  / Huffington Post  / Renewable Energy  / TreeHugger Job

Tortillas, Ethanol, and High Fructose Corn Syrup
July 14, 2008

Note: Every Sunday I write an op-ed article for the Huffington Post.  You can see this article in its original context here

A recent leaked report from the World Bank, stating that 75% of the increase in world food prices is due to biofuels, has served to reignite the food vs. fuel debate. In particular, many are outraged that even as food prices rise corn continues to be used for ethanol rather than tortillas. However, what is lost in all the biofuel controversy is the fact that tremendous amounts of land are devoted neither to fuel nor nutritive food, but rather to non-nutritive uses like tobacco, high fructose corn syrup and cane sugar.

Blame Meat and High Fructose Corn Syrup

The fact of the matter is that if we are really concerned about rising food prices and endemic hunger/poverty, then we’ll have to do more than question the biofuel mandates in the United States and the European Union. In truth, we’ll have to call into question much of our agricultural system. For instance, we might ask the world’s billion or so wealthy citizens to curtail meat consumption, which is not only responsible for 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions, but also uses tremendous amounts of land, water and food–all of which could be devoted to staple crops that the poor need to survive. Or, we might take a second look at the amount of corn that is used for high fructose corn syrup, which does little more than contribute to the American obesity epidemic.

Read More
No Comment

Huffington Post  / TreeHugger Job

How Renewable Energy Can Resolve the Iranian Nuclear Issue
July 6, 2008

Note: Every Sunday I write an op-ed article for the Huffington Post.  You can see this article in its original context here

Fuel Oil and Food Aid Were Key in North Korea

16 months ago North Korea agreed to shut down its nuclear program in exchange for aid and the lifting of sanctions. President Bush recently removed North Korea’s designation as part of the ‘Axis of Evil’, and “the energy -starved state is already receiving the equivalent of one million tonnes of heavy fuel oil.” This has been one of the Bush Administration’s few diplomatic victories, yet even as it works to ensure that North Korea lives up to its end of the bargain, a new, equally ominous threat, has been grabbing headlines: Iran’s nuclear ambitions. While the promise of aid in the form of fuel oil and food was instrumental in dealing with North Korea, the Iranian nuclear issue can be resolved with renewable energy. Here’s how.

image

If Iran Wants Electricity, Give It Renewable Power

Iran claims that “its nuclear [program] is solely aimed at generating electricity so that it can sell more of its oil and gas.” If that’s the case, then all Iran really needs is a means of generating electricity that doesn’t involve oil, gas or nuclear power, since the international community is staunchly opposed to a nuclear Iran. Well, that only leaves one form of energy production: renewable energy (nuclear power is not renewable, as uranium and plutonium are finite resources.) Imagine if the six countries involved in the negotiations–the U.S., China, Russia, Germany, Britain and France–went to Iran and made the following offer: “in exchange for shutting down your nuclear program, we will give you aid in the form of renewable energy equivalent to the amount of power that would have been produced from two of your planned nuclear reactors. In addition, we will provide strong incentives and subsidies in the future as you expand your wind, solar photovoltaic, solar concentrating and biomass programs, and we will also lift all economic sanctions.”

Read More
No Comment

environment  / Huffington Post  / Renewable Energy  / TreeHugger Job

Cycling Has An Image Problem
June 29, 2008

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be seen in its original context here.



Cycling Has An Image Problem

For the last five years the bicycle has been my sole means of transportation, and I happen to feel pretty good about that. Sure, it means my carbon footprint is smaller and I save money on gas and insurance, but what really matters to me is that cycling keeps me in shape and is fun, and I love the beauty and technology of bicycles. In fact, when I complete my masters degree and start earning more money, my hope is not to be able to afford a Mercedes, but rather a carbon fiber race bike. Unfortunately, for most people the bicycle is something you use for transportation until you are successful enough to buy a car; that the bicycle is not seen as a sexy, technologically advanced machine worth aspiring to tells me that cycling has an image problem.

This image problems crops up in numerous T.V. shows and movies. One example is The 40 Year Old Virgin, where Steve Carell, in the role of a loser, rides his bike everywhere. The message that is constantly conveyed is that not only is cycling for transportation inconvenient and dangerous, it’s also a sign of failure. It isn’t surprising, then, that people aspire to purchase a better, faster, sexier car: that’s what signifies that one is moving up in the world. What’s more, any ‘Ten Things You Can Do for the Environment’ list will invariably include cycling, which turns a simple bike ride into some sort of heroic act instead of what it is: fun and good for you. And, as I pointed out last week, people don’t want to be heroes, they want to work for a better world by having fun and using their creativity and talent to solve problems (think of a kind of Google workplace for saving the world).

Read More
No Comment

Huffington Post  / TreeHugger Job

You Don’t Have to be Gandhi: Why Anyone Can Save the World
June 22, 2008

Note: I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be read in its original context here

A New Model

During the twentieth century, if you wanted to save the world chances are you sought to emulate Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King or any number of tremendous individuals whose fight for justice was characterized by self-abnegation and spiritual rigor. To some extent, that was because the average person lacked the requisite tools to reach the whole world with her ideas. But with the proliferation of computers, the internet, and information technology, a new model has emerged that dramatically lowers the barriers to entry to saving the world and, to put it simply, makes doing so more fun. What’s more, not only is the old model outdated, it sets a high bar that keeps out the very creative thinkers that can solve 21st century problems.

Whom Should We Admire?

In a recent NY Times article titled ’The Moral Instinct,’ Steven Pinker posed the following question: “Which of the following people would you say is the most admirable: Mother Teresa, Bill Gates or Norman Borlaug?” He went on to point out that while most would lionize Mother Teresa, demonize Bill Gates and ask ‘Who is Norman Borlaug?’, if one looks at what each of them accomplished, the answer is quite different. Dr. Borlaug, father of the so-called Green Revolution (for which he received a nobel peace prize in 1970), is credited with having done more to abate world hunger than anyone in history. Bill Gates, through his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is at the forefront of dealing with the world’s deadliest, yet most treatable, diseases. Mother Theresa, on the other hand, “offered plenty of prayer but harsh conditions, few analgesics and dangerously primitive medical care.”

Read More
No Comment

Huffington Post  / TreeHugger Job

The Future of Our Transportation System is Electric
June 15, 2008

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be seen in its original context here.



Here are two interesting points: electric motors are inherently more efficient (and simpler) than internal combustion engines (ICE), and it is far easier to produce green electrons than it is to produce green gallons of liquid fuel.  Both augur well for an increasingly electrified transportation system. 

The first point is incontrovertible: electric motors can easily reach an energy conversion efficiency of 90%, while ICE’s have an efficiency of around 20%.  Simply put, that means that for a given unit of energy, an electric motor will produce more power.  What’s more, electric drive trains are far simpler, requiring 1/10th as many parts as a gas car (no spark plugs, fuel tank, transmission, muffler, etc.). 

Read More
No Comment

environment  / Huffington Post

Americans Feeling Pain at the Pump, But That’s Only Half the Story
June 7, 2008

Note: I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be read in its original context here



It’s amazing how unaware Americans are of the extent to which our economy is dependent on oil. Amazing not only because of the consequences–geopolitical, environmental and social–of oil addiction, but also because oil prices affect every aspect of our daily lives. I was reminded of this fact the other day when I went to my local bike shop. There, the talk wasn’t about carbon fiber and chainrings, but rather about how the cost of shipping has skyrocketed over the last few months (fortunately for the bike shop, high gas prices also mean business is booming). Meanwhile, food riots in Haiti, Egypt and Mexico have made headlines, and the airline industry, hit particularly hard by fuel costs, has gone so far as to begin charging $15 per checked bag.

From high-end bike shops in Providence, Rhode Island, to the slums of Port-Au-Prince, and everywhere in between, people are directly feeling the effects of $130 a barrel oil. Yet there is still no sense of urgency in American political discourse. President Bush was recently on his hands and knees begging OPEC to pump more oil (which they declined to do), and both John McCain and Hillary Clinton have been touting a federal gas tax holiday. Some believe that once oil gets expensive enough America will be forced to truly seek out new sources of energy. But that kind of thinking belies a fundamental problem: the switch to an economy based on renewable energy won’t happen overnight, and it will require far more than a mere policy fix. Just try to think of one product you buy that can be manufactured and delivered without fossil fuels and you’ll see that the scale of the problem dwarfs our current proposed solutions.

Read More
No Comment

Huffington Post  / TreeHugger Job

Newer Posts


  • Get In Touch

    Contact Andy
  • My Goal

    My goal is to foster an economy that alleviates poverty, provides meaningful, sustainable and just jobs, and protects and restores the environment.
  • Sign Up!


© Copyright Andy Posner | Site design by RI Web Gurus