At last Tuesday’s city council meeting, three homeowners and the builders of their residences received Green Building Awards for innovation, air quality improvement, reuse of materials, and other waste reduction techniques.

Local homeowner Jono Stevens received an award for the second-story remodel on his house. In addition to comprehensive deconstruction, Stevens designed his house to generate energy almost exclusively through solar power.

 “I’m very proud of what we did with the amount of green building, and receiving this award,” Stevens said. “It makes me feel good to participate. I benefit from it, the community will benefit, and the value of the home will benefit.”

The building practices promoted by GBP aim to help long-term energy and resource sustainability within the city, as well as reduce harmful chemical byproducts of construction work.

“[GBP] was [created] specifically to save energy, reduce natural resource depletion, and provide for a healthier living and working environment, which in turn provides for a better community,” said GBP coordinator John Ancic.

The Santa Cruz GBP is a leading program in California for waste reduction in commercial and residential buildings. Any new or remodeled building that satisfies the minimum square footage requirement is obligated to participate in the program to receive a building permit.

Participants receive a checklist of different green features they can implement during construction. Each feature is awarded a point, and the summation of enough points — which ranges depending on the size of the project — can earn participants a Green Building Award.

 “It’s really pretty easy,” Stevens said. “In my opinion, there are a lot of choices in order to get points. It’s very user-friendly in that sense.”

Stevens said he wished the program was harder. He said more points should be required to encourage a higher level of green building.

“[GBP] really is a good program,” Ancic said. “It does need to be updated, but we’ve been working diligently to do that, and that’s going to be coming real soon.”

Jennifer Werner, green building and environmental specialist for the city of Santa Cruz, said flexibility within the program is a nice incentive for participants.

“There is a common misconception that building green is a lot more expensive,” Werner said. “There are a lot of options within our program that are not at an additional cost at all, and over the lifetime of the building, you are actually saving money in your utility bills and water bills.”

However, only about 5 percent of all Green Building Program participants have won an award, suggesting the awards are not the main motivator for homeowners to build green.

“This is a choice that the homeowner makes on their own, generally, not so they can garner recognition and a plaque from the City of Santa Cruz,” said Marc Susskind, a contractor who works with the GBP. “Perhaps there are greater incentives that could be offered that would entice more homeowners to fully participate in the program.”

A decade ago, the GBP began its commitment to waste reduction and resource efficiency, as the Green Building Working Group. The group succeeded in generating a set of guidelines for the program by 2005. These were approved by City Council and went into effect in January 2006. Similar programs have been adopted in Capitola, Watsonville and Scotts Valley, all of which produced similar results as the GBP in Santa Cruz.

In January 2011, California’s green building program, CALGreen, implemented a statewide set of green building regulations, compelling the Santa Cruz GBP to adapt to those regulations.

Werner said the GBP would soon be recognizing CALGreen within the updated [GBP] program as a response to the state’s raised expectations.

Susskind has worked on the residential homes of three Santa Cruz Green Building Award winners.

“Generally the homeowners see the value,” Susskind said. “In a lot of ways it’s saving them money by not disposing debris into landfills. A lot of the products are energy-efficient. It is good for their health, for the environment, for their pocket books — it just makes sense.”

Stevens said that participating in GBP was the right decision for him.

“The long-term benefit is there,” Stevens said. “It might have cost me more up-front to do all these things that I did. But the flip side is that over five, 10, 20 years, my energy costs are really minimal.”

Save for objections that the program could penetrate the Santa Cruz community more significantly and that it needs to be updated, Susskind supports the green practices GBP, building owners and builders utilize.

“I think it is good to set guidelines,” Susskind said. “New ways of doing things. A lot of times as builders you end up doing the same thing over and over again. It’s like furthering your education. That’s what the Green Building Program does.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Green Building Program Recognizes Homeowners

Illustration by Louise Leong

His house was marvelously crafted, constructed neatly between two ancient evergreens and overlooking a vegetable garden, orchard and sweeping fields and forests. Through the heavy oak door, the smell of stale, sweet smoke enveloped the entryway.

“Are you going to use my face for this? As long as you keep me out of the spotlight I’ll tell you the whole story — otherwise, you’ll get the PR version.”

That’s Rennold Mare, a retired real estate agent, who recently retired from another profession as well.

“I was a grower for 24 years, but I never considered myself one until the latter half of it,” Mare said. “It was always kind of a lie. I was passing the time making money, but trying to go elsewhere. I quit because it wasn’t worth it anymore. Profits are over.”

Mare wasn’t just any type of “grower”: He grew marijuana and sold it to friends and buyers across the state, first illegally and then legally under Proposition 215. Mare was one of many in Northern California’s so-called “Emerald Triangle” (the triad of Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity County, dubbed the “Emerald Triangle” in the 1960s) that provided financial stability for themselves or their families through this trade.

“We had the bare essentials,” he said, “and would make just enough to get through the year.”

Mare lived through an era of social transformation. As unemployment hit 10.8 percent in early 1983, many looked for alternatives to the deteriorating job market. One such alternative was black-market activity — a “very profitable niche,” Mare said.

The laissez-faire marijuana market has indeed had benefits — such as this unrestricted profit — but in recent history the unregulated cash crop has taken a toll both on the value of the industry and on the ecosystems that host cannabis production. To combat the economic downturn, marijuana-related businesses have sprung up to keep products competitive in an over-saturated market. Marijuana testing laboratories, regional collectives and brand-name labeling are new tools producers use to maintain price competition in the increasingly stagnant market.

But while some find strength in outsourcing consumer appeal, a campaign is taking hold of consumers in a different way, asking them to be conscious of what they smoke and reconsider eco-friendly products over energy-consuming cannabis.

“We’re trying to — on a statewide level — launch an education platform, because there’s a lot of misinformation about this [medical marijuana] movement,” said Alec Dixon, director of client relations at SC Laboratories, a new testing company based in Capitola, Calif.

SC Laboratories tests medical marijuana for various ingredients like pesticides, herbicides, plant growth regulators, molds and cannabinoid potency. There are over 80 different types of cannabinoids, a type of chemical compound, found within the cannabis plant. The most famous of these is tetrahydrocannabinol, better known as THC.

“People know very little and will often unknowingly smoke pesticides or mold,” Dixon said. “Some aren’t bad for your health — like powdery mildew, for example — but others like Botrytis [commonly known as bud rot] is a human pathogen, and Aspergillus, which is unseen to the human eye, can cause pulmonary aspergillosis [an organ fungal infection], which can be fatal.”

“People want to know, and are fascinated by the truth,” Dixon said. “Now that we have an audience, there is a podium to speak about the progress of this flower [cannabis]. We’re trying to say, ‘You should care,’ especially if you’re a conscious consumer, because many growers use carcinogenic plant growth regulators and toxic chemical additives to maximize yield.”

Testing labs have broadened the discussion on cannabis, replacing the “one cure for all” approach with distinct prescriptions for patients. The cannabinoid known as cannabidiol (CBD), has proven to be an anxiety suppressant, whereas THC is an anxiety agitator. The Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research has classified CBD as an anti-inflammatory for those with arthritis or fibromyalgia, and an anti-psychotic for those with schizophrenia. But the variation in potency is a subtext to the main concern.

“If we’re going to truly call this medicine, then obviously we need to remove the toxicity from cultivation,” Dixon said. “Basically, we’re trying to clean up the industry. We’re working to educate collectives, educate patients and educate growers so there is a higher standard of treatment. Just like strawberries, if you’re taking something, putting it in your body, you should know what’s in it, chemically.”

Kyle Noland* is a resident of Humboldt County who has taken up this same task of saving the industry’s lucrativeness. With a handful of growers, Noland, a cultivator himself, has created an awareness campaign he hopes will connect consumer understanding of grower practices in order to better reflect ecological awareness. Noland sticks mostly to business. As a 46-year-old married man with a 15-year-old daughter, he has a responsibility to provide a steady income for his family.

“I feel we need far more unbiased and up-front education out there to somehow have a positive impact on this uncontrolled industry,” Noland said. “In short, most folks [growers] are over-watering and over-feeding plants without much thought of where the resources are coming from to grow their crop, or where the potential pollution is going.”

When actually analyzed, some of the products commonly understood by growers to be organic often reflect a large carbon footprint and unhealthy choice.

“There are growers who are trying to make a case for toxic amounts of heavy metals like mercury and cadmium in soil additives,” Dixon said. “How that may actually affect the product that patients are buying and smoking will be interesting to see.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

Defining what constitutes as an organic product has been a large debate among growers, Mare said. But he ensured “growing anything under synthetic sunlight is not healthy — it’s using huge energy consumption for profit.”

“Bio-mimicry, looking to nature for a more efficient design, gives us ideas for growing more sustainable,” said Robert Sutherland, a Northern California environmental activist and blogger. “Production efficiency is how we get to professionalism.”

When asked what they actually understood about the science of medical marijuana, out of a handful of smokers most couldn’t answer basic questions beyond the potency of “indoor or outdoor.”

The lack of producer awareness for unsustainable practices, Noland said, isn’t just laziness but consumer ignorance of the unhealthy practices they buy into with every purchase.

The scope of these sustainable practices is immense, which may be daunting to buyers. The issue of water consumption is but one serious example of many malpractices, including soil usages, resource localities, environmental pollution, pesticide/herbicide exposure, and commercialization.

“The consumer doesn’t understand the immensity of the industry, the variation in product as well as production,” Noland said. “This is where we hope to enlighten people, because healthy choices will shift the producer’s ideas about how to grow their stuff more consciously.”

With the use of actual hard-hitting facts, said Dixon, SC Laboratories director of client relations, the scientific aspects of the reconsideration may be the game changer for patients.

“Ultimately, indoor cannabis production is unsustainable because of the use of fossil fuels,” Dixon said. “And with scientific research, we’ve found outdoor cannabis to have two distinctly unique terpenes which may actually justify the medical benefits of outdoor-grown products.”

Terpenes are what you smell in every plant. A combination of many terpenes gives a distinct flavoring and potency to each variety of cannabis. The significance of the two new terpenes being discovered in marijuana grown outdoors may very well confirm the health impacts the drug has on patients.

But until little-known facts like these are widely disseminated among consumers, the indoor market will continue to thrive, Dixon said.

Mare, a socially active community member, has seen his fair share of new generations come into Humboldt County and stressed the lack of concern “diesel dopers” had for environmental protection. Mare said newer generations are less concerned about production of clean pot than generating large revenues, something he thinks is unfortunate for the quality of cannabis production.

“This is where it gets interesting,” said Robert Lott, a transport-certified middleman between producers in Northern California and Santa Cruz dispensaries. “We [middlemen] do the networking, the driving, but we don’t sell anything but the product. It’s not really a concern for us because it’s not our fight.”

“Sometimes buyers want to know the background of the stuff they’re getting,” he continued, “but it’s pretty basic stuff: indoor, outdoor, hereditary strains, markup prices. But they don’t care about how the plants were grown. It’s kind of too bad.”

When asked about the lack of consideration from middlemen, former grower Mare said, “A lot of these people are in it for the simple outcome: money. Kids today just want the bottom line, the straight shoot. Middlemen especially. Some think it’s a full-time job.”

The lack of consideration by large sellers won’t change until the demand for organic production is formally made by consumers, Dixon said. In a separate interview Mare agreed; middlemen or dispensaries “don’t get paid to preach.”

Julian Palms*, a 32-year-old medical marijuana grower, has been growing indoors for more than three years. He finds interest in growing organic product, but admits it is not easy.

“I have tried to avoid it, but I use plant health regulators (PHRs) to keep up the steady growth,” Palms said. “It’s like any immune system. If it gets sick or weak you can boost the health by adding some chemical or biological agents to the food. With antibiotics, you’re boosting defense by usually strengthening white blood cells. These PHRs boost energy and bloom.”

Though Palms is concerned about his impact, he admits many growers don’t care about ecological damage because of the profit turnaround.

“To a lot of my friends there isn’t any problem with running a 100 kW generator for 12 hours a day,” Palms said. “They still make bank on their cycles, so who can blame them?”

The argument is being justified by all sides, whether it’s indoor grower or local distributor. The reaction, whether concerned or not, depends on the consumer.

“Clubs don’t care, the drivers [middlemen] don’t care, and the buyers don’t care, but if they knew the amount of energy going into this stuff and the pollution coming out of it, and the unethical means [i.e. spraying plants with pesticides] by which people are producing this medicinal drug, it might change their minds,” Noland said. “You really have to consider who’s buying your product. Our personal market isn’t uneducated yuppies. They are usually conscious consumers that understand the value in sustainable products. But this concern isn’t reflective of most.”

This lack of concern was significant to Mare as well when he grew marijuana.

“Hopefully people start to get it,” Mare said. “The campaign is hard to get moving because there isn’t an advertising business for pot yet. But the facts are already there — they just have to be used properly.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

The campaign is amassing a database from respected individuals in the local community and from institutions of objective, rather than subjective, standing. But numbers are just numbers for Noland, the campaign leader, as he argues in order to make an impact, “you have to make things relative.”

Both consumer and commercial retail suppliers see this as reasonable. Local dispensaries see little salience in mudslinging against indoor marijuana, but do like the idea of putting science into their sales.

Humboldt grower Noland’s campaign work incorporates these databases of grower practices into digestible facts and pamphlets in order to get consumer attention.

One of the headings on a campaign flier reads “70 Gallons of Diesel Fuel = 1 Pound Indoor Pot”; a product statistic generated by Evan Mills, long-time energy analyst and staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California. Mills has done extensive work on the energy consumption involved with medical marijuana production.

“From the perspective of individual consumers, a single cannabis cigarette represents two pounds of CO2 emissions, an amount equal to running a 100-watt light bulb for 17 hours assuming average U.S. electricity emissions (or 30 hours on California’s cleaner grid),” Mills said.

Studies like these, done in a professional environment, have given concrete support to the fight against energy-consuming marijuana production, and with the combination of health problems presented by toxic additives, it may give campaigners what they need to change consumers choices from indoor to outdoor.

“Facts like that hit hard, man,” Mare said as he rolled a cigarette for himself. “If every time someone lit one up, they thought about — what, 17 light bulb hours? They would probably start to think about their buys, right? That’s why I think the indoor market is so damn powerful. It’s not natural, it’s not organic — it’s ‘pollution pot,’ but the buyers don’t really know that, and that ignorance is actually keeping prices up.”

But today, even with new scientific education about environmental impact awareness, will there be time to save this export market before the economic collapse? The three counties’ economies rely heavily on the production of cannabis and the steady generation of revenue, but with industrial production becoming more prevalent, profit-per-pound will drop.

It is hard for any person to forecast the market, but there is still joking and comedic speculation among community members. The future of Humboldt County is not, however, solely dependent on the success of the cannabis market, said Noland.

“In my opinion, I feel that it is important that we [Humboldt County] as a community try to diversify our economies and not only hold onto the marijuana monoculture mindset to follow this so called ‘Napa model,’” Noland said.

The Napa Model reflects the industry in the county southeast of Mendocino County, which grows solely wine products. Instead, he argues, through farming specializations, small communities can diversify their agricultural practices and limit the requirement of imported goods through sustainable alternatives such as livestock, energy collectives or large scale community gardens.

By choosing more sustainable alternatives, growers avoid direct negative feedback loops. These alternatives include importing products, growing cannabis and producing pollution.

Sustainable practices, according to Keenan and Mare, allow for a redirection of outcomes, serving more environmental benefit, in balance with crop profit.

Sutherland reiterated the slim market that existed for sustainability.

Illustration by Louise Leong.

“Don’t get me wrong. I know there are some people out there that do store water for their crop [lowering impact on streams during summertime droughts], but they are an extremely small, small minority,” Sutherland said.

Compared to the sheer mass of production, Sutherland doesn’t think small action is enough.

“I learned from the drug task force in Eureka that last year 168,300 pot plants were confiscated, [and] when I asked what percentage of total production in the county they thought that amount represented, they answered 1 percent,” Sutherland said. “That means that last year there were an estimated 16,830,000 marijuana plants planted in Humboldt County, both indoor and outdoor.”

The numbers were shocking to hear, Sutherland said.

“Keep in mind, Humboldt’s production is in rivalry with Mendocino County, with Trinity County in close proximity to these numbers as well. And although population in Humboldt County hasn’t grown much in the last 20 years, the amount of water consumption is vast in comparison. Shifting cultivation outdoors virtually eliminates energy use (aside from transport), although

when mismanaged, the practice imposes their own environmental impacts.”

Dixon however is hopeful for a reconsideration of the market.

“If we’re just dosing our products with toxic chemicals,” he said, “how different are we from the pharmaceutical industry?”

The campaign will slowly continue, trying to bring consumer and producer closer together. Bringing light to the benefit that organically grown products can offer.

Michael Pollan, a renowned critic of the agricultural industry, champions the power of the consumer in any industry. The viral campaign “Vote with your Fork,” produced in the New York Times, shows that with every healthy choice made, the industry will adapt to serve the buyer. Cannabis activists like Mare have asked patients to “Vote with your Joints” in order to accomplish this same transition.

Noland continues to work on agendas for upcoming cannabis conferences.

“In short, this is a very complicated situation we are facing here in our community and we can only speculate on the future,” Noland said. “For the sake of the environment, the industry must change.”

*Names have been changed.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Inside the Industry: The Costs of Marijuana

At the location where ground will soon be broken for construction of a downtown Los Angeles NFL stadium, Gov. Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 292 last Tuesday.

Penning his signature on pigskin as well, Brown had only moments prior opened the floodgates for the exceptional job growth developer Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG) expects. In a state with high levels of unemployment, AEG foresees 11,000 permanent jobs as well as 12,000 construction jobs created by the project.

Prior to Brown’s signing, at the prompting of supervisor Neal Coonerty, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors voted to urge Gov. Jerry Brown to veto Senate Bill 292. According to a recent press release, the bill would “weaken” the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) “by providing special treatment under the law for an influential developer [Anschutz Entertainment Group] seeking to build a downtown Los Angeles football stadium.”

The bill will in effect streamline the environmental assessment that follows approval of such projects. The bill stipulates any lawsuits regarding environmental impacts of the project will go directly to the California Court of Appeal and be mitigated within 175 days.

Supervisor Coonerty spoke out against the bill in a press release prior to Brown’s vote.

“It is important to speak out about this bill because of its preferential nature and because it would erode California’s vital environmental review process.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Brown Approves Controversial Stadium Bill

Photo by Kyan Mahzouf.

“Free food — no strings attached!”

Armed with this offer, two members of the Student Environmental Center (SEC) brought students into this year’s annual Earth Summit, which was held at the College Nine and Ten Multipurpose Room last Friday.

Capping off Earth Week at UCSC, the 2011 Earth Summit drew together students, faculty and campus and community organizations.

Those who entered found themselves flung into a nexus of vegan food, sustainability, performance and education. Besides the food, tables, slides and lectures, Earth Summit featured several booths that allowed participants to offer input for “the blueprint” — a long-term plan designed by the Campus Sustainability Council (CSC) to create a more-sustainable future at UC Santa Cruz.

The blueprint has 11 different topic groups, including Food, Energy and Transportation. CSC will use ideas and suggestions pitched at the event to use in the blueprint, and will put them into practice throughout the campus.

Sophie Garret, a second-year Crown representative of the CSC, explains the different types of ideas that could be implemented by the blueprint.

“There are goals set for 10 years in the future, and there are those that are more concrete,” she said, “but any can be funded if they are sustainable.”

Members of the 2011 Earth Summit drew in people from all over. Linda Furuto, an associate math professor at the University of Hawaii-West Oahu, said that her school sent her to UCSC to learn and share ideas.

“I’m really fascinated with the intersections of sustainability, environmental conservation and mathematics,” she said. “UH-West Oahu is here to bring back some of the knowledge and wisdom to our students in terms of math.”

She said that math is crucial to a more sustainable future.

“I think what you guys have here is really special,” she said. “And I think math can be a tool to preserve the culture and backgrounds that we come from.”

Co-chair of SEC Gabi Kirk said that community is a large factor in SEC’s mission.

“A lot of environmental issues are deeply ingrained into community issues,” she said. “It’s not just the culture on campus, it’s the culture of Santa Cruz. This open forum is for anyone to walk in and participate.”

Though the attendance matched the projected estimates set out by SEC’s event advertisement, Kirk admits that she hoped more would come.

SEC publicity intern Goldie Mitton said that it can be difficult to gather a large amount of campus and community members.

“Some don’t think we do as much as we say,” she said, providing a reason for the disparity between the 300–350 that showed up and the potential attendance of an event lasting for six hours.

Joyce Rice, program manager for both SEC and CSC, pointed to a traditional level of non-interaction between those inside and outside campus.

“There’s a lot of people in town that don’t work up here,” she said. “So they don’t understand some of the issues [that have been around] since UCSC was built. Water, energy and transportation [to name a few].”

Not in the least affected by this perceived division, Gary Harrold made his way from Soquel to be a part of the campus sustainability endeavor. Harrold went to College Nine and Ten to participate in Earth Summit, enjoying the food and discussing the aims of the event.

“It’s so enriching to see all these young people organizing and being so creative — the cooperation and the lack of dissent are so impressive,” he said.

“As a faculty,” Furuto said. “being able to learn from students is like reaping the fruits of your labor.”

Goldie has an optimistic view of the relationship’s future.

“They’re one of our biggest strengths — they’ve been around since long before us,” she said. “Sustainability is something we can all come together for.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Tenth Annual Earth Summit Brings Community Together

Mandatory 40 percent water rationing. Hotel closures. Water lines shut off when consumption exceeds the limit. Businesses reliant on tourism struggling to make it through the summer months — their most lucrative time.

The City of Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD) foresees this future if no alternative water source is integrated to forestall what it characterizes as “catasrophic” potential impacts of compounded drought years.

“The consequences of doing nothing are dire. I don’t think people understand how bad it could be,” said SCWD water director Bill Kocher.

The SCWD has spent two decades examining how to mitigate the impact of compounded drought years. After determining roughly 30 various projects to be insufficient or nonviable, SCWD concluded that bringing a desalination plant to Santa Cruz to cover the gap during drought years was the only way to prevent dramatic consequences of critical droughts.

“Desalination is the best alternative,” said public outreach coordinator Melanie Schumacher. “We have been looking at alternatives, but they have to meet the water needs of the community.”

Four-minute showers. City government invests in providing lawn replacement for Santa Cruz homes and equipping them with rain catchment devices. Instruments to support greywater reclamation — the process of recycling wastewater generated from laundry, dishwashing and bathing for landscaping and irrigation usage — become a popular feature in Santa Cruz homes.

Proponents of desalination alternatives envision this future for Santa Cruz — a future where no new water source is needed, due to a capitalization on further conservation measures.

“Money is just a tool, and we could use this tool to conserve and live within our means rather than bringing in the desalination plant,” said Ellen Murtha, co-chair of the Santa Cruz branch of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), which is pro-conservation.

Numerous individuals in the Santa Cruz community are mobilizing against the potential introduction of the plant, saying that such a drastic step to ensure water provision is unnecessary, because conservation and curtailment efforts could be expanded, and the potential unknown ramifications of bringing in such a facility.

“There are some major environmental impacts,” said Rick Longinotti, cofounder of Desalination Alternatives. “It uses a lot of energy … it is a guess as to the impact on the ocean, it is just not clear how much of an impact it will have.”

This has been the bone of contention between the two fronts, as proponents argue that desalination is the only alternative and it is environmentally sound, and opponents argue that conservation efforts have not been capitalized on and the plant would bring negative environmental implications.

This contentious engagement was typified at last week’s debate forum, hosted by the League of Women Voters at the First Congregational Church on April 14, where the opponents and proponents of the desalination plant were able to engage in direct dialogue in front of the people of Santa Cruz for the first time.

The debate forum included two individuals each from the Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District and Santa Cruz Desal Alternatives, representing the opponent and proponent sides to the issue, respectively.

Longinotti, co-founder of Desal Alternatives, and James Bentley, retired city water production manager, represented the opposing side. Mike Rotkin, former mayor and city council member, and Toby Goddard, SCWD water conservation manager, represented the proponents of desalination. More than 100 members of the community attended last Thursday’s meeting to express their investment in the future of Santa Cruz’s water supply.

“It is important for the community to understand the need for desalination,” Schumacher said. “It creates a level of transparency. I think that the agencies are being responsible in the way that they are pursuing the desalination plant and I hope that we are presenting that to the public — that this is not a silver bullet solution [and] we are continuing to evaluate and address concerns about the short and long term water supply.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

The Logistics of Water Storage

SCWD serves a population of 98,000 people. The city’s source of water consists mainly of the San Lorenzo River, various North Coast diversions, a few wells and Loch Lomond Reservoir. Currently, Santa Cruz’s water supply consists of 95 percent surface water and only 5 percent groundwater, making Santa Cruz particularly susceptible to periods of drought.

Due to low annual runoff, during periods of drought Loch Lomond Lake Reservoir becomes Santa Cruz’s only source of fresh drinking water, which poses a problem — it isn’t enough.

“We can’t bring water from anywhere else,” Kocher said. “When we run out, we run out.”

The city has been grappling with this looming threat for two decades. The Santa Cruz City Council began evaluating alternative new water source options specifically for provision in periods of drought back in 1997.

In order to ensure that Santa Cruz will have the infrastructure to withstand compounded years of drought, SCWD has undertaken the more than two decade-long project of identifying possible new sources of water. After determining new source after new source nonviable, desalination eventually became the only remaining possible new source for water left on the district’s drawing board.

“I’m convinced that we need some kind of additional supply, and as one project after another fell by the wayside, this is what we have left,” said Terry McKinney, SCWD superintendent of water production.

The desalination process involves converting seawater to potable water, or drinking water. Sodium is removed through a process of reverse osmosis, whereby the water is separated into two parts: the freshwater and the high-sodium concentrate, brine.

WILPF co-chair Murtha said that this two-decade-long investment by the city may be more of a motivation for the SCWD pushing forward with the desalination plant than the plant’s necessity.

“A lot of it is this investment they have — it is very hard to slow that down,” Murtha said. “There must be something very exciting about making a plant.”

In 2005, the city of Santa Cruz Integrated Water Plan (IWP) was developed and utilized. The IWP took into account background evaluations on water demand, conservation, curtailment and alternative water supplies, assessed from 1997 up to the plan’s inception. The plan included a background on the status of water demand, consumption and provision, and looked toward new sources of water supply. The IWP recorded the two decade-long process of examining the viability of various potential resources.

“The IWP first of all looked at conservation, then looked at how much more could be curtailed, then came up with supply plans that could make up the difference,” Kocher said.

Before the 1990s, SCWD knew surface water was always going to be the district’s primary source of water. In 1989, Luhdorff & Scalmanini, an environmental consulting firm employed by SCWD, concluded that groundwater sources were scant at best. The firm investigated potential groundwater sources, including wells at both Harvey West Park and Thurber Lane, and assessed that they could yield only 550 acre-feet of water annually, an inadequate amount considering SCWD annual water production hovers around four billion gallons a year.

In the early 1990s, the Brackish Groundwater Wells Project was considered the most viable groundwater option, but residents in the site area were concerned that the pumping could eventually negatively impact their wells. As a result, the city abandoned the project.

Waterman Gap Reservoir, Kings Creek Reservoir, Yellow Bank Creek Reservoir and Loch Lomond enlargement were four surface storage projects on the table, but the city determined these alternatives were not viable due to the fact that an immediate source of water is needed and such projects would be too lengthy an undertaking.

By 1997, only two projects remained on the drawing board: Reclamation/Coast Groundwater Exchange and Desalination.

Reclamation/Coast Groundwater Exchange would have been a two-part construction undertaking. One part of the project would have been a four-to-five million gallon per day wastewater treatment plant, located either on the existing wastewater treatment plant site or another location. Treated water would be delivered to area farmers for irrigation, and the city would have access to farmers’ current groundwater supplies. The second part of the project would therefore involve the wells and associated facilities necessary to extract this groundwater.

This alternative also faced obstacles. In a 2009 letter to SCWD water director Kocher that was cited in the IWP, Jonathan Steinberg of Route 1 Farms said using reclaimed water and turning over his well were not an option.

“Our customers expect the very best, very purest produce — I cannot in good faith give them produce grown in wastewater,” Steinberg wrote. “I also have concerns regarding giving up the autonomy of my water supply … I am in no way shape or form, interested in reclaimed wastewater being used in my farming operation nor am I interested in signing over my well to the city.”

Larry Jacobs, CEO of Jacobs Farm, echoed similar sentiments in a 2002 letter to Kocher, also cited in the IWP. Jacobs said he supports using reclaimed water, just not its use in growing food.

“We are in favor of recycling reclaimed water on golf courses, car washing, commercial landscaping, and home landscaping,” Jacobs said, “but not on plants grown for food, and especially [not] on plants that are eaten uncooked.”

Illustration by Louise Leong.

What Could Be

According to the evaluations of water demand in Santa Cruz listed in the IWP, SCWD said that Santa Cruz’s current demand for water “exceeds the estimated available yield from its existing sources during drought conditions, even with mandatory curtailment requirements.”

The city conducted the Water Curtailment Study (WCS) in 2001, which is cited in the IWP, to better understand how customers would reach usage restrictions and how such actions would impact agriculture, business and resident customers.

The WCS analyzed six levels of water shortage severity, ranging from 10 to 60 percent shortages, and assessed the impacts of necessary curtailment on the three prioritized types of usage, health and safety, business and irrigation.

According to the results of the study, households issued a 40 percent system shortage would have “serious” implications “with important lifestyle changes.” Catastrophic shortages, however, where households would be issued 50 to 60 percent system shortages, would result in residents’ concern for daily water usage reaching “an unparalleled level.” The IWP stated that this level of shortage “would also impose major and burdensome lifestyle changes, some of which could well affect basic health and safety.”

A 50 percent systemwide shortage would result in 30 percent annual revenue shortages, which would be “catastrophic,” with hotel and motel closures. In the business sector during an extreme drought where residents would have to cut water usage by 42 percent, businesses would have to cut usage by 50 percent and irrigation would be eliminated.

“The economy in Santa Cruz that depends on water would shut down, and the tourist industry would all be out of business,” said SCWD water director Kocher.

Chirag Mehda, general manager of the Comfort Inn on Plymouth Street, corroborated the conclusions in the IWP, saying that for his inn, 40 percent rationing would impede business.

“It definitely would affect the business, because customers need to shower and use the pool and spa. They might not stay,” Mehda said. “I would fear that I would go out of business. The economy is already not good, [so] if that happened it would make it worse.”

Desalination

In both operating and constructing the desalination plant, the SCWD has proposed and moved forward with partnering with Soquel Creek Water District (SqCWD). The city will be partnering with Soquel to lessen the fiscal burden of undertaking such a project, and to maximize each entity’s attributes.

“It would be good to have a money partner. We have tried to partner with Soquel to have a way to exchange with each other,” said Terry Tompkins, deputy director/operations manager of Graham Hill Road Treatment Plant. “It would be good to have a partner that has ground water supply, and vice versa.”

According to the IWP figures drafted in June 2003, desalination funded by the city would be a $77 million undertaking. At that point, if responsibility of funding the plant falls on residents, it would be $7.32 per month. If SCWD partners with Soquel Creek, the project would be a $40 million undertaking and cost $3.84 per customer per month. However new estimates place the cost of the desalination plant over $100 million.

For opponents of desalination, these million dollar figures are cause for alarm.

“The potential cost is going to be a burden, not just for us, but for generations to come,” said WILPF co-chair Murtha. “This is a city that does not have a lot of money.”

The construction cost would be split between agencies. Santa Cruz Water Department would pay 59 percent of the construction cost, and Soquel Creek Water District would pay 41 percent. Operational costs would be split 50-50.

Where the funding for the desalination plant will come from is still to be determined. Both SCWD and Soquel Water District are pursuing grants, but the project will likely become a bond measure reliant on rate increases.

“This thing is for the public and will be owned by the public,” Kocher said. “We shouldn’t be doing stuff the public is concerned about if we don’t have good answers. This has to be paid for by the people — if the voters want to put it on the ballot and shoot it down, sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong. I am advocating for continuing to research ­— it is my duty and job — but it is not my job to convince voters.”

There are four main concerns both agencies must mitigate with desalination — impingement on the intakes, proper disposal of the brine leftover, city population growth and the amount of energy desalination requires.

Kocher said that by managing the intake velocity to compliment the natural velocity of the surrounding waves and utilizing a small screen size, the threat of impingement is all but eliminated.

The treatment process — separating saline water into treated fresh water and a high saline concentrate (brine) though reverse osmosis — requires a significant amount of energy. Where current methods of water production require 2-4 kilowatt hours per thousand gallons of water, desalination requires 12-16 kilowatt hours per thousand gallons.

Even in years of drought, the plant would only be used 180 to 200 days out of the year. Kocher said the infrequency of use alleviates the issue of energy consumption.

The concentrate left over from the process will be sent back to the ocean after being mixed with the treated wastewater, effluent, from the water treatment plant. Currently, Santa Cruz’s effluent is sent back to the ocean. The treated wastewater sent back to the ocean is essentially freshwater, so mixing the effluent with the brine is closer to the natural salinity levels in the ocean.

“The freshwater and brine mixture would actually be an enhancement,” Kocher said. “Everything is a trade, but I think it can be mitigated better in the ocean than in our current usage. This one seems to have the best chance to meet our needs in an environmentally responsible way.”

For some in the Santa Cruz community, despite the SCWD’s statements that the environmental impacts can be successfully mitigated, the integration of a plant that would require triple the energy to produce the same quantity of water and would tamper with the marine sanctuary would be an affront to the values of the community.

“I think [the SCWD] is not giving us enough credit,” Murtha said. “We are a community that really cares about the environment. This desal plant would make us hypocrites. I mean, if I ride my bike to work, I am still contributing to the desal plant.”

Environmental concerns continue to be a sticking point with community members. At the debate forum last week, this sentiment was echoed by the opponents of desalination and audience members alike when cheers erupted after speakers brought up the potential environmental impacts of the desalination plant.

Opponents of desalination have also consistently argued the SCWD has not capitalized on conservation efforts, and this point was not omitted from the debate. The opponents said the city, rather than investing millions into the desalination plant, should allocate those funds to further conservation efforts, among them composting toilets.

Upon the proponents of desalination’s response that such conservation efforts would not come to fruition, audience members shouted simultaneously: “I’ll take one!”

Longinotti pointed out that until the SCWD exhausts all conservation efforts, their assertion that desalination is not “a silver bullet” solution but the only remaining alternative is contradictory.

“If you value desalination as a last resort, please have your spending priorities reflect that,” Longinotti said.

Mike Rotkin, former mayor and city council member, countered that to depend on conservation as a method of water supply insurance is “irresponsible planning.”

“Conservation [alone] cannot do it,” Rotkin said. “Emotionally I am opposed to desalination, but we have reached a point where we don’t have any other alternatives.”

Contributing to skepticism of conservation as a solution is the degree to which Santa Cruzans already conserve. City residents use 66 gallons of water per person per day — compared to the 150 gallons used per person per day statewide — the lowest per capita use in California.

Bentley and Longinotti, representatives in the April 14 debate of those opposed to desalination, commended the district for their efforts to engage with the public and their conservation efforts up to the present. Bentley asserted that despite dissent and skepticism mounting around the desalination plant in particular, he still believes “the city will take care of us.”

Opponents of desalination argued that the environmental implications of the desalination plant outweigh the difficulties that would come from relying on conservation efforts to solve a water shortage crisis.

“Nature has its limits, and we are going to have to live within them,” Longinotti said during the debate forum. “If it is a tradeoff between our needs of today and our grandchildren, then it is no contest.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Critical Time for Water

(Left) Roark and Kirk (right) campaign against the selling of bottled water on campus. Photo by Morgan Grana.

Third-year UC Santa Cruz students Gabi Kirk and Lindsey Roark are on a mission to bring plastic water bottle sales on campus to an end.

City on a Hill Press: Can you tell me about the project you are both a part of?

Kirk: Take Back the Tap is a campaign to end the sale of plastic water bottles on the UCSC campus, and eventually, the UC systemwide. We want to build long-lasting behavioral change. We want to be teaching the people who are going to lead our nation and our future that these are the social values that we hold dear, that water is a right for everyone.

CHP: Would you consider Take Back the Tap a green movement?

Roark: Our campaign is more about the fact that water is privatized, that water is commoditized, and it is something that should be available to everyone. It’s great that there will be less plastic consumption, but that’s not what our campaign is about. We’re trying to make this also a community-based marketing scheme, [instead] of an information-based marketing scheme …What we’re trying to do is find out exactly why people buy bottled water [and] how can we modify that behavior to be more sustainable.

CHP: How is the project going?

Roark: Hopefully by mid-May there will be two spigots, one in the foyer at OPERS and one in the upper floor of the Wellness Center. They’ll just be little push-back spigots where you can fill your water bottles. And if that goes well, then we are hoping to install spigots at all of the high-usage areas that we find around campus, so probably around 25 more spigots. We’re hoping to have the rest of the installation done next year [since] they don’t have the capacity [this year].

Kirk: We actually got grants from Measure 43 and Measure 44, which were passed last year on the ballot.

CHP: Any other future plans for the project?

Kirk: We want to identify the “deserts,” as we like to call them, areas without an accessible water source, and maybe make it into a map for a phone, where someone can ask, “Where is the water fountain near me?” and then later on, “Where is the recycling bin near me?” [or] “When does the next bus come?” And we want to build a website with a transparent budget, so that people can track it. If we’re going to be spending student fees, we want to make sure it’s in a way that’s going to engage the student body.

CHP: Have you received support from the administration?

Roark: What’s cool is that we’ve noticed in this project that every administration, staff [or] faculty [member] that we’ve approached about this has been so stoked, and so as far as administration support, I feel like the administration supports us full-heartedly.

Kirk: There’s a great sustainability community here and we’d love this to be a big part of it. Right now it’s a small group of people doing it, but we’re slowly getting more and more, so we really want people to come out to Earth Day and find out how they can get involved with this effort.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Community Chest

A show of hands from Santa Cruzans identifies those who support searching for alternate methods of water conservation rather than building the proposed desalination plant. Photo by Sal Ingram.

Photo by Sal Ingram.

Updated 4/20/2011 at 11:50pm.

The Santa Cruz City Council voted unanimously in favor of the Water Department’s Habitat Conservation Plan on April 5. The vote brings the desalination plant’s incorporation one step closer.

Water overconsumption has been an ongoing problem in Santa Cruz. Overconsumption threatens endangered species of fish, including the Coho and steelhead salmon species, in the San Lorenzo River and other northern coast streams. The city has postulated several solutions to this problem, including regulation of water uptake in local streams to create optimal living conditions for these fish.

In 2002, the National Marine Fisheries Service accused the city of violating the Endangered Species Act by harming fish populations with a high level of water consumption. The Water Department formulated the Habitat Conservation Plan to protect these species of fish. The plan will take an agreed upon amount of water out of local streams. The building of a desalination plant would provide an additional supply of water to accommodate the city’s projected needs.

Desalination is not new to Santa Cruz. A year-long pilot program was taken on from 2008 to 2009 for a desalination plant at UC Santa Cruz’s Long Marine Lab, and was generally considered a success.

In his presentation at the April city council meeting, Santa Cruz water director Bill Kocher emphasized that stream regulation is necessary for optimal fish population living conditions. He also said the introduction of a desalination plant is necessary.

“Desalination provides a safety net,” Kocher said. “Just knowing that we have it allows us to pull comfortably [from] the lake.”

The plant is projected to filter 2.5 million gallons of water a day, and is estimated to cost up to $99 million to install. It is expected to be in operation by 2015, and has the capacity to cost up to $130 million.

Kocher proposed the Habitat for Conservation plan, which was later approved. His plan has yet to be put into action, but will be presented to NOAA Fisheries in the next step of the process.

Opponents argue that there are better alternatives to the installation of this plant. Financial and environmental impacts are pressing areas of concern. Anti-desalination advocates are pressing for more sensible conservation methods.

Rick Longinotti, a spokesman for the Santa Cruz organization Desal Alternatives, said the city should work to lower the demand for water, which is projected to increase exponentially in the coming years.

“There is an alternative to becoming hooked on desal,” he said. “We need to set ourselves a goal to continue the downward trend in water use, rather than plan for expansion of water use.”

This predicted increase in water demand is due in part to an increase in student enrollment at UCSC. Longinotti said other college campuses have better models for water conservation.

“There is a building called Oakes Hall at Vermont Law School that makes use of compostable toilets, using an average of only 16 gallons of water a day,” Longinotti said.

Other alternatives include water exchanges with neighboring cities and water-neutral development plans.

Third-year environmental studies major Nick Evans attends a sustainability class at UCSC. He said the installation of a desalination plant would have various consequences for the environment.

“Fish population and fish larva will be sucked into the pipes [and] large amounts of carbon dioxide will be released into the atmosphere,” Evans said. “People are blinded to the consequences. Installation of this plant will only serve as a Band-Aid-like situation.”

Evans pointed to Australia as an example of an effective model for water conservation.

“Australia has pursued conservation in an aggressive fashion,” he said. “I attribute the main catalyst of success there to [Australia’s] progressive push of social marketing. They realized that the public’s opinions and actions don’t always line up due to factors that affect convenience.”

The Habitat for Conservation plan is still in premature stages, and it will take some time to finalize the plans. For now, the debate continues.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at City Council Moves Forward with Controversial Desalination Plant

Illustration by Muriel Gordon.

Eleven people died in vain because of BP’s Macondo well blowout on April 20 last year.

For 86 days, 4.9 million gallons of oil gushed from BP’s stores and polluted the Gulf of Mexico.

The accident slowly became the world’s largest oil spill as BP failed to get the leak under control.

Marine life was decimated, fishing economies destroyed. With assistance from the Coast Guard and volunteers, the self-proclaimed leader in sustainability hung its head and got to work.

The company’s efforts to reform safety practices and compensate affected communities are a step to “[earn] back the trust that was lost and build a sustainable BP,” according to a public letter penned by group chief executive Bob Dudley. Paying for the 2012 Olympic energy bill is a nice gesture, but may be more representative of their political prowess than anything else.

Now BP has applied for permission to resume drilling in the Gulf. While the company’s rhetoric is remorseful, the oil spill and its ghastly environmental and community impacts overshadow the sentiment.

The fact of the matter is BP has not made amends for the spill.

The federal government should not permit BP to drill oil in the Gulf because it has not earned the trust of impacted communities. It is still paying for costs related to the oil spill, cleanup and ongoing civil and criminal investigations into the incident.

Moreover, the United States needs to protect its environmental health and faltering economy. It is contradictory for the United States to allow BP to drill in light of the administration’s commitment to rigorous safety standards and punishment of those in poor compliance.

BP has claimed that it would be unable to repay the rest of the reparations without drilling in the Gulf. Some congresspeople and more oil company officials insist that getting back in the Gulf is necessary to reestablishing economic success. However, numerous companies lost a lot of money because of last year’s spill, not just BP.

It is not the responsibility of the United States to pull international corporations out of financial trouble, especially those who brought their woes upon themselves. The relationship between BP and countless Americans affected by the spill is deeply damaged beyond repair. The U.S. government should demand the rest of the reparations and disallow BP’s request for permission to drill. It is the federal government’s responsibility to protect the environmental health of the nation. Drilling oil is not a sustainable enterprise.

Energy companies should set their sights on clean energies like solar and wind power. Not on the oil below American waters.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at BP: A Long Way From Forgiveness

The Farm, nestled away in the fields below campus, is an organization that teaches students about sustainable and organic farming. The Farm runs the produce stand at the base of campus, promoting community supported agriculture. Photos by Nick Paris.

In anticipation of budget cuts, students and faculty are taking preemptive action to protect the programs they deem important.

As talk of extensive cuts to the UCSC farm and the CASFS circulate, members of the community take precautions to protect the campus resource

An email petition is being circulated by Christopher Krohn, an environmental studies internship program coordinator, and second-year graduate student in environmental studies Michelle Glowa, urging Chancellor Blumenthal and dean of social sciences Sheldon Kamieniecki to consider the ramifications of issuing extensive cuts to the Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Farm Systems (CASFS).

Kamieniecki, however, said in an email that no final decision has been made regarding any cuts in the division of social sciences, including CASFS.

The petition states that CASFS is set to lose $1.4 million out of its $2.3 million operating budget — roughly 60 percent of its funding.

Faculty, staff and students are still uneasy about the impact these potential cuts could have on the program’s effectiveness.

“CASFS is an integral part of the environmental studies department’s commitment to experiential learning,” said professor Karen Holl, chair of the environmental studies program, in a email regarding the potential cuts to the program. “Assuming CASFS continues to function, it will have a substantially reduced ability to support both coursework and research. Depending on how deep the cuts go, it is questionable how long CASFS will continue to be able to exist.”

The CASFS, which started off as the Student Garden Project in 1967 and officially became the Farm in 1974, supports a number of programs on its 25-acre property located on the UCSC campus, including apprenticeship programs, the Farm Stand, and various undergraduate classes. The six-month apprenticeship program at CASFS is a hallmark of the center, and boasts over 1,400 graduates since 1967. Upon completion, graduates of the program receive a Certificate in Ecological Horticulture.

“The environmental studies department realizes that difficult choices must be made in response to severe cuts in state funding for higher education in California,” said environmental studies professor Deborah Letourneau in an email. “The faculty is nevertheless extremely concerned about the lasting damage that these budget cuts to CASFS will cause to a central feature of the UCSC campus that has attracted excellence and has more than paid for itself in indirect funds from federal research grants and worldwide prestige for over 30 years.”

Upper division courses in environmental studies — such as Ecophysiology, Integrated Pest Management, Soils and Entomology — depend on the CASFS for the field portion of the course curriculum. The ability of the CASFS to adequately provide for the student body has also been called into question by environmental studies faculty.

“Undergraduate education in environmental studies relies heavily on the CASFS in a number of ways,” Letourneau said. “Two core courses in the agroecology emphasis — ENVS 130A/L Introduction to Agroecology, and ENVS 133B Agroecology Practicum — rely entirely on the farm for field laboratories and hands-on experiences.”

Ian Wilson, a second-year apprentice for the CASFS who takes part in the day-to-day routine of the farm and mentors new apprentices, emphasized the farm’s relevance to the larger Santa Cruz community.

“The farm and all of the programs related to the farm are important for the people on the farm and also for the community at large,” Wilson said. “We provide academic internships for students who are coming onto the farm and learning the fundamentals of organic farming and gardening. It seems really clear to me that it’s a place that is vital to the community and the university.”

Members of the Santa Cruz community are concerned about the potential impact of such cuts as well.

“It’s a jewel in the community,” said Gail Harlamoff, executive director of the Life Lab Science Program, an agricultural non-profit program that seeks to educate school-age children about sustainable agricultural practices and works with the CASFS. “I think these cuts will have a ripple effect,” she said. “It’s one of the few organic research and training farms in the country.”

According to their mission statement, the CASFS’s autonomy of research capability would also be in question. As university funding for the program decreases, its dependence on external sources of revenue increases, which may lead to its research focus being determined by the agendas of those external sources of funding.

“It’s sad,” Harlamoff said in reference to the university. “If they aren’t able to fund these programs, someone else will have to, or it won’t get done.”

The Farm’s value for Wilson is reflected in both the consistent participants in the program, and in infrequent visitors as well.

“We get regulars on a daily basis,” he said, “but we also get people who just wander in and are enchanted by the space and beauty of all the work that we’re doing here.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Petition Circulates to Forestall Cuts to the Farm

Illustration by Bela Messex.

The city of Santa Cruz has become synonymous with environmental activism and being at the forefront of the green movement. And as of this past week, the city is taking one more step toward balancing environmental responsibility with economic vitality.

City council members voted on Tuesday to pass a Green Business Measurement and Tracking Tool, which will help Santa Cruz manage the number of green businesses throughout California, as well as the effectiveness of certain green practices. The city will collaborate with Ecology Action Inc., described on the organization’s website as “a nonprofit environmental consultancy.” Funding is provided by a small grant awarded by the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (CDTSC).

The program, which aims to create an online network of green businesses, will document the progress of these environmentally conscious business tactics. The state is encouraging such environmentally friendly practices by garnering attention for certified green businesses through the creation of an accessible database. With access to a listing of green businesses, individuals are given the opportunity to be more responsible consumers.

“The [CDTSC] has given [a grant] to continue the program and promote the measurement tool to track savings achieved through participation in the green business program,” said Cathlin Atchison, who works with the City Public Works Department and serves as the green business manager.

Atchison explained that the database will also allow consumers to ask themselves, “Where would be the best place to go if I want to support a green business?”

Erica Penney, manager at L’Atelier Salon, a certified green business in Santa Cruz, said that although green efforts can be difficult to maintain for businesses like a salon, consumers in the area have an “awareness” of green practices and make a conscious decision to seek out environmentally friendly businesses.

“We have clientele that specifically come [here] because we are a green business,” Penney said. “As someone who works with a green business, it’s important to create a network.”

In addition, through the tracking of green businesses, the program hopes to calculate not only ecological profit but fiscal benefits as well.

“[With the database] we’ll be able to determine how much savings are achieved,” Atchison said. “It’s really helpful in measuring the steps the community and businesses are taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

The Green Business Measurement and Tracking Tool program will help businesses become certified as green to ensure that they comply with environmental standards in the areas of energy and water savings, solid waste, climate action and pollution prevention.

Atchison said that the ways businesses can cut monetary costs as well as eliminate some pollution can be as simple as organizing a carpool for employees. The overall goal, she said, is to “reduce businesses’ carbon footprint.”

Santa Cruz certified its first green business in 2006, and since then the county has certified a total of 15 businesses, including the UC Santa Cruz dining halls, Atchison said. She added that the increase in the number of local green businesses shows “businesses [are] now seeing the value” in adopting green practices.

Like Atchison, Mayor Ryan Coonerty hopes that the program will benefit the Santa Cruz community.

“We need the city and individuals to adopt good practices,” he said.

Coonerty also expressed excitement over the “collaboration between the city, Ecology Action as a non-profit, and the business community.”

Jo Fleming, who manages the green business program for Scotts Valley and Watsonville and has had approximately 18 years of experience in environmental work, believes that the program’s documentation of green business benefits will be highly useful in promoting environmentally sound practices.

“If you can collect that [information] in one tracking system, it just is a powerful force,” Fleming said. “Green business has definitely instituted the most change [environmentally].”

Fleming said that Santa Cruz holds a “commitment to environmental leadership” and that it is this atmosphere of environmental consciousness that has allowed the city to step up to the plate as managers of this project.

“I think it’s great that Santa Cruz has taken on a leadership [role] in this statewide collaborative effort,” Fleming said.

Coonerty also said that there resides a certain commitment to environmentally responsible behavior in the city of Santa Cruz, and explains that the city is “pushed by community to enact more cutting edge environmental policy.”

The benefits garnered through green business practices can be invaluable, Atchison said.

“Most businesses think it’s really worth the effort. There is really an opportunity to save while doing the right thing,” she said. “[It’s] good for the planet and good for the business.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at New City Program Tests Efficacy of Green Businesses

The plastic bags people use to line their garbage cans, hold their dogs’ waste and litter the ground everywhere might soon be banned in Santa Cruz County. Photo by Nick Paris.

The city and county of Santa Cruz are grappling with a major policy change intended to curtail damage to the environment and preserve the beauty and health of local beaches.

The policy would ban single-use plastic bags. In Sept. 2010, the Santa Cruz City Council moved to conduct research on the environmental impact of the proposed ban on single-use plastic bags.

If enacted, the ban would prohibit the use of plastic bags. A 10-cent fee on paper bags is part of the proposal.

Since plastic bags often find their way to the oceans, many consider the policy essential for the preservation of the Monterey Bay.

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors reviewed the proposed ordinance in an April 2010 meeting. AB 1998, a comparable measure, failed on the state level in August.

The magnitude of environmental damage due to plastics has caught the attention of many governing bodies. However, newly elected city council member and UCSC alumna Hilary Bryant said the policy faces obstacles.

“In the past, the ban has failed not because of the lack of broad-based popular support but because of strong lobbying on the state level,” Bryant said.

Of those opposed to the bill, the American Chemistry Council garnered the public’s attention with radio and television ads against the state ban. A Virginia-based company, the ACC represents plastic bag manufacturers, including ExxonMobil.

All three recently elected city council members support the ban, saying they would support it on a statewide level as well. City council-member David Terrazas said Santa Cruz is obligated to deal with the plastic problem.

“As a coastal community, we have a responsibility to find a solution,” he said.

Because statewide Proposition 26 passed, the ordinance must be revised or passed with two-thirds of a local vote. City council member Lynn Robinson said a statewide measure would be beneficial. However, she forsees potential problems with the policy language in its compliance with Proposition 26.

“Local municipalities can’t afford to get sued,” Robinson said. “Before you put a policy forward you need to make sure it works.”

Bryant said a statewide measure would make the policy more successful.

“A statewide consistent effort would have a larger impact and would be easier to implement because of its uniformity,” she said.

Some countries and municipalities have enacted similar policies already. South Africa, Ireland and China have implemented fees or bans on plastic bags. While no U.S. state has passed a ban, the municipalities of San Francisco, Palo Alto and Malibu have passed such ordinances.

Opponents of the ban point to economic reasons. Businesses will be affected by the demand for alternative methods of transporting their products. Taquerias, Chinese take-out restaurants and supermarkets are among those affected. Council member Robinson said this is a major difficulty with the policy.

“The biggest challenge is how it does affect the businesses,” she said. “People want to do the right thing, but you have to do it in a way that doesn’t make it more difficult for the small businesses to do the work they need to do.”

In Santa Cruz, some vendors have already switched from plastic to paper. New Leaf Community Market, for example, only provides paper bags.

They encourage customers to bring in reusable bags by donating to local sustainable organizations with each bag filled. Council member Bryant supports such community efforts.

“I would be in favor of bans on the use of plastic bags to be voluntarily implemented by local residents and businesses regardless of when or if a state or local legislative ban is passed,” she said.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at City Council Considers Ban on Plastic Bags

Illustration by Louise Leong.

Sooner or later, it will end up in a landfill.

It’s not your fault. We live in a culture that too often values itself based on the stuff that we own. Do we have the newest laptop? The coolest phone? The completely useless — though perhaps wildly entertaining — iPad? More than any other time of the year, the holiday season is too often about getting more stuff.

But as you rush from shop to shop, please put down the shirt you are thinking of giving your sister and ask yourself: Is this something she really needs?

The answer is probably no.

According to Stanford’s recycling center, in the short time between Thanksgiving and New Year’s, Americans generate around 25 million tons more waste than at any other time of the year. Even if your gift isn’t chucked out with last night’s pot roast, it might become obsolete by next year and “need” to be replaced.

This isn’t to say you have to give up gift-giving altogether. Instead, try to think of more practical or socially responsible gifts. Creativity, more than convenience, will give you the “wow factor” during the gift exchange, and you can sleep soundly knowing that it will be put to good use. Here are some suggestions:

Rather than reaching for the newest DVD, see if there is something that the people on your list actually need.

If the folks on your list have it all, then give them an alternative gift that will benefit others. Micro-financing can be a great way to help someone, and there are many sites that offer easy ways to get involved. Investing in Kiva could be a great way exercise your generosity this year. The site allows you to browse through the profiles of motivated entrepreneurs from the developing world and select who you’d like to help and how much to loan. For just $25, you can empower someone to change his or her life.

If you would rather make your social impact locally, visit the Homeless Garden Project gift shop on Pacific Avenue. The proceeds from gift sales go directly to the payroll of homeless trainees, so you are not only buying a gift, but also paying for a homeless person to learn valuable skills that will help him or her get off the street.

Finally, what your loved ones really want for the holidays might be you — not bursting out of a gigantic cake like a stripper at a bachelor party, but in the form of spending some quality time. Mom might be thrilled to be taken out to lunch, or maybe Dad would like to go fishing like when you were younger. Especially now that you spend so much time away from home, don’t be surprised if what your folks really want is some bonding.

So this holiday season, don’t be boring. Don’t make the annual trip to stores you think your family members like and wait to stumble upon the “perfect” gift. Surprise them with something more interesting.

You might find they are impressed you thought outside the box.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at A New Way to Give This Season

Chancellor George Blumenthal reveals a LEED plaque in recognition of Cowell Dining Hall’s certification as a green building. The presentation of the plaque was part of the Sustainability and Resource Fair on Monday. Photo by Rosanna van Straten.

UC Santa Cruz is the 11th “greenest” college in the nation, according to a ranking released by the Sierra Club in August. On Monday, the university held the first ever Sustainability and Resource Fair at Cowell College.

The event, which was sponsored by the Sustainability Office, featured over 30 campus environmental organizations and a presentation by Chancellor George Blumenthal, who officially declared the new Cowell Dining Hall a silver LEED-certified green building. LEED certification, which stands for Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design, is an internationally recognized green building certification and has four different levels: certified, silver, gold and platinum.

Blumenthal is the first UCSC chancellor to declare sustainability a priority in his two-year plan. The crowd listened as he explained the importance of sustainability on the UCSC campus.

“It is truly a mark of distinction, nationwide and worldwide,” he said. “It says something about who we are and what we are as a campus.”

Cowell Dining Hall is the second building on campus to be LEED-certified, and one of the 12,000 LEED-certified buildings in the country. Steps toward achieving certification included maximizing natural light, conserving water, minimizing and composting waste, using computerized ovens to save energy and installing completely recycled and recyclable carpet and countertops.

The next campus buildings to be LEED-certified include several buildings at Porter, the biomedical sciences facility and the Student Health Center.

The crowd cheered when Blumenthal announced news about the McHenry Library renovations, which will feature an environmentally-friendly addition.

“When the new section of the library opens, there will even be solar panels on the roof,” Blumenthal said.

The Sustainability and Resource Fair also served as the kick-off for the COOL Campus Competition, a three-week event with 40 universities competing to reduce their resource consumption. UCSC is adding an inter-college aspect to the competition, with Kresge, Porter, Cowell and Stevenson each vying for the title of the most energy-efficient.

The competition is sponsored by the Student Environmental Organization, the Green Campus Group and the Sustainability Office.

Cameron Fields, one of the event’s main organizers, described the competition process, as well as the outreach effort, intended to promote participation.

“Meters have been installed in each of the four colleges to measure their water and electricity usage,” Fields said, “and students can check online to see how they are doing, as it updates their electricity usage live and their water usage weekly. We’ve been tabling at colleges, knocking on students’ doors and posting flyers to try to get students involved.”

The installation of the meters cost the school approximately $17,000 — including the cost of labor and the setting up the website. Fields said that, although the cost is high, the awareness that could come as a result of this competition will outweigh the expense.

“As this is a pilot event, it’s the first time we are doing something like this, [and] we’ll have to see how it goes,” Fields said. “But I feel really positive about it, and students seem to as well. Raffles will be held for the next three weeks as the competition continues. Students can win iPods and other gadgets.”

Blumenthal expressed his intent to further UCSC’s sustainable and environmentally friendly reputation and reiterated the positive effects that the LEED certification will have in the future.

“Thirty-two percent less lighting will be used, due to computerized lights that adjust as the light changes in the building,” he said, “and 62 percent less heating.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Colleges Compete to Win ‘Greenest’ Title

Colleges Nine and Ten hosted a Meatless Monday event during lunch last week. The event was geared toward promoting vegan- and vegetarian-friendly options in campus dining halls to reduce their carbon footprint. Photo by Andrew Allio.

Omnivorous students at College 9/10 Dining Hall took a break from their meat-eating habits while vegetarian and vegan students took the spotlight last Monday. During a special Meatless Monday lunchtime outreach event in the dining hall, representatives from Banana Slugs for Animals, Students for Organic Solutions, and Morningstar Farms greeted lunching students with decorated booths adorned with a wide array of pamphlets, prizes and samples.

The event was originally planned with the intention of promoting awareness about UC Santa Cruz’s nomination for the 2010 Most Vegan-Friendly College competition by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). UCSC took fourth place last year.

However, UCLA beat UCSC in the first round of voting this year, eliminating the Slugs from the competition.

Gaining a higher rank in the PETA competition would have just been dairy-free icing on the vegan cake, but the loss did not affect the event. Volunteers encouraged the students who stopped by the booths to pledge to go meatless for a meal, a day, a week or a month. Students wrote their names and e-mail addresses on Post-it notes and stuck them to posters in their respective pledge category.

One of these volunteers, second-year Tash Nguyen, tabled for the group Students for Organic Solutions at the event. As the student coordinator for SOS, Nguyen tries to bring positive attention to Meatless Mondays.

“We hope that all the vegetarians and vegans who have meal plans become aware of Meatless Mondays and take advantage of these days,” Nguyen said. “Our job is to advocate these events. We want to get more people interested in trying vegetarian and vegan options.”

Second-year Virginia Hanrahan, who is vegan and a representative of Banana Slugs for Animals, said that Meatless Mondays and the reduction of meat consumption on campus are not only about moral issues but environmental concerns as well.

“We’re showing students all the alternatives that are out there,” Hanrahan said. “There is a big environmental push for people eating less meat.”

There is a significant link between the production of meat and “environmental destruction,” according to March 2006 reports by the Department of Geological Sciences at the University of Chicago and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

Opponents of Meatless Mondays have said that removing the choice of meat imposes on students’ dietary freedom. Following the institution of Meatless Monday programs in several public schools throughout the country, public figures such as Janet Riley, American Meat Institute (AMI) senior vice president for public relations, condemned Meatless Mondays as a denial of student rights.

Diners as well as employees of the dining halls have shown support of Meatless Mondays.

Vegan second-year Melanie Kaplan is a food service supervisor and student manager at the Crown/Merrill Dining Hall. She started working with the dining service and was initially troubled by a lack of signs in the dining halls. She said she was disheartened by the lack of options for vegetarians and vegans.

“I was able to see a wide range of products that [the dining halls] have and help get healthier options out for other people who are concerned about what they’re eating,” Kaplan said. “I’m also making sure things are labeled properly with what’s in it, so that nobody eats something that they realize they didn’t want to be eating. I feel like [the dining halls] have gotten extremely better with that and are constantly improving.”

UCSC students were not the only ones involved in the event. Morningstar Farms’ Gardenburger representative, Katie Goetzinger, attended the event to promote vegan and vegetarian dining options. Morningstar Farms is a division of Kellogg Company.

The student volunteers were excited to receive support from a major corporation like Kellogg. Goetzinger said that Kellogg’s involvement in the movement is mostly a reaction to the growing interest in vegetarianism and veganism.

“Working for a major corporation, it is necessary to promote vegetarian options. It’s not like you have a choice if you want to grow as a company,” Goetzinger said. “My company is one of the largest in the world, and we’re able to set ourselves in the vegan and vegetarian category. It is the largest growing category in food services in terms of colleges, military and other places with cafeteria-type settings.”

Supporters of Meatless Mondays said increasing the amount of unprocessed foods offered in the dining halls will make the campus more sustainable.

“The goal is to get to 20 percent real food in the dining halls to lessen the carbon footprint,” Nguyen said. “[Meatless Mondays are] one push to get there. I think we’ve already almost accomplished it, and we hope to go above and beyond it.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Meatless Mondays to Encourage Environmental Awareness

Illustration by Louise Leong.

UC Santa Cruz Foundation and Special Events Center honored two distinguished persons of excellence at their annual Founders Day Forum and Founders Dinner events last Friday. Jean-Michel Cousteau was the recipient of the Founders Medal, and alumnus Richard Harris received the Alumni Achievement Award.

The Founders Medal goes to the person whose life work reflects UCSC’s values as an institution. This year, Catherine Faris, associate vice chancellor and director of donor relations and development programs and part of the main organizing team, said it was an honor to have Jean-Michel Cousteau accept the Founders Medal because of his exceptional work in ocean conservation.

“He’s recognized all around the globe for filming images of environmental degradation but also images of programs and ideas that have worked,” Faris said. “We believe that through the work UCSC does in marine and ocean sciences that we’re doing the same thing, researching problems, teaching students, helping them become the next scientists that find solutions to environmental degradation. So we’re honoring his lead in that role.”

Jean-Michel Cousteau has dedicated his life to helping conserve the world’s oceans through his films, and trying to convince diplomats as high up as former president George W. Bush to preserve marine life for future generations. Faris said this was important especially as an inspiration for younger generations.

“His role has been to teach children about how to care for the world’s oceans, and the role we all play in how we live our lives to preserve the world’s water systems,” Faris said.

Ann McCrow, director of the UC Santa Cruz Foundation and one of the people responsible for choosing Cousteau, said his exceptional achievement in ocean conservation and education made him stand out among the other candidates and mirrored the ideals of UCSC.

“It is an opportunity for us not only to recognize Jean-Michel Cousteau and what he’s done, but also to align his work with the excellence that UCSC has in this area,” McCrow said. “It’s a way to talk about and demonstrate the excellence that UCSC recognizes and aspires to.”

Founders Day consists of two events: the forum at noon at the Rittenhouse in downtown Santa Cruz, and the Founders Day Gala Dinner held at Coconut Grove. At the dinner, these two awards, plus two others — the Fiat Lux Award to the S.H. Cowell Foundation and the Faculty Research Lecturer Award to Paul Whitworth — were presented. But at the Forum, Richard Harris and Jean-Michel Cousteau were center stage.

“I’m very privileged to be here and also honored to be among young people who are the next decision makers of our country,” Cousteau said, beginning his speech. “When I was a child I was fascinated by marine life, but later on quantities [of animals] became fewer and fewer, and the amount of trash that was in the ocean was just shocking to me.”

Cousteau said he hopes that the young people in the audience would be inspired to do something about the devastated oceans, so the forum was made available to students throughout Santa Cruz, and multiple local schools were invited. Over 200 people were present.

UCSC alumnus and NPR science correspondent Richard Harris, who has been covering the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, wore a Slug tie to the event to show his allegiance to the school, and explained to the audience the magnanimity of the disaster. He was part of the team that discovered that the amount of oil per day gushing into the ocean was close to 50,000 gallons a day, rather than 5,000, which was BP’s initial estimate.

“It’s really hard to picture how much oil that is,” Harris said. “That amount of oil could power all of the United States’ cars and trucks for about five hours. That shows our reliance on this technology.”

Cousteau said that when the oil spill occurred, he was blown away because people are still making the same mistakes as they were years ago.

“It wasn’t the equipment that failed. It was the people,” he said. “It was the decision-makers who were taking shortcuts. We need to take big risks.”

Many of the students in the audience agreed that big risks needed to be taken, as was apparent when question and answer time came, and one student asked why, if we have the technology already, are we still addicted to oil? Cousteau responded with a call to action:

“Go for it. Kick asses.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at UCSC Spotlights Ocean Conservation

Activists with signs line the sidewalk outside of Valero on Mission St. and display their messages to passing motorists. Photo by Isaac Miller.

Bike powered blenders were used to make smoothies for protest attendees on the warm October day. Photo by Isaac Miller.

Opponents of Proposition 23 gathered at the Valero gas station on Mission Street near downtown last Sunday to protest the California initiative funded by major Texas oil companies Valero and Tesoro. The initiative would repeal AB32 of 2006: the California Global Warming Solutions Act.

More than a hundred people gathered at 12 p.m. and marched downtown, ending at the Bike Church for a festival with music, art and food, including bicycle-powered smoothies. UCSC Calpirg and Cabrillo Calpirg were the main organizers of the event. People Power and other groups also participated.

People Power director Mike Posner said he participated because preventing the passage of Prop 23 would improve the conditions of society as well as those of the earth’s climate.

“If Prop 23 passes, it will potentially help to wreck the world’s climate as well as roll back people’s right and privilege to have a more civil society and more public space,” Posner said. “It’s no coincidence that the prop was written by large corporations in Texas that care about neither humanity nor the environment.”

Posner hoped that the demonstration would show how California could stand up to outside corporate interests.

Cabrillo Calpirg intern Anoosh Yaraghchian said that out-of-state interests should have no part in California’s politics.

“Texas companies are trying to come over here to tell us what to do, dirty up our energy,” he said. “Who are you to do that?”

The main objective for Yaraghchian and other students with Calpirg is to educate people, especially students, about the proposition. Yaraghchian said he tables every week, reminds people to vote “no,” and wears a gorilla suit around campus to get people’s attention.

“Proposition 23 is a no-brainer,” Yaraghchian said. “It’s an obvious ‘no,’ and more and more people are understanding what the prop is.”

Taylor Cross, a Calpirg campaign coordinator for opposition to Proposition 23 and participant in the rally on Sunday, said that not many people knew about the proposition.

“Our main campaign is to educate people on what Proposition 23 is because a lot of people haven’t been informed yet,” he said.

For Katie Roper, the Cabrillo Calpirg organizer who also oversees the organizer at UCSC Calpirg, this is the most harmful aspect of the proposition.

“The way that it is worded, people who think they are for climate change think they should vote for it, which they shouldn’t,” Roper said.

One of Roper’s responsibilities with Calpirg is calling a list of student voters before the Nov. 2 elections. The list is of students who signed up to be reminded by Calpirg to vote. Roper expects that students will help defeat the proposition.

“What has made California so successful and a world leader on environmental issues is that when our national leaders failed to act on global warming issues, California was able to pass AB32 and similar things,” Roper said.

Roper has hope for the future, she said, and she expects that Californians will pull through to defeat this proposition.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Locals Rally to Reject Proposition 23

Illustration by Bela Messex.

The Federal Transit Administration granted Santa Cruz Metro $4,830,600 last week for the conversion of 12 diesel-fueled buses to natural gas buses by 2011.

Santa Cruz Metro received notification of the grant, which is part of FTA’s program, “State of Good Repair,” on Oct. 4. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood made the announcement.

“Our goal is to have 100 percent of our natural gas buses on the street at all times, because that will end up saving 12,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the lifetime of a single bus,” said Tove Beatty, legislative analyst for the Metro, who wrote and submitted the grant last June.

Beatty said that the conversion would help save the Metro money because natural gas is at least half the price per gallon compared to diesel. Furthermore, the change will decrease Santa Cruz’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Of the 93 buses in the Santa Cruz Metro fleet, 63 are fueled by natural gas, and the rest run on diesel.

Mike Rotkin, who serves on the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit Board, said that by law the buses need to be replaced anyway, but instead of switching to “clean diesel,” like most cities in California are, Santa Cruz Metro wanted to take the extra step by converting to CNG, or compressed natural gas.

“We’ve converted most of our fleet, but we don’t have the money right now to convert the rest,” Rotkin said.

The grant will pay for what the city of Santa Cruz cannot, and by 2011, 12 new buses will be added to the fleet, replacing ones that are about 25 years old. The new ones could easily last 20 years, if not more, said Ellen Pirie, chair of the Metropolitan Transit District Board.

“If for no other reason than the cost of maintenance and repairs, this is a good thing to be doing,” Pirie said. “It’s also important that we use as little oil and gasoline as possible. This allows us to use the alternative of CNG, and it burns cleaner and has a domestic supply.”

Pirie expects that this move will be particularly important to Santa Cruz.

“It’s a community that cares very much about climate change and global warming and energy independence, and this is something that is a positive step on all those issues,” Pirie said.

One thing the grant does not solve, however, is the current fiscal crisis the Metro is suffering due to lack of funding.

“We’re not in any better shape when it comes to operational funding,” Beatty said. “That’s a different ballgame.”

The grant does nothing to pay for more Metro jobs. Rotkin said that even so, any money that can be provided is important because of the switch from diesel to CNG.

“For a lot of years we were telling people, ‘Get out of your cars, use the buses,’” Rotkin said. “Now what’s happened is we actually have more demand than we can provide for with our resources. We want to be able to provide more. Anything we can save by ways of fuel is helping with that process.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Metro Makes a Natural Transition

Illustration by Louise Leong.

The whales are dying.

The number killed along the coast has spiked in recent months. Whales — an already endangered species — follow krill, their primary source of food, into shipping traffic. The ships then slam into the whales, damaging them fatally.

Reports by the San Francisco Chronicle and Associated Press have falsely blamed the whales’ food, krill, for the rise in whale deaths. It’s not an increase in krill that causes whales to die, nor is it the fault of whales for following their food. The real culprit is human shipping. Huge metal cargo ships, with dangerous propellors, can easily kill a whale.

It’s people who send ships into whales’ ecosystem, the bays and surrounding ocean, where they collide with the whales. It’s people who set up a transport system that only takes whales into consideration when the animals obstruct shipping traffic.

At least five whales have been killed since late July, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. That’s not even three months. Some of the whale carcasses have washed onto shore, which has raised awareness of the issue.

It shouldn’t take a rotting carcass on the beach to realize that human activity has been destroying the whale population, but it’s a good reminder. Every year, 2,800 blue whales, 2,600 fin whales and 1,400 humpback whales — all endangered species — swim along the coast of California, Oregon and Washington. Before the 20th century, whales were abundant. Since then, humans have decimated the population through hunting and shipping.

We need to take responsibility for human actions. Shipping companies cannot treat the bays and oceans as empty shipping lanes. These waters are the homes of whales and their fellow sea creatures, and anyone trespassing in someone else’s home, at the very least, needs to avoid incurring death and destruction.

There are technological tools that the shipping industry can use to prevent running into whales, such as using monitors to watch out for whales in areas with heavy shipping traffic, and applying sound systems to warn whales of a ship’s approach. There is no reason shipping companies shouldn’t be using all possible methods, all the time.

But while technological fixes can mitigate damage, they will not resolve the issue at the core of whale deaths.

Ships are not an essential part of the ocean. Whales are.

It’s imperative that we get our priorities straight.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Whales Fall Victim to Human Activity

When he visited California State University Monterey Bay to appear in the fourth and final installment of the Panetta Institute Lecture Series, a handful of other UC Santa Cruz students and I were fortunate enough to represent UCSC in the audience amidst a sea of high school and college students from the surrounding counties.

The Panetta Institute, located on CSUMB’s campus, has historically partnered with the university to bring in guest speakers and implement programs that encourage involvement in public policy.

Although by now we’re all familiar with Gore’s 2006 documentary and accompanying book, “An Inconvenient Truth,” anyone who predicted that Gore’s approach to the issues of global warming and climate change would be stale four years later was proven incorrect. The issues he addressed were made more relevant than ever by the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Of the 90 million tons of CO2 we put out daily, 30 million are absorbed by the ocean, causing marine acidity to rise and the wildlife to dwindle. The recent oil spill has had an uncannily similar effect on the ecosystem.

“Here’s one difference between the oil spill and the CO2 spill,” Gore said. “Oil you can see … CO2 is invisible.”

Although an unfortunate and lasting incident, the oil spill serves as a useful analogy for the other environmental crises facing the world. Gore referred to it several times to explain the grave consequences that will arise from denying the severity of these issues.

“That much pollution is being pumped into the atmosphere every three seconds,” Gore said. “They told us it was safe to drill into the ocean. They were wrong about the Gulf; they’re wrong about this. [Global warming] masquerades as an abstraction … gives us the illusion that we have the luxury of time.”

He referred to the oil drilling platform responsible for the spill as a “rat’s nest,” and emphasized that the nest ought to be cleaned out, alluding to “corruption in that part of the government.”

Gore also spoke about multibillion-dollar corporations that try to prevent people from demanding change, comparing companies that deny the validity of global warming and climate change with the pro-smoking ad campaigns of the 1950s.

“The response [to the dangers of smoking] was delayed almost 40 years by creating doubt,” Gore said.

I was pleased to see a famous politician and public figure speak so candidly about an issue — any issue — and indeed, Gore pulled no punches. Judging by the raucous applause the former Vice President received every 30 seconds or so, the rest of the audience was equally enthused.

In response to the question of where students should go to seek out the hard facts, Gore recommended the National Academy of Science of any country, professional scientific societies, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“Or,” he joked, “you can listen to Rush Limbaugh. It’s your choice.”

Since he was addressing students — who are in the position of being educated as well as educating themselves and others — Gore emphasized the importance of what he called “sorting through the noise” when it comes to the state of the environment and those who deny the reality of global warming. This was the component of his lecture that I found most profound and most memorable. I would guess that my peers felt the same way.

“Learn about it,” he said. “Empower yourselves with knowledge … If you decide you want to make a difference, you can. You really can.”

For what may have been the hundredth time, the audience broke out into applause again. Whether it was because we were relieved we hadn’t been told the best thing we could do to save our planet was to buy energy-efficient light bulbs, or because it just seemed like the appropriate thing to do, we all clapped over and over again.

There was an energy that pervaded the auditorium, emanating from the applauding hands of the students and the ardor in the former Vice President’s eyes. It hinted at the passion we all have toward our world, a force that might prove to be the ultimate source of alternative energy.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Former Vice President Al Gore Offers Inspiration to California Students

Coral reefs are one part of the marine ecosystem threatened by warming oceans. Photo by Devika Agarwal.

Flamingos and other wading birds perch in swamps, which could be flooded as a result of sea level rise. Photo by Devika Agarwal.

Warmer beaches could alter the male to female ratio of sea turtles in the oceans, threatening their population. Photo by Devika Agarwal.

A group of children on a field trip view splashing penguins, which may soon have to migrate further north to feed their population. Photo by Devika Agarwal.

A talk-back station invites aquarium visitors to share their feelings and ideas about global warming. Photo by Devika Agarwal.

As swarms of tropical fish dart in and out of porous corals, vibrant colors pop against the paler branches of the reef. Children gaze in awe, their hands and noses pressed to the glass, eyes following each animal’s every move.

Visitors to the Monterey Bay Aquarium may not realize that the ocean home of marine life — from spotted jellies gliding effortlessly through the water to delicate flamingos tip-toeing through salty marshes — could soon be a very different place.

With the exhibit “Hot Pink Flamingos: Stories of Hope in a Changing Sea,” which tells the stories of species all around the world affected by global warming, the aquarium hopes to inspire awareness of climate change.

Global warming, or the warming of the Earth’s atmosphere due to increasing levels of greenhouse gases, has been a topic of intense worldwide debate for the past several years. Despite detractors, there is a scientific consensus that the planet’s climate has begun to warm and will continue to do so in the future due to increasing levels of carbon emissions.

“Climate change is a very sobering topic,” Raul Nava, an Assistant Exhibit Developer for “Hot Pink Flamingos,” said. “What we want visitors to understand is that we are all trying to wrap our heads around climate change. But we have found that there is hope. There is power in numbers.”

The Phenomenon

Climate variation is nothing new. Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide have always been a part of the atmosphere. However, since the 18th century industrial revolution, human consumption of fossil fuels has led to rising carbon dioxide emissions. Scientists fear this will lead to a rapid increase in the Earth’s atmospheric temperature.

Just ask Director of the Institute of Marine Sciences Gary Griggs, a distinguished professor of earth and planetary sciences at UC Santa Cruz.

“Right now, globally, we are about 85 percent dependent on fossil fuels,” Griggs said. “In the next hour [around the world], we’re going to burn about 150 million gallons of oil, 15 billion cubic feet of natural gas, and about a million tons of coal. Cumulatively, those are going to put, per hour, about a million tons of carbon dioxide into the ocean.”

Mark Snyder, assistant project earth scientist at the Climate Change and Impacts Laboratory at UCSC, uses climate modeling to predict the future temperature and greenhouse gas levels in the Earth’s atmosphere. Snyder and other researchers use scenarios established by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a group of 3,000 scientists that last released a report in 2007, to calibrate future temperature and carbon dioxide levels.

“Right now, we’re essentially on one of the more extreme scenario curves, in terms of the rate of CO2,” Snyder said. “The sort of rapid climate change that people have looked at could definitely be happening as a result of this rate.”

According to the IPCC, global temperatures could rise between 2 and 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, leading to a sea level rise of anywhere between .6 and 2 feet, as ice caps melt. UCSC professors and Monterey Bay Aquarium researcher’s estimates are less conservative. Such scenarios could put many parts of Santa Cruz under water.

There are still many unknowns about how climate change will affect oceans, but the Monterey Bay Aquarium is raising awareness of the changing seas.

Changing Seas

“Hot Pink Flamingos” is tucked away on the bottom level of the aquarium. Upon entering, viewers are drawn to hundreds of fish, in all colors of the rainbow, whizzing from side to side in the “Acid Oceans” exhibit. The fish aren’t literally swimming in acid, but in the future, marine ecosystems dependant on coral reefs could be threatened by changes in ocean pH.

“The ocean is becoming more acidic, which affects the coral reefs and all the animals that depend on the reefs,” said Angela Hains, public relations senior associate manager at the aquarium.

Acidic water affects the ocean’s levels of calcium carbonate, which many organisms use to build shells.

“Certain types of plankton that make calcium carbonate shells are going to dissolve,” Professor Griggs said.

Corals and plankton may not be the most fierce, colorful, or interesting animals in the aquarium, but both are vital to the food web that feeds larger marine animals and even humans. The larger aquarium is also home to sea otters and black-tipped reef sharks.

“Even if [some] animals are not affected by ocean acidification or warming, the loss or the change in abundance of some other species they depend upon can affect them indirectly,” Jim Barry, a senior scientist at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) said.

Beyond “Acid Oceans” lies a tank of spotted jellies in shades of translucent brown, dotted with white spots — some have tentacles tangled in webs, while others drift, solitary, through the center of the tank.

Jellyfish are especially sensitive to the temperature of their environment.

“Warmer temperatures threaten some tropical spotted jellies and sea turtles, species who live at the edge of their temperature limits,” Assistant Exhibit Developer Nava said.

Sea turtles have temperature-dependent sex determination, which means that the temperature at which their eggs are incubated determines the turtle’s sex — warmer eggs become females, while cooler ones become male. Warmer oceans could lead to warmer beaches, which could alter turtle sex ratios and lead to a decline in population.

“Scientists are concerned that we may tip the balance for them,” Nava said. “Some beaches are already on the edge and produce more females than males.”

Past the jellies are two turtles gliding by the glass, their dark eyes looking out at the children staring back at them. Though an Earth 100 years into the future may seem distant for humans, it’s all in a turtle’s lifetime.

Flamingos — perhaps the most flamboyant of all birds in the marine ecosystem — face equal challenges.

All over the world, rising sea levels could force wading birds to move inland to marshes that are disappearing quickly.

Nava emphasized that although many birds can fly and migrate to different areas, the question is whether there will be enough wetlands left.

“We know that they can move and survive in different environments, but will there be other birds there doing the same thing?” Nava said.

Hitting Home

“Hot Pink Flamingos” features species from all of the world’s oceans that are facing the effects of global warming, and the local Monterey Bay may be facing many of the same changes.

According to the Bay Conservation Development Commission, if sea levels rise by three feet, the entire San Francisco International Airport, which currently sits within 16 inches of sea level, could be covered within the next 100 years. In Santa Cruz, the Boardwalk, Main Beach, parts of the harbor, and even downtown, which is built on a flood plain, could be inundated by the rising tide.

“If we keep going at the rate we’ve seen for the last 50 years, sea level would rise about one foot in the next 100 years, but most people are predicting that in the next 100 years, it’s going to go up a lot faster,” Professor Griggs said.

Ocean acidification, warming, and species migration northwards could also change the bay’s unique ecosystem.

Stories of Action

Despite the feelings of hopelessness that climate change can bring, “Hot Pink Flamingos” focuses on stories of hope and inspiration.

“A lot of times, people are overwhelmed on this subject. Our message is that it’s OK to feel worried, it’s OK to feel hopeful, and, most importantly, you’re not the only one,” Nava said.

The exhibit features “talk back points” throughout, stations at which visitors can share their feelings on climate change or their ideas. Dispersed between species are stations where visitors can post note cards sharing their personal stories or use a touch screen to share their emotions, whether hopeful or helpless.

Visitors can see examples of cities around the world that are cutting their carbon footprints through innovative public transportation systems and religious groups that are working toward creating a better planet for children by using solar energy or growing gardens.

Erin Loury, a CSU graduate student from the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, was visiting the exhibit while planning a trip for teachers who would then incorporate climate change education into their curricula.

“It’s really great that people are getting to see animals they may have heard about but maybe not seen,” Loury said. “They have to care about something before they can care if it disappears.”

Why Hope?

If ocean species are on the path to disappearance, why try?

According to Nava, marine ecosystems have a vast potential for adaptability.

“Life is resilient,” Nava said. “Nature is very capable of adaptation — we know that. We can bounce back. The question is whether we are going to have enough time.”

This isn’t the first time that oceans, and Earth in general, have experienced climate change. But because of human activity and emissions, the rate of change is faster than in previous periods.

“In the past, we’ve seen changes in ocean temperature and chemistry. Those changes happened over millions of years. The difference is that [now] these changes are happening over hundreds of years,” Nava said.

Nava explained that although many scientists think there could be a point at which change is irreversible, that doesn’t mean giving up now.

Jim Barry, a senior scientist at MBARI, stated that despite evidence of changes already happening in the Monterey Bay, people should take action in any way to reduce their energy use and emissions.

“You sort of think about global warming as an on-off switch,” Barry said. “[But] it’s not global warming or no global warming — it’s how much global warming, and the more we do to conserve energy, to use alternative energy … the less warming we will see, and the slower warming will occur, so we will give ecosystems a better chance.”

At the end of the exhibit, visitors are asked to commit to do one thing in order to combat climate change — examples included bringing a reusable bag to the grocery store or skipping a hamburger to reduce methane emissions.

Visitors are rewarded with a video of their photo transposed onto a person carrying out their pledge.

One option is simply to talk about what they learned from the aquarium, an idea that Nava says encapsulates the goal of the exhibit.

“It’s a success to me if someone walks out of here and understands that their actions ripple out,” he said. “That’s the biggest thing anyone can take from this exhibit.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Seas of Change

The Santa Cruz community came out in the hundreds to take part in the Earth Day celebration. Photo by Andrew Allio.

A skyscraper made out of a beer bottle towers over cardboard streets. Drinking straw telephone poles run in front of an apartment building made of an upside down Burger King cup.

Students from Monarch Community School built this diorama from the litter they found around their school. Their project was part of a contest at Earth Day Santa Cruz, but it would have been hard to find signs of this dark future at the yearly Santa Cruz event.

In an effort to create zero-waste, the Earth Day coordinators implemented a variety of solutions, like a bike valet, a solar-powered sound system, and waste disposal stations with an option to compost.

Earth Day Santa Cruz is part of a larger nationwide event that was started in 1970 by Senator Gaylord Nelson in order to raise awareness about mounting environmental concerns.

Playing in front of solar panels the size of a small house, Peter Weiss, the Singing Scientist, sang the title song off his album “Do as you Otter.”

This main stage, where performers and speakers like Mayor Mike Rotkin made their appearances, ran entirely off of clean energy.

“[Solar power] actually runs the whole band … [it] is capable of doing all the energy needs,” said Casey McDonald, a representative from the local energy company and Earth Day sponsor, Solar Technologies.

People Power, an organization that encourages the use of human-powered transportation, offered free valet service. Thirty bikes, many of them with custom child carriers built onto the back, could be found neatly parked by volunteers.

“[The valet service] encourages people to take alternative ways to the Earth Day,” said Tawn Kennedy, who works with People Power to educate schools about modes of transportation like bicycles, skateboards, and scooters.

People Power also offered special bicycle blended smoothies, with proceeds going towards the initiative to promote bicycle culture in schools from elementary to college.

In addition to the extensive efforts to make Earth Day Santa Cruz a zero-waste event, many groups also worked to create a space of awareness about current environmental issues.

Molly Kirkpatrick, a steward with Save Our Shores, walked around Earth Day with a blue poncho covered in the different refuse she found while cleaning a variety of local beaches. She pointed out a pair of dentures that she discovered and a beer cozy that had travelled all the way from Minnesota.

“Our message is to try and avoid plastics as much as possible, because they don’t totally break down,” Kirkpatrick said.

Santa Cruz County agrees. Mark Stone, the Fifth District Supervisor, opened Earth Day with a speech that addressed past and future achievements in waste reduction.

“As you know, the county and all four cities — Santa Cruz, Capitola, Watsonville, and ScottsValley — have banned polystyrene in take-out containers from local restaurants and food services … and the county has recently put into motion, I’m very proud to announce, a plastic bag ban.”

Later that day, Monarch Community School won the third prize for its project that creatively displayed the litter around the school. The students triumphantly held a giant $200 check above their heads. The trash-filled dystopia they imagined in their diorama is likely to be sorted into the recycling.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Earth Day Aims for Zero-Waste

Photo by Morgan Grana.

A volunteer deposits a needle into the biohazard box. The needle shown was among several needles found that day. Photo by Morgan Grana.

A child drops a hypodermic needle into a biohazard box with a poster draped over it that reads “Save Our Shores.” The box is already host to several needles found at the beach that day. The child is volunteering at a cleanup on Main Beach, in front of the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Save Our Shores organizes cleanups throughout the year to preserve the local environment of the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary.

A Brief History

Save Our Shores is a local nonprofit organization based in Santa Cruz that organizes cleanups and raises awareness of threats to the marine ecosystem. Whether for monthly cleanups, where any community member can participate, or group cleanups, where specific organizations participate, Save Our Shores motivates the community to volunteer to preserve the marine environment in which they live. The organization’s pamphlet reads, “We show them how their actions affect the marine environment, and offer the choice to make a positive impact.”

Save Our Shores has served to facilitate a “thriving and healthy marine ecosystem as a result of an informed and compassionate public” in the Santa Cruz area since they fought offshore drilling on the central coast 20 years ago. In order to prevent offshore drilling, Save Our Shores has traveled across the state since 1985 to gather support for offshore drilling prohibition. The momentum the organization generated during their campaign across California provided support for the establishment of a National Marine Sanctuary. In 1992, the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was established, and since the sanctuary’s conception, the organization has influenced cleanup in the protected area they helped establish.

At their watershed cleanups, Save Our Shores provides volunteers with supplies for cleanup; such as receptacles for collecting trash along the waterways, gloves, the biohazard box, and cards to keep tally the types and quantity of trash found. Before letting the volunteers loose on the litter, a Save Our Shores representative gives a short presentation about the amount and types of trash found in marine ecosystems.

“It’s important to help the environment we live in, and especially because Santa Cruz is such a beach town, it is important to keep the ocean ecosystem thriving and healthy,” said Tori Lord, an intern with Save Our Shores and fourth-year environmental studies major.

Save Our Shores’ office sits on the harbor, its front windows looking out onto the sea of docked sailboats. Here, the nonprofit organizes monthly waterway cleanups throughout the Santa Cruz area, with both specific groups and the general community.

Last year, Save Our Shores collected over 26,000 pounds of trash and 9,000 pounds of recycling, a total that was reached by adding up the quantity of trash collected from all of the cleanups they run throughout the year.

Trash collected at local waterways contributes to this amount. Save Our Shore’s mantra, “Awareness, Advocacy, Action,” is now being directed at the rivers as well.

“We are starting to run more river cleanups, because they are in much worse condition,” said Emily Glanville, Program Manager at Save Our Shores. “We’re really focusing our education on pathways of pollution. I think we have gotten people to not litter on the beach, but we want to foster that kind of awareness for all watersheds.”

Photo by Morgan Grana.

A Shifting Focus

Save Our Shores has begun to focus on rivers and all waterways in the area because they eventually lead to the ocean and are contributing to the amount and type of debris found on the beaches and in the marine habitat.

“Our beaches are getting cleaner because we run a ton of beach cleanups. We hope that it is because of the awareness [we’ve raised],” Glanville said. “Our rivers are a different story. It is much easier to leave a mess at a river. I think that people have a hard time connecting the trash on the rivers and the harm that it causes.”

Despite Save Our Shores’ increased involvement in river cleanup, it has not decreased its involvement with ocean conservation. They still conduct the same number of ocean cleanups.

Glanville said that the high levels of traffic and people that frequent the rivers furthers the importance of their involvement with that endeavor. The debris found at the rivers includes heavier objects, such as tires, washers, dryers and other various household items. The trash typically found on the beaches usually consists of significantly lighter items, like cigarette butts and bits of paper.

Much of the garbage picked up at their beach cleanups — like the one at Main Beach — is in fact attributed to runoff from rivers. For example, the San Lorenzo River pours into the ocean at Main Beach and deposits trash from the river onto the shore.

Needles, like the one found at the Main Beach cleanup, are among the various types of copious amounts of trash found at watersheds and oceans throughout the Santa Cruz area. They indicate how the beaches and the rivers are connected.

“It’s weird, cigarette butts used to be the main thing, now we are finding more condoms and syringes,” said Jessica Glanz, an intern with Save Our Shores, as she stands behind the table, instructing volunteers on the proper methods of trash disposal at Main Beach. Glanz is a Clean Boating and Sustainable Seafood Intern with Save Our Shores and a third-year marine biology major at UC Santa Cruz.

Inhabitants along the rivers may be contributing to the increased presence of needles and other drug paraphernalia being found on the beaches.

“There might be a few people who use on the beach but it is from the homeless encampments on the river and then the river washes them into the ocean,” said Dennis Gagne, Save Our Shores volunteer.

Save Our Shores does not intervene with homeless encampments, but they do acknowledge the damaging effects of such infrastructure on the environment.

“We don’t ever break up homeless encampments. It’s a hard situation that I feel has not been addressed correctly,” Glanville said. “From an environmental perspective, it is bad to have people living along the river without bathrooms, but without the proper infrastructure coming from the city and county, there isn’t anywhere for these people to go.”

Many volunteers at the beach cleanup brought their children with them, and one volunteer braved bringing their stroller onto the sand. Photo by Morgan Grana.

Volunteers for Save Our Shores looked throughout the beach for tiny pieces of trash mixed in all with the wood. Photo by Morgan Grana.

Getting Their Hands Dirty

To facilitate community involvement, Save Our Shores works with community organizations ranging from grade school children to adult sport leagues, coordinating things like beach adoption. In the adoption process, an organization will adopt a local beach and then participate in a minimum number of beach cleanups at their locale.

One blustery February afternoon, at the cleanup aforementioned, nearly 30 Santa Cruz Roller Derby Girls and members of their families showed up to their newly adopted beach, Main Beach, to do one of the three mandatory beach clean-ups required as part of the adoption process. Main Beach is a place that many of the Derby Girls have frequented.

“A lot of our girls grew up here and have an affinity for the beach and keeping the beach cleaned up,” said Derby Girl Salt Ann Battery. “Having grown up here, a lot of us want to help out and because Santa Cruz supports us, we want to show that we are thankful and set an example of community support.”

The cleanup illustrated the intertwined relationships of the community, the beaches and the rivers.

Talking Trash

Save Our Shores works with groups of children frequently, and in light of the debris being found, volunteers are fearful for the youth present at the cleanups.

At the office, Kate Purcell, volunteer coordinator with Save Our Shores, described how the dangerous debris is especially a cause for concern at cleanups with school groups.

“Needles and syringes have increased and it is really worrisome for us, because we have so many school groups who go out,” Purcell said. “It is just scary.”

The possibility of needles and syringes lurking beneath the surface has prompted the staff at cleanups to make a request to children at play.

“Sometimes we recommend that kids don’t dig, because there might be hidden danger. To me, that’s just so sad,” Purcell said. “One of those quintessential childhood experiences is threatened because of the mess.”

Save Our Shores has each volunteer carefully mark what items they collect at cleanups to ensure a thorough bookkeeping of the type and amount of trash collected at each cleanup. The removal of syringes and needles factor in to keeping the beaches safe.

“The state beaches would be pretty dismal without the beach cleanups,” Purcell said. “Save Our Shores is really providing a service to the community. We’re keeping them safe. People don’t realize that cleaning the beaches keeps it safe for children.”

As of mid-March this year, Save Our Shores had collected a total of 2,764 pounds of trash, and 797.5 pounds of recycling at their 18 beach cleanups and 11 river cleanups.

Their close tally of the types of litter picked up at the cleanups allows them to generate accurate and helpful breakdowns of the data.

The top five items picked up at the cleanups, are as follows: 8,230 Styrofoam pieces, 6,545 plastic pieces, 4,025 cigarette butts, 2,503 plastic food wrappers, and 2,430 glass pieces.

The amount of trash that Save Our Shores removes from all watersheds reflects the organization’s role in continuing to preserve the sanctuary they fought so hard to establish 20 years ago. The nonprofit continues to preserve the community and ocean ecosystem that hundreds of marine animals and nearly 700,000 people that live along the Monterey Bay coast call home.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Saving the Sanctuary

Photo by Morgan Grana.

Gallons of precious water are wasted each day as they swirl down countless sinks and drains. Due to the heavy winter rainfall in Santa Cruz, it may be easy to take water for granted. In actuality, showers and faucets at UC Santa Cruz dorms and apartments make up 40.5 percent of the campus’ total water usage.

Sarah Finder, a second-year global economics major from College Nine, is transforming her passion and concern for the environment into action as she dives into a campus project documenting water usage.

“The goal of the project is to try to raise the awareness that we [as a campus] care about how we act in the community,” she said.

As a University Relations Good Neighbor intern, Finder aims to foster good relationships between the campus and the city of Santa Cruz.

Finder’s project, debuting this week, involves the distribution of mock water bills to students living in Crown and Merrill apartments.

The bills will be distributed three times during the quarter, displaying water usage for February, March and April. This billing will allow students to learn how much water they utilize per month and how much money they would realistically pay if they lived off-campus.

UCSC uses about 200 million gallons of water per year. According to the 2007 UCSC Water Efficiency Survey, the campus consumes 5 percent of the total Santa Cruz Water Department demand.

“I take water for granted. If I were told how much I use, I could cut down,” said Tyler Hunt, second-year economics major and resident of the Merrill apartments.

There is a great need to conserve water to keep housing fees from rising and to reduce the strain on the city water supply. Finder hopes increasing awareness about campus water use will help to create a more sustainable campus.

She created the mock water bills herself, taking the mean water readings of the 14 buildings and 92 apartments located in Crown and Merrill to calculate hypothetical costs.

Ian McDonald, the UCSC Energy Analyst, supplies Finder with information regarding water usage on campus. She has concluded that every cubic foot of water used costs approximately 10 cents.

Finder received initial help getting the word out about her project from Silas Snyder, the Safety, Training and Resource Conservation Coordinator. Snyder helped Finder to connect with Gabriela Alaniz, the Coordinator for Residential Education (CRE) for Merrill.

Alaniz asked Residential Advisors in Crown and Merrill to do the footwork of distributing the bills, creating an opportunity for the apartment residents to learn about their water consumption.

“I want to help out and share this information. In Santa Cruz, you see stickers in the bathroom telling you to conserve. Having enough water is a serious problem here,” Finder said.

Growing up in Nashville, Tennessee, Finder noticed that many residents did not focus on environmental awareness and saw little encouragement of conservation.

“I learned to be very conscious about water usage and recycling from my parents,” Finder said. “After talking to many of my peers, it was clear that not everyone knew about the importance [of these things]. I remember people would ask if we had to recycle, and I would say ‘Yeah! We have to!’ I was very surprised.”

Finder anticipates that many students will be persuaded to conserve when they receive the bills.

“I would like this to eventually reach all corners of campus, maybe even in the dorms,” Finder said. “I am envisioning this to be a regular thing.”

Finder is hoping to find other committees or interest groups focusing on sustainability and water conservation, such as the Green Campus Program (GCP), to help the distribution of mock water bills become a standard practice on campus.

So far, Alaniz said, Finder has been successful in achieving her goals. “Sarah has been doing an impressive job. Getting something done takes perseverance. I feel like this is a different way of educating students instead of just giving out tips,” Alaniz said. “It teaches that water is an important source in the country and it allows students who live on campus to see what it is like to be responsible for a bill and collecting money.”

Finder has high hopes for the project.

“Nothing is impossible,” she said. “People want to help students out. If you have a good idea, start talking.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at UCSC Water Going Down the Drain

1. the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline.
2. refers to the maximum rate of the production of oil in any area under consideration, recognizing that it is a finite natural resource, subject to depletion.
3. the end of the 21st century lifestyle.
4. a chance to be reborn.

Illustration by Joe Lai.

Homegrown harvests and bread baked by the family down the street. Medical care subsidized by local taxes and available to all residents of a municipality. Mixed-use housing, water catchment systems galore, walkable neighborhoods and thriving community connections.

Transition Santa Cruz, a citizen coalition that educates and acts on the principles of personal and community resilience in a future devoid of cheap oil, believes all of these and much more are possible in a post -petroleum world.

Assiduous, relentless, and, above all, positive, they want the city to be ready for the biggest crisis facing the mechanized world: the redefining moment when oil will no longer be the ubiquitous source of energy it has become.

“The crisis is inevitable,” said Michael Levy, a core coordinator for Transition Santa Cruz and a local music teacher, referring to peak oil. “But there are things we can prevent from happening.”

These ‘things’ include, but aren’t limited to: the collapse of the world’s economies (the current crisis will pale in comparison when the fossil fueled, globalized financial system loses easy access energy), famine, civil war (over what oil is left) and, quite possibly, human extinction.

In the face of these hard-to-swallow potentialities, almost all of Transition Santa Cruz’s 450 members are looking on the bright side. They see a break with oil as an opportunity to redefine society on more prudent terms.

Levy, initially frightened by the visions of the world foreshadowed by global warming hypothesizers, stumbled upon Transition and was immediately hooked.

“I saw people having fun. It’s a realistic movement,” Levy said. “I made the decision to see the world in terms of possibility. I don’t think it pays to see the world as probability.”

Transition Santa Cruz, which is a satellite of the international Transition movement that first sprouted up in England four years ago, is staying true to the literal meaning of their name: in order to effectively phase out fossil fuels and make the changes stick, the process must be gradual and organic.

“You don’t have to go around and say, ‘Peak oil is coming! We have to do something!’” Levy explained. Instead, he recommends we begin by building resilient communities where neighbors can rely on one another and individuals are prepared for life without cheap oil.

Levy went on to say that Transition has always been a grassroots effort and that there is a gap between citizen solutions and government rhetoric, a realm where it is unpopular to speak publicly about diminishing energy supplies and halted economic growth.

“There’s no way to have a growing economy with shrinking energy,” he said.

Until there is enough popular support for weaning municipalities off oil, government is going to drag its feet and cover its ears.

Some, however, are listening.

City council member Don Lane, sipping a steaming cup of green tea and gingerly placing his bike helmet on the wooden bench next to him, has attended a handful of Transition meetings.

“Transition is really very practical about what you can do,” he said, praising the group’s positive pragmatism. “People are held back by that ‘What can I really do?’ attitude.”

Lane decided that what he could do was start a home garden, which he says produces copious amounts of lettuce, among other veggies. It took some grunt work, but for him the payoff is worth it, especially when he shares his crops with his neighbors.

He agrees with Levy that peak oil isn’t the most politically savvy subject for politicians to breach, especially when the economy is such a touchy topic. Santa Cruz, though, as the Mecca of conscious living it purports to be, has been quite progressive in terms of city planning and policies.

“We are starting a program to finance people putting solar panels on their roof,” Lane said. “We need to let things be built near neighborhoods – the classic example is small community grocery stores that people can walk and bike to.”

Lane’s favorite proposal is the creation of a high-capacity transportation system between UC Santa Cruz and the downtown area that would cut down on traffic and carbon emissions.

Lane also believes that lasting change won’t come about by mandating what people should and shouldn’t do.

“If it happens fast, then it isn’t truly transitional and won’t last,” he said. “The city government can play a supportive role and facilitate things that are already happening on the grassroots level.”

Neighborhood Ne Plus Ultra

Oil discovery peaked in 1964, meaning that over the last 65 years the number of new oil reserves has declined precipitously. Most experts agree that oil production — the amount of barrel-bound petroleum — peaked in mid-2008. From now on, they say, oil will become increasingly harder to find, both in the ground and, consequently, in the greater marketplace. At the moment, we are using five barrels for every one we discover, a rate that is impossible to sustain for much longer.

Responses to this predicament include everything from survivalist retreat to reluctant surrender to militant denial.

Transition takes a different approach.

“I just see, on the horizon, that culturally and economically, we’re going to have to learn to live within the means of our environment,” Aviva Longenatti, a member, said. “I see Transition as a hopeful, positive way we can live within on our means.”

She posed a question that seems to sum up Transition’s seminal philosophy: “Instead of worrying about what we’re going to give up and live without, what can we do within Santa Cruz county to sustain ourselves?”

Longenatti is spearheading the Neighborhood Working group, one of three smaller, singularly-focused action teams within the larger movement. Her husband, Rick, is the coordinator for the Land Use Working group, and Michael Weaver heads the biggest one, which focuses on food.

“It’s about getting to know the people on our block,” Longenatti said of her working group’s goals, “getting to know each other and support each other, to reconnect with people we live two feet from.”

Reinventing the wheel is not what Transition is about. Though they want to see society dance to a different beat, the group feels all the answers are right next door.

Using what tools are at hand, “reskilling” is a major component of the movement, emphasizing a back to basics, empirical education that provides for the needs of day-to-day living. Transition holds classes on building rainwater catchment systems, forging, compost toilets and carpentry — all skills geared toward preparing members for an era deplete of fossil fuels.

Because meals won’t be able to travel the great distances they currently average before they land on dinner plates, and commuting to and from jobs many miles away will become nearly impossible, “re-localization” is a second major prong of the Transition plan. This is probably the most widely recognized precept of the movement and extends beyond the “Buy Local” mantra to cover other fundamental necessities like health care and currency.

Personal preparedness is tantamount to Transition’s vision of the future, but without resilient communities, that future will be bleak.

Levy and Longenatti both believe that the re-establishment of personal relationships represents the only way humanity will make it through the peak oil crisis. Both of them say that an added benefit of getting to know one another, aside from simple survival, is the enriched personal life that comes with a sense of communal belonging.

“The neighborhood is a great size, in a way,” Longenatti said. “People talk about change on a grand scale, but a neighborhood is like an extended family…It’s a more human scale.”

And until the government catches up, neighborhoods represent the only place where transformation can take root and grow.

“There [do] need to be policies, yes — nationally and locally — to make change,” council member Lane said. “But we need to start at home.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Power Positive

Summer 2009 is almost here, and everyone knows what that means: people from all over the world will be stampeding to the beaches in Santa Cruz to enjoy some of the most beautiful coastal scenery in California. There is no feeling quite like the one you get when you are standing on the cliffs at Seabright Beach, looking down at the pristine white sands, beautiful people and deep greenish-blue of the ocean. 

What you probably don’t notice is the amount of trash piling up beneath the blankets and umbrellas. One of the largest threats to the health of our beaches is marine debris, which is trash that ends up in the sea either from land-based or ocean-based sources. In the past 50 years this problem has worsened due to the increased use of convenient plastic containers rather than reusable ones. Cigarette butts, plastic and glass bottles, aluminum cans and every other forgotten piece of trash left on the beaches of Santa Cruz every day by the throngs of visitors diminishes the landscape’s postcard perfection.   

We are not the only ones who have to deal with the consequences of marine debris. Every year, an estimated 100,000 birds, sea turtles, dolphins, whales, seals and other animals will ingest plastic debris or become entangled in it. Everything from lighters to small toys has been found in animals washed up on the beach, who were just trying to eat and survive. 

Plastic material is mainly responsible for the ongoing massacre of marine animals, forever floating around brightly-colored and appealing to hungry creatures. Americans each use about 200 pounds of plastic every year, and that number is predicted to become 300 by the end of the decade. With our reckless use of this long-lived petroleum product, it’s no wonder that the environment is suffering. 

By now, many people have heard of the horrifying North Pacific Gyre trash heap in all its plastic splendor: a mass of trash the size of Texas in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, containing an estimated 3.5 million tons of trash. There is not a better visual example of the consequences of our careless use of plastics than the garbage patch. 

The amount of trash on Santa Cruz beaches is staggering, but there are many dedicated locals who don’t mind cleaning up the mess. The annual International Coastal Cleanup Day happens every summer at beaches all over the world. Last year, over 3,000 volunteers cleaned up 10,200 pounds of trash off of the beaches in Santa Cruz County alone. Worldwide, people from 104 different countries picked up 6.8 million pounds of trash from their beaches, rivers and streams. 

The good news is that it’s not too late to diminish our impact on our coastal environment. The main action that we should all take is simply to use fewer plastic containers. Be aware of your surroundings on the beach, keep track of the trash that you end up with and make sure that you pack it up when you leave. If you smoke, don’t throw your cigarette butt away in the sand. These simple actions could save thousands of marine animals’ lives and keep the beaches in Santa Cruz looking beautiful. 

There are several organizations in Santa Cruz dedicated to keeping the beaches clean and looking for volunteers to help. Save our Shores has been organizing coastal clean-ups in communities of California for the past 30 years. Pack Your Trash is another agency promoting the health of the coastline with their anti-littering campaigns, and is located on Pleasure Point.

So when you trip down to the beach this summer, just remember to leave it how you found it — you’re not the only one enjoying the sun, sand and surf.

By Kathleen Mullen-Ley 
Fourth-year environmental studies major

~~~~~

We are eager to hear your opinions, so please e-mail editors@cityonahillpress.com. Letters should be around 250 words, and ideally will have to do with recent CHP content. We reserve the right to print, or not print, anything we receive.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Letters to the Editor

Illustration by Joe Lai.

The end of spring marks a time that many seniors either dread or embrace: graduation. 

For some, graduate school is around the bend, while others are looking to start their careers. At College Eight, no matter what students’ next step may be, they are asked to take into consideration more than just their future goals.

“Given the theme of College Eight, being ‘Environment and Society,’ I thought it was appropriate to bring [the pledge] to the attention of the college,” said Mike Kittredge, College Eight programs coordinator. “Then I brought it to the attention of our senior graduation committee last year and they decided to run with it and make it part of the College Eight commencement.”

Kittredge helped incorporate the Graduation Pledge Alliance (GPA) into College Eight’s commencement ceremony last year. 

The pledge that all College Eight graduates have the option of taking states: “I pledge to explore and take into account the social and environmental consequences of any job I consider and will try to improve these aspects of any organizations for which I work.” 

For graduating legal studies major Ryan Estes, this pledge is much more than just an empty promise.

“I’m going to grow up to be a corporate lawyer,” Estes said. “So when I take this pledge I take it to not go join a company like ENRON or Washington Mutual, or go work for a company that’s going to go destroy all the rainforests of the world. I’m just talking about a sense of high moral standards.”

Currently, UCSC is the only UC campus to partake in this pledge and College Eight is the only college that has proactively worked to have its graduating class take the pledge.

Fourth-year environmental studies major Jessica Wackenhut believes that all colleges should be making their graduating students more aware of the pledge.

“I think it’s important for all colleges to do something like this because it is one of those things,” Wackenhut said. “Most of the colleges are engaged in social issues like globalization or social justice, so it’s important for everyone to be knowledgeable or take this into consideration when going into their future careers. They need to think about social justice and environmental issues and sustainability in general.”

College Eight’s incorporation of the pledge into its ceremony is unique, even for institutions that participate in the pledge.

“There’s not many [institutions] that actually incorporate the pledge into their ceremony,” Kittredge said. “The way we do it is that we ask students who have either taken it or plan to take it stand and be recognized by the audience.”

Kittredge recalls how he first learned about the pledge when he worked as clubs, activities and new student programs officer at Humboldt State University, one of the first institutions to participate in the pledge.

At Humboldt State, students would table in their quads to raise awareness about the pledge and inform other students about how they could take it. For College Eight seniors, taking the pledge is as easy as going online to the college’s commencement website. Estes and Wackenhut, both part of College Eight’s graduation committee, will also table at rehearsal and on graduation day to ensure that every senior who wants to take the pledge can and will.

“I feel like [students] are not really informed about it at all yet,” Estes said. “It’s only its second year, so only the graduating class hears of it actually. They might want to think about telling the freshmen when they first come in, that when they graduate they’ll have a chance to be part of the GPA.”

However, Kittredge stresses that the pledge is a personal decision and students will by no means be held accountable.

“It’s just a voluntary pledge. No one follows up with them to say, ‘You’re doing this and you’re not doing that,’” Kittredge said. “I think it’s more a statement of value, of someone’s individual values and choices.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at College Eight Graduates Pledge to Retain Ethics

What if a shovel, a seed and a conversation could change the world?

Students of University Repair find themselves asking such questions every day.

University Repair is a project founded by students of the Kresge Garden Co-op, and acts as a class that tends to and upkeeps the Kresge Garden. The group holds weekly World Café meetings where students discuss themes relating to educational and environmental issues important to the university.

Self-proclaimed as a “thriving powerhouse of creativity and abundance,” University Repair incorporates gardening and conversation with the students’ vision of a “regenerative culture.” This vision means focusing in on the cultivation of an abundant, thriving, and self-perpetuating social and ecological community. Inspired by the collaborative and community-based initiatives of both the garden and the café, these regenerative visions are becoming a reality.

“[University Repair] is truly experiencing a renaissance, a rapidly growing number of individuals and groups involved with what we are doing,” said second-year Ryan Abelson, an environmental studies major, teaching assistant for the Kresge co-op class and participant in the World Café. “The increased amount of human interest has allowed for the creative imagination of the collective intelligence to flourish in many unique directions.”

The Campus Sustainability Council (CSC) collaborates with the university to finance environmentally friendly and sustainability-promoting organizations on campus, according to a UC Santa Cruz Student Union Assembly (SUA) description. A ballot measure passed in 2005, meant to ensure and improve the quality of campus sustainability, charges students $6 in student fees each quarter to fund these types of environmentally friendly efforts. The CSC then allocates this sum of money to various organizations bi-annually. 

After seeing a recent increase in interest and activity in their program, University Repair students sent in a grant proposal to the CSC on April 30.  They asked for $35,000 of the total measure money.

If they secure the grant money, University Repair will be able to purchase new tools for the Kresge gardening class, remove dead oak trees, expand the co-op class, provide TA and faculty stipends, and improve garden infrastructure overall. The money would also help expand the World Café program to other colleges across campus, increase the size of their gatherings, and sponsor similar universitywide forums.

“I see it as a generous thank-you gift or investment from our tuition fees back into the hands of students, so we can create the change we see and desire,” Abelson said.

The Kresge Garden

The Kresge Garden was created during the late 1970s and early 1980s by students and volunteers. Since then, the garden has seen periods of fallow and flourish. With the creation of the Kresge Garden co-op and class in 2007, students and faculty have witnessed the garden’s immense growth. Every year, the class has grown in size, with 29 students currently enrolled. 

First-year Ayden Graham, a music major enrolled in the co-op class for the first time this quarter, has seen and tasted the fruits of hard labor through the work he has done.          

“It’s been delightful,” Graham said. “It’s cool to look around and see, ‘Oh yeah, I planted that entire bed right there. I dug and planted it, and it’s going really well.’” 

However, the growth in student interest has caused a lack of available resources. Many of the tools used in the garden have either been donated or scavenged by the students themselves. As of now, there is only one completely functional watering can. 

Though a seemingly simple request, second-year University Repair student Phineas Ellis suggested that achieving sustainable goals will be very difficult without more gardening tools. 

“If we’re working towards sustainability, I think everyone should know how to garden, or at least have an opportunity to do that, to work with a shovel,” Ellis said, “but we don’t have enough shovels.” 

Dave Shaw, instructor of the class, said that new tools are vital if the co-op’s visions of expansion are to be fulfilled.

“For the garden to grow with ease and grace it’s necessary to have the right tools,” he said. “Will our project be stopped if we don’t have funds for the best quality tools? No, it will continue, because it’s not dependent upon any outside force. It will grow. But in what way? How easy and graceful will it be?” 

With the money, students at the garden intend to maximize their efficiency. Though certain tools such as watering cans and forged bulldog spades must be bought brand-new, other tools will be purchased at flea markets or through Craigslist.com.

First-year Anna Capurso has been involved with the garden since winter quarter and is now a teaching assistant for the co-op class. She said that the grant money would help students focus more on gardening and less on finding ways around faulty materials.

“[The grant] would … allow us to focus on expanding the vision even more, rather than attempting to find outside resources and continue to work with broken tools,” she said. “It would just ease the process.”

Included in Capurso’s and other students’ vision for the co-op is the plan to help other colleges have thriving community gardens of their own.

“I would like to see every college have a thriving garden, as well as a class to accompany it and teach incoming students the ways of gardening,” she said. “I see the Kresge Garden co-op as a foundation for the other gardens … we can lend our time and resources.”

The World Café

The World Café began in 2007 as an avenue to gather students on a weekly basis and serve as a collaborative space for all students to dialogue about campus issues, which University Repair sees as a vital step toward enacting change in UCSC.

“The World Café is the time to put the shovels down and use our most fundamental of tools: the power of conversation,” Abelson said. “When the body is well-fed it becomes a lot easier to entertain a dialogue around current meaningful issues.”

Every week a new topic is discussed, ranging from sustainability to budget cuts proposed by the administration.

On May 12, students and faculty members gathered to discuss the cuts that the community studies program may face next year. Posters pinned along the walls provided thought-provoking quotes and phrases. One of them, from Mark Twain, read “Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned.”

First-year Amelia Baker, a community studies major herself, has been integral to the writing and submitting of the grant proposal. She led the May 12 meeting and continues to take an active role in both the café and the garden.

“All you’re really doing when you host a World Café is providing a space and a time for people to connect,” Baker said. “It always turns out interesting. Most of the work is in just showing up.”

Though those involved say these café meetings will continue regardless of whether the grant goes through or not, the grant funds would help to strengthen and enlarge their gatherings.

“It is truly a rare place in which we all become teachers and students to listen and also share personal involvement, concerns or knowledge,” Abelson said. “The creative collective intelligence really has no boundaries to imagine when a positive place of nonviolent equality and good food and tea is created, which is exactly what we aim to create in the garden as well.”

A Regenerative Culture

The University Repair project describes itself as “an incubator for projects which regenerate themselves.” A large theme of the grant proposal revolves around the idea of “integrated eco-social design,” a concept that plans to “integrate ecological and social elements of sustainability to build a regenerative culture at UCSC.”

Dimitri “Dima” Zadorozhny does not take the Kresge co-op class for credit, but has contributed an immense amount of time toward the writing of the grant proposal and frequently works on improving the quality of the garden. He regularly attends World Café meetings, where he takes an active role in the discussions.

“Regenerative culture is a concept that builds on the concept of ‘sustainability,’” Zadorozhny said. “While sustainability simply means being able to use something over and over without depleting it, regenerative culture means being able to use something over and over in a way that allows it to grow more abundant, and there is actually more of it because of your interaction with it.”

This is University Repair’s ultimate goal: to create a culture that is regenerative, thriving, and constantly growing through self-perpetuation — rather than a culture that merely sustains. 

In order to spread this message to the greater UCSC community, University Repair hopes to use some of the grant money to develop a quarterly workshop designed to teach gardening skills and provide seeds to interested students. A similar workshop, planned for the winter quarter of 2010 — pending grant approval — would teach students tree-growing techniques and provide them with a tree of their own.

“I don’t want to just sustain the garden, I want the garden to be regenerating so each year it is fertile and every year there is more and more,” University Repair student Ellis said. “The grant will help this place be that much more effective in what it does.”

Ayden Graham commented on the regenerative lessons he’s learned since starting his work in the garden and attending the World Café meetings.

“It’s really exciting to understand [gardening] because I feel like even with this small amount of knowledge that I’ve gained here, I can take plants and plant them in a small plot in a backyard whenever,” Graham said. “I get a house, and start a garden.” 

Visions of the Future 

Though at print time it was still undecided whether or not the grant would pass, students optimistically looked to the future. 

While teaching assistant Capurso, like many of the students involved with University Repair, hopes to see money sent toward the gardening program and the World Café, she said that the vision of the gardeners will remain strong regardless of whether the group secures the grant funds.

“I believe that we would still be completely functional and continue to grow without funding,” Capurso said. “We are a determined group of people and we can accomplish a lot.”

Instructor Dave Shaw believes that while the money is important, the opportunity to establish a relationship with the CSC is a bigger step toward fulfilling their long-term goals.

“The fact that we’re building a core group of interested participants and the fact that we’re in a conversation now with more stakeholders … is super important,” Shaw said.

Zadorozhny agreed that though the grant is important, other things are more important than the money, and the group members will do whatever it takes to keep the garden growing.

“If we don’t get the grant, things will definitely keep going,” Zadorozhny said. “It’ll just be trickier. We’ll have to get more creative.” 

University Repair holds potluck meetings each Monday from 5 to 6 p.m. The World Café meets every Tuesday at 7 p.m. Both meetings are located in the Kresge Student Lounge. The Kresge Garden is open weekdays from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. For more information, visit theworldcafe.com.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Beyond Sustainability

Photo by Isaac Miller.

Craig Pearson hates plastic. 

It’s 9 a.m. on a brisk and windy morning at the Santa Cruz landfill, where a fence bordering an exposed mound of garbage is lined with Pearson’s archnemesis: single-use plastic bags.

“We just cleaned this fence off earlier this morning and look at it now,” Pearson said. “There’s gotta be hundreds more now.”

As Superintendent of Waste Disposal for the city of Santa Cruz, Pearson has been fighting an uphill battle against plastic, and everything else Santa Cruz residents throw away, for 20 years.

“Plastic, plastic, plastic,” Pearson said with a grimace. “There’s no reason people should be using that.”

But use it we do, and in massive quantities. 

According to a recent special report on waste by The Economist, the average American produces over 700 kg, or 1,500 lbs, of trash per year. Landfills house the remnants of our wasteful habits and consumption patterns, with every plastic cup, candy wrapper, popcorn bag, sushi container, toothpaste tube and plastic fork that we buy, use and throw away every day with little thought. 

With a growing population, increasingly threatened planet, and ever-shrinking supply of habitable land, it seems that wasteful habits cannot be sustainable forever. There simply will not always be enough space to cast off our refuse. 

Modern waste habits are driven by one-time-use convenience, said environmental studies professor Margaret Fitzsimmons, whose research focuses on resource management.

“In terms of domestic waste, packaging is the major component,” Fitzsimmons said. “People are too accustomed to the convenience of just picking a package up and then throwing it away.”

Photo by Isaac Miller.

The Inner Workings of Waste

At the Santa Cruz landfill, Pearson is running an independent enterprise unfunded by tax revenues, and his precious commodity is space. He operates what is called a “sanitary landfill,” meaning the waste must be covered.

“If I can smash it, push it down, or put a ton of garbage in a cubic yard, that’s more profit for me,” Pearson said.

The fact that waste even has to be managed in such a space-conscious manner is somewhat of a modern phenomenon, and serves as a testament to how much waste we actually produce. The Santa Cruz landfill began as an “open canyon dump” in 1926, into which residents freely disposed of their waste. Because of the volume of trash today, the site must be carefully regulated, managed and spatially calculated to ensure room for future generations’ trash.

“I don’t think people really realize the ‘end’ of their stuff,” Pearson said.

That “end” is located just two miles north of Santa Cruz off Highway 1. If it weren’t for the persistent squawking of seagulls, a visitor to the area might not even realize he or she is standing on a literal mountain of garbage, over 80 years in the making. 

This constant barrage of garbage means that the more trash Pearson can divert, or keep out of the landfill, the longer the site will have open space to keep running.

“We’re so regulated and it’s so expensive to run a landfill, we find it’s cheaper to recycle,” Pearson said.

Santa Cruz has a somewhat efficient rate of diversion. Sixty percent of everything that is produced in the city of Santa Cruz is diverted from the landfill for beneficial reuses including recycling, composting, e-waste and scrap metals, Pearson said. 

The landfill is constructed in a series of “cells” that are engineered and subsequently filled with garbage one at a time and then covered. Carefully planned and measured, these cells are constructed by a team of soil experts, geologists and engineers who seek to maximize space and minimize environmental impact. One cell can be 40 feet wide, 100 feet long, and 100 feet deep and can last anywhere from five to 10 years before being covered. 

There are two major environmental issues that every modern landfill is forced to deal with: methane production and water contamination, Pearson said.

To tackle methane production, which occurs when garbage decomposes in an anaerobic environment, methane wells sequester the substance, which is then either harnessed in an energy facility or destroyed by flaring it off.

To prevent “leachate,” or contaminated water, from entering the groundwater systems, the bottom of the cells are lined with impermeable clay soil or plastic sheeting. Once the cells are full of trash, they are covered with clay soil, mulch and seedlings from organic compost matter to prevent soil erosion. 

The end result is a landscape that resembles rolling grassy hills, except the hills are massive piles of our trash.

Photo by Isaac Miller.

Waste Watchers

People’s refuse has always served as an indicator of what day-to-day life was like at any given time in history. Anthropology professor Judith Habicht-Mauche, whose research focus is in archeology, explains that “garbology,” or the study of modern trash from an archeological perspective, is widely used to study the material culture of today’s society.

“I think that garbage tells a lot about who we are,” Habicht-Mauche said. “It tells us about the material remains of our day-to-day life.”

Just last year, Santa Cruzans threw away 52 thousand tons of trash — excluding recyclables and organics, which are diverted from the landfill. From a garbologist’s perspective, the contents of our landfill might reveal the underlying values and trends of our community. To Pearson, the contents of his landfill often reveal how careless people can be when kicking something to the can.

“I have to pay someone $20 an hour to clean up other people’s garbage,” Pearson said as he watched employees filter through what is supposed to be a pile of organic waste. “I mean, why do you throw [plastic] in a green waste can? Is it because you’re cheap, uneducated, lazy — it’s ridiculous.”

Habicht-Mauch explained that the carelessness people tend to have when it comes to their disposal habits, in addition to its universal presence in human society, is part of the reason why trash can be so informative.

“Archeologists will often say how democratic garbage is,” Habicht-Mauch said. “It tells us about everyone’s life because everyone gets represented in garbage. We can see rich people, poor people, men and women, young and old.”

Furthermore, when it comes to people’s consumption habits — what they eat, as well as what they buy and then don’t eat — trash is honest when people often are not.

“[Trash] tells us about what we do, not what we say we do,” Habicht-Mauche said.

Photo by Isaac Miller.

Cutting Down the Crap

It is becoming increasingly clear to environmentalists that our unsustainable habits cannot continue unabated. 

As the Waste Prevention campaign coordinator for the Student Environmental Center (SEC), second-year student Nicky Chronis seeks to change the way that students think about what they buy and consume.

“Everyone is so busy that I think they feel justified in not caring about it,” Chronis said. “I’m taking into account future generations and I don’t want them to face the consequences of what I’m throwing away now.”

The SEC campaign encourages the university to make more responsible purchasing decisions, such as 100 percent post-consumer recycled paper. It also promotes waste-free campus events, starting with the summer 2008 new student orientation going zero-waste for the first time.

Silas Snyder serves as the resource conservation coordinator for university housing services at UCSC and works closely with waste reduction committees at the various colleges to reduce the amount of trash that we truck to the landfill. Snyder said that the solution is part individual, part systematic.

“Part of it is a global effort — don’t put anything in the trash, reduce, buy in bulk, etc.,” Snyder said. “The other part of it is providing individuals with the opportunity to properly process their waste through recycling.”

At the university level, the University of California Office of the President has outlined a systemwide waste policy that plans a zero-waste UC system by the year 2020. Snyder said UCSC is currently at a 50 percent diversion rate, expected to increase to 75 percent by 2012.

Zero waste is an ambitious goal for such a large system, and both Snyder and Chronis consider a comprehensive and in-house composting system on campus vital to achieving that goal. 

The recent introduction of trayless dining in the campus dining halls cut down food waste from 3 to 4 ounces per plate to 1.75 ounces per plate, Chronis said. However, only the College Eight dining hall is equipped with a food pulper to convert this wasted food into compostable material, which is then outsourced to a local farmer. Chronis explained that in order to achieve zero waste, the school cannot continue sending its compost off-site.

“We produce so much compost as it is that the city can’t even handle taking it all,” Chronis said.

There is a long way to go, but a rapidly changing planet requires our commitment, Snyder said.

“The students who are going to be here when we have to be zero-waste are second-graders right now,” he said. “Can you imagine all the climactic change, landfills filling up, and ocean pollution that’s going to occur until then? It’s going to be a very different place.”

It is this kind of mindful awareness of waste that Pearson hopes will become more prevalent. Indeed, for someone who spends his days surrounded by the trash of 60,000 people, Pearson has managed to not resign himself to the fact that humans are driven to degrade the earth. In addition to abolishing the reviled single-use plastic bag, Pearson hopes people will begin to think less about one-time convenience, and more about reuse.

“It’s a circle, you can’t have something that goes in a straight line and stops,” Pearson said. “People have to start thinking that way in everything they buy and use.”

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at Talking Trash: The Truth About What we Waste

  

Photo courtesy of Dennis Schwartz.

On April Fools’ Day, Daniel Press, the head of the environmental studies department, wrote an opinion piece in the San Jose Mercury News deriding UCSC’s recent purchases of renewable energy certificates, calling them a “feel-good scam” and saying that the school, which purchased certificates for 57,000 megawatt-hours of clean energy in 2007, “was getting fleeced by green-energy scammers.” Despite the cover date, however, his piece was no joke, and it was completely wrong.

In 2006, UCSC students voted to raise their tuition by $3 in order to purchase renewable energy certificates to reduce the carbon footprint of the school’s electricity use. Because its utility, PG&E, doesn’t have a green power program that would allow the school to pay extra for a greener mix, the school chose to buy certificates. In 2006, they were for California-based geothermal power. In 2007, over half came from California wind, the rest from a mixture of biomass in Florida and wind in Oklahoma, Texas, and the Dakotas.

In his piece, Press said “certificate brokers have persuaded hundreds of colleges to buy the ‘environmental attributes’ of wind, landfill gas and solar energy – but not the electricity itself.” And he is exactly right. Renewable energy certificates are a market-based answer to a simple physics problem that Press understands well: once electricity is on the grid, you can’t route “clean” electrons to those who pay extra for it and away from those who don’t.

Part of that has to do with the sheer complexity of the electric grid. With the need to respond instantly to shifts in demand and the lack of ability to store energy, the grid is a deeply intertwined, delicate system, cobbled together from midcentury infrastructure designed to service always-on coal plants and the comparatively recent additions of intermittent renewable resources like wind and solar. It’s a mixed-up, tumbled-around creature, and the power you get out of the outlet under your desk is a mashup of electrons from any number of sources, much like a cup of water dipped from a river formed by a thousand small tributaries. Trying to divine where each drop came from is impossible.

Normally we don’t care about the details – the lights turn on just the same whether the electricity was generated from coal plants, wind power, or gerbil wheels. But now that we’re demanding cleaner electricity from renewable resources, we want to be able to pay extra to get our electrons from the wind and sun, not belching smokestacks. By paying extra for green power, so the argument goes, it should incite investors to build renewable energy, which is more expensive to build than fossil fuel plants and has a longer payback time. But if we can’t route green power straight to our homes, how can we give people and universities the ability to send an unequivocal economic signal to build more wind farms and solar arrays?

The idea, first instituted in the late 1990s, was a pretty revolutionary one, and went like this: assign every megawatt hour of clean energy a unique serial number (a certificate), and then sell the certificate as the sole claim to that generation, but independent of the actual electrons. That way the wind farm has two things it can sell: first, the undifferentiated electricity (it’s not “wind power” anymore) to the local utility, and second, all the good environmental benefits of that electricity embodied in the certificate, which can then be sold to the highest bidder on national commodities markets. The final buyer (say, UCSC) has sole claim over the renewable attributes, and once the transaction takes place, the serial number is retired so no one else – not the state it was generated in, or even the owner of the wind farm – can claim the environmental benefits of that megawatt hour.

There’s no other system quite like it, but it works. Individuals and companies can buy renewable energy whether their utility offers it or not, and renewable energy generators get paid for more than just the electricity they produce. They are compensated for the environmental benefits we all enjoy. Before this system of certificates, our common natural resources were given away free to industry to use up and pollute, and there was no financial gain in avoiding the environmental pillaging that was fully allowable by law. The system of renewable energy certificates is an artificial system, but it’s effective as both a way to monetize the act of not polluting, and to incentivize new renewable development. All this in a market-based system of commodity trading where the market determines the price.

And here are the results: wind power capacity has grown on average by 24 percent per year in the U.S. since 2000, 46 percent in 2007 and over 50 percent in 2008. Certificate prices rise and fall but have trended sharply upward over the last decade, improving financing options for new facilities. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, in the last decade households and businesses collectively have provided a larger market for new renewable energy developers than all state government renewable programs combined, and these voluntary purchases support more than 4,000 MW of new renewable energy capacity nationally, steadily increasing over time. Every state uses certificates to track their renewable energy generation and progress toward their renewable energy goals, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recognizes big purchasers of renewable energy like UCSC and Intel as part of its Green Power Partnership program.

Columbia Energy Partners, a developer of wind energy projects in the northwest, finds certificates are crucial for getting new projects in the ground. “Wind projects are immensely capital intensive, often requiring funds way in advance of project development,” they said. “As wind turbines are becoming more and more expensive, you have to have every revenue stream on the back-end to cover your costs. Renewable energy certificates are critical to our projects. Apart from the financial imperatives, in the presence of global warming, any incentive for renewable energy only makes sense.”

Basin Electric Power Cooperative, a utility purchaser of wind energy in North Dakota, has a similar story. “We started out planning for one turbine, but then when we started seeing the interest from the U.S. government and from [consumers] in purchasing renewable energy certificates, we decided that we could build more wind. Certificates make wind competitive with coal or other traditional forms of energy.”

Because of its purchases, UCSC is No. 6 on the U.S. EPA’s Green Power Partnership Top 20 College & University list, just below the entire California State University system. Chancellor Blumenthal is a signatory of the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment, a pledge by over 600 college and university presidents to at least partly reduce their schools’ environmental impacts by purchasing or producing at least 15 percent of their institutions’ electricity consumption from renewable sources. The only way this purchasing can be done is through certificates, and in purchasing 100 percent renewable energy, the school has done far more than the minimum required by the commitment.

President Obama’s energy plan calls for increasing the nation’s use of renewable energy to 25 percent by 2025, up from the current 2 percent. Twenty-five percent might not sound like much, considering the urgency of the climate crisis, and it is far less than the 100 percent goal Al Gore challenged the nation to last year, but getting there will take all the political will, private investment, and public action we can muster.

This means that we have to start cutting back on our energy use and buying renewable energy now, just as the school is doing. Renewable energy sales last year to individuals and businesses were responsible for more demand than all the state goals put together, and we need both markets if we’re going to build enough renewable energy to wean ourselves off foreign supplies, stop destructive coal mining, and stave off the coming climate crisis. Along with reducing our overall energy use, buying renewable energy is one of the most important environmental steps we can take, and UCSC should be commended for doing both. Keep it up.

 —–

Jeff Swenerton is communications director of the Center for Resource Solutions, a San Francisco-based nonprofit working to advance sustainable energy. He can be contacted at jeff@resource-solutions.org.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at UCSC is a Green Power Leader

A glance at the food labels in any given dining hall would prove our campus chummy with the organic movement. We utilize gardens and food co-ops, and we even have compost stations at all 10 colleges. So, we’re doing all we can, right?

Wrong.

However environmentally conscious we strive to be, there are still copious amounts of food waste and trash at the end of the day, each and every day. Right now, our campus has a diversion rate of about 50 percent, meaning that half of all the waste we produce goes to beneficial reuses like compost or recycling. The other half takes a one-way trip to the dump.

So it’s true, we are flexing our greener muscles. But it’s time to up our game and get more aggressive. A friendly gesture toward a greener tomorrow simply is not enough anymore. A few random compost bins here and there won’t cut it. 

The UC Office of the President has put forth a goal for future waste practices UC-wide, hoping to up our current diversion rate to 75 percent by 2012 and dump only a quarter of our waste. By 2020 we are aiming for a zero-waste policy, reusing everything and bidding the local landfill a permanent adieu.

Although lofty, this goal is not out of reach. But UCSC has to take some progressive measures soon, or this vision of a cleaner campus could very well get dumped, along with that 50 percent of our oh-so-reusable waste.

As a means of achieving this goal, it’s time we revamped our compost system. Currently only semi-effective in its disjointed college-by-college state, UCSC’s practice of this sometimes smelly art form isn’t living up to potential. First of all, the UCSC waste that is composted is not even handled on campus. We ship it off so those better equipped can literally do our dirty work for us. With the amount of students here and the sheer strength of the average college appetite, this route will no longer be effective if we plan to achieve our zero-waste goal. We eat too much and throw away too much to send everything offsite. Self-sufficient sustainability is the name of the game. Put on your big-kid pants, UCSC, and learn to take care of your own mess.

What we need is a cohesive system, a campus united under old banana peels, wilting lettuce, and eventually, rich, reusable soil. It is necessary that the various compost stations around campus have communication, and that we gear up enough as a school to handle the waste we produce. This would give us a jump-start in claiming this zero-waste beacon, and also make for a strong system with some staying power. It’s a solid first step, and while it’s not the only road toward zero waste, it’s definitely one of the most important.

The good news is we just have to keep doing what we’re good at here in Santa Cruz: play up that eco-friendly vibe like it’s going out of style. But we could certainly do with a little more organization and fine-tuning. And where better to hone our skills than the place where we stuff our faces? The College Eight dining hall has the right idea, utilizing a “food pulper” that mashes leftover food together to make it more compostable. This is a squishy step in the right direction. In fact, adding a pulper in every campus dining hall could be just the step needed to help us build the foundation for an improved compost system. 

The intention is good so far, but now it’s time to really organize and do something constructive with the heaping pile of waste before us. Let’s dig in.

---- (C) 2011 City on a Hill Press. All Rights Reserved. View online at From Trashy to Classy: A Compost Makeover