Philly Tree People: Kensington Tree Planting

April 26, 2011

Belated Post, forgive me!

On April 17, 2011, I went (by my lonesome in the group! which was actually a serious accidental disaster…) to Kensington. The bus was late (thank you SEPTA) but we arrived (I went with SEA–Students for Environmental Action) almost on time. I signed a waver for my safety, went to group number 2, and loaded trucks with six trees, 15 gallons of water, clippers, prunes, special growth seeds, and more.

The community was really accepting to the help. There were team leaders for each group, from Philly Tree People, and also prominent community members.

What I learned in particular, was the mechanics of tree planting.

  • a healthy tree needs water every day (duh)
  • in my group, we planted six trees
  • the root flare needs to be  a little above the ground when planting
  • trees should be chosen according to how high they will grow
  • a hole should be dug for the space of the roots
  • pruning trees and clipping bad roots are especially good for roots; if it’s dead or will go out in a different space, then it is okay to trim
  • spread a white gelatin into the soil for growth and nutrients; also, to fight bacteria
  • put gardening soil on top at the end to help the tree and for aesthetic appeal

What we learned in Kensingtion, to our surprise

  • the ground had a lot of topsoil
  • there could possibly be needles (BE CAREFUL)
  • they cut out the wrong sidewalk (but it all worked out)
  • randomly, there was a hammock in this plot of land
  • community members were generally interested in the tree planting and requested certain trees in front of their houses
  • it was difficult to find house numbers because most places were not labeled
  • we celebrated our success by going to the local brewery

That was basically my day in Kensington! I volunteered for four hours and it was worth it.

April 17, 2011 for 4 hours

[


Case Study: Washington University in St. Louis

April 26, 2011

Blog Post #3 Individual Case Study

A model from Washington University in St. Louis can help Temple University consume less and save more. Water style!

With the recent wave of environmental action, people are looking for small, inexpensive ways to consume less and save more. What most people do not realize is that it is as simple as drinking water from a good plastic bottle, just not bottled water.

Washington University in St. Louis ended the sales of bottled water in early 2009, with only two venues selling bottled water for a few more months due to contractual obligations. The ban encouraged students, guests, and faculty to drink tap water and use reusable water containers because of the hazards of bottled water.

Bottled water uses fine resources, including mass amount of plastics and fresh water. Propaganda from bottled water companies promote that it is healthier than tap water. Yet, bottled water does not have to meet all of the federal, state, and municipal regulations; also, it is more difficult to check water quality.

Students at WUSL are incredibly supportive of the ban of bottled water because it made them take time to think of the impact. Students and faculty supported the decision because it would promote St. Louis’ water supply. In September 2008, students built a ‘tower of consumption’ out of discarded waste bottled water created. The group also started selling reuseable water bottles.

This idea, banning bottled water, should be an incredible issue for Temple University. It can promote conservatism and in the long run it is cheaper for poor college students.

Temple University has the misfortune of being located in urban North Philadelphia and using Philadelphia’s municipal water system. With that system is a lot of negative connotation of the water being dirty and unhealthy.

Unlike WUSL’s water system, North Philadelphia is not one of the best water sources in the country. That said, special water fountains have been placed around campus that filter the water again, furthering environmental action on Temple’s campus.

The case study of WUSL shows Temple University that it is possible to eliminate bottled water purchases and drink tap water. The case study is a perfect example on how colleges can become green, simply through student movement and environmental issues as a first-thought.


Philly Water Case Study

April 26, 2011

The City of Philadelphia’s drinking water supply, servicing over 1.4 million people, comes exclusively from surface water sources.Philadelphia’s drinking water is drawn from two rivers, the Delaware and Schuylkill. The three modern water treatment plants — Baxter, Belmont and Queen Lane — have a combined, design-rated capacity to treat 540 million gallons of water per day. The city of Philadelphia passed a Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974 that was amended in 1996. The act does the following: directs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue national Primary Drinking Water Regulations for all public water systems having at least 15 service connections or regularly serving at least 25 people. The Act sets standards aimed to control substances that can pose a threat to health when present in certain quantities in drinking water. However in a case study done in 2003 Philadelphia’s water showed high traces of lead in it especially in schools and homes of young kids. The lead derived from the corrosion of pipes or faucets. High traces of lead can cause serious health issues for children which is why it is an issue.Levels of chlorination by-products, specifically total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs),were as high as 80 percent of the new national standards and occasionally spiked above those standards. HAAs and TTHMs are by-products of chlorine disinfection and may cause cancer and,potentially, reproductive and other health problems. At levels measured in Philadelphia tap water, TTHMs
and HAAs came in well above health goals and are of potential health concern.The city’s water sources are threatened by contamination from treated and untreated sewage, industrial point sources, transportation accidents and spills,urban, suburban, and agricultural runoff, acid mine drainage, and drought. Philadelphia has put a major effort into assessing this pollution and is trying to encourage protection of its source water, but the city
does not control its watersheds, and the state does not adequately regulate pollution of these waters. Philadelphia could benefit from methods of storm water management greatly. Being that most of Philly’s water comes from groundwater and surface water stormwater management is critical and this can be seen through methods such as green roofs.

Safe Drinking Water Information System, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency database, available online at: http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/sdw_
report. last visited on 04/26/02.


Milcreek Farm

April 26, 2011

The kids outlines were made with recycled items

The incredibly green living roof.

Milcreek Farm was quite the experience. It’s a communtiy garden/farm out in West Philly that grows vegetables, houses bees and ultimately provides a good, organic environment in a concrete jungle. There were lots of interesting things at the farm like the living roof. The roof is what caught my attention the most, even though it is expensive I think it would be a smart choice as a roofing and the way it adheres to different weather conditions is great. We pulled weeds and clover out of the soil to make room for the planting of the collards. I expected the work to be hard but the lady made it look so easy. Once I attempted to do what she was doing it was so hard and so tiring and we had to be careful to leave as much soil in the ground as possible. It was also interesting to see how everything their foundation was made up of was recycled glass they found around the neighborhood, old bike pedals, old water hose handles. It was so creative and it looked as if the kids really enjoyed doing it from their forms on the wall. I really enjoyed this work day and it definitely made me more aware of my ecological footprint.


Case Study: Project Earth

April 26, 2011

One group for the IB Exhibition researched how plastic water bottles effect the pollution on earth. They discovered that the caps don’t recycle and cause huge environmental issues. Also, they discovered the massive floating island in the Pacific that is the size of Texas. They decided to try to ban water bottles at our school. They figured out by surveying the classes, that the students at our school would be willing to stop buying water bottles and would pay up to $6.00 for a reusable water bottle. Then the group researched eco-friendly bottles and ones that are the safest for kids to use. They found a stainless steel one that would laser our logo on it for $5.50. The company they would use makes 144 @ $5.50. If your organization could cover $500.00 of he production cost for the first batch of bottles, the rest of the production costs would be paid by our PTO (the kids had to submit a proposal to the board which agreed to fund the project, on the condition that we find a way to pay the first $500.00). The students could sell them to the kids for a very good price and then with the profits make more for the rest of the school. They surveyed the 3rd, 4th and 5th grade classes and have enough customers for the first 144 bottles. It would be awesome if we could get our whole school off of plastic water bottles. Our current student population is 400 students from k-5th!

From http://www.projectearth.net/Project/Details/635


Celebrities Endorse Green!

April 21, 2011

I was reading articles about my one and only, Matt Damon, who is now the co-founder of Water.org. He and his celebrity friends are just like us–they endorse green. This might not be that exciting, but these organizations have merit and funding! Here’s a list I’ve borrowed from a website (source at the bottom):

1. Brad Pitt
In 2007, Brad Pitt toured the lower 9th Ward of New Orleans, an area unable to recover from the destruction of Hurricane Katrina. Pitt founded Make It Right, an organization with a plan to build over 150 environmentally friendly homes in the area. The Make It Right community is currently the largest greenest neighborhood of single family homes in America, according to the U.S. Green Building Council. Make It Right is also constructing micro-farms, rain gardens, and eco-friendly roads throughout the 9th Ward.

2. Leonardo DiCaprio
The Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation hopes to secure a sustainable future for Earth. The foundation recently committed $1 million dollars to help save tigers. In 2007, DiCaprio created, produced, and narrated Eleventh Hour, a documentary highlighting practical solutions for restoring our planet’s ecosystems.

3. Sting
Sting and his wife, Trudie Styler, started the Rainforest Foundation in 1989. The foundation works in 20 rainforests throughout the world and has helped protect 28 million acres of forest. Rainforest Foundation has expanded its offices into England and Norway.

4. Bode Miller
Bode Miller, an Olympic gold medalist, partnered with his family to establish Turtle Ridge Foundation . The organization empowers individuals to solve difficult environmental issues. The foundation has several programs to help America’s youth learn about the environment through recreational activities.

5. Dave Matthews
Dave Matthews started the BamaWorks Fund in 1999 to help fund programs for the environment in the Charlottesville area and has since expanded its parameters. The Bama Works Fund has contributed over $8.5 million to charities. Dave Matthews joined the Farm Aid board of directors in 2001. Farm Aid is a nonprofit organization helping farmers keep their land.

6. Kate Hudson
Kate and her hairstylist, David Babaii, teamed up to make a line of hair care products that are good for the environment. David Babaii for Wildaid features shampoos, conditioners, and styling products free of sulfates, petrochemicals, and animal products. All of the products were tested on Kate’s hair, not animals. The products contain natural and renewable ingredients. Ten percent of the profits from the products are donated to Wilaid . The products are very affordable.

7. Daryl Hannah
Daryl Hannah co-founded Sustainable Biodiesel Alliance in 2006. The alliance helps educate the public on community-based biodiesel programs. The Sustainable Biodiesel Alliance hopes to reduce the negative impact on our environment through energy conservation, petroleum reduction, and reduction in release of harmful emissions.

8. Sheryl Crow
Sheryl Crow‘s clothing line, Bootheel Trading Co., is an eco-friendly clothing line that features organic sustainable labeling, fair-trade cotton, and denim. The clothing line is affordable and features casual jeans, tops, vests, and jackets. Jeans start $60 and shirts start at $20.

9. Harrison Ford
In 1991, Harrison Ford formed Conservation International . The foundation uses science, policy, and field work to protect Earth’s resources. The organization helps communities, countries, and societies protect tropical forests, lush grasslands, rivers, wetlands, abundant lakes, and the sea.

10. Jack Johnson
Jack Johnson and his wife, Kim, formed the Kokua Hawaii Foundation to support environmental education in the schools and communities of Hawaii. Jack Johnson also established All At Once, a group that collaborates with community groups to provide sustainable local food systems, environmental education, tree planting, and other hands-on projects.

SOURCE: http://omg.yahoo.com/news/celebrity-green-organizations/58320


Green Managment Strategies: European Union’s Failure

April 7, 2011

Perhaps one of the most heavily debated upon issues for political and scientific reasons is global warming. It has a particularly politically charged meaning and its existence is questioned as groups separate into believers and nonbelievers. But if any action to change the planet it taken, it needs to effect the economy, the environment, and the society.

Here, it is referred to as climate change, a proven scientific phenomenon that has happened before and very well be happening now, but for a different reason. Climate change is the long term change of weather patterns over time; however, human-caused activities are forcing the planet to heat up, most likely due to the burning of fossil fuels and the increase within cities.

Urban life is quite possibly one of the main reasons evidence of climate change is happening; therefore, management strategies should be used to adapt and redirect climate change. The Greenhouse effect has been magnified by global warming because the gases can become stuck within the atmosphere.

In urban areas, where there is more density in population, the heat island effect occurs. It heats up the city. Nature’s own checks and balance, trees, are featured less prominently. Urban areas are the founders of industrial revolution and emissions. Although they established some of the first mass uses of public transportation, enough emissions are used to cause worry.

Recently, a new rise in environmentalism has given rise to sustainable development and green management strategies. Particularly the European Union region has devoted time and energy to develop and nurture green developments in the job sector, the physical environment, and the carbon offset. However, it appears that it did not follow management strategies well enough. But more on that later.

The European Union wants to increase 20% of its resources to be renewable. It wants to meet part of the Greenhouse Gas reduction obligations outside the EU through international offsets. The EU wants biofuel. It wants a redesign of architectural buildings. The only want to do this is through management. They followed the Kyoto Protocol.

“The protocol sets binding targets for 37 industrialised countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions. The targets amount to an average reduction in emissions of 5% against 1990 levels over the five-year period, 2008–2012” (Analysis of the EU  policy package on climate change and renewables Pantelis Capros a, Leonidas Mantzos a, Leonidas Parousos a, Nikolaos Tasios a, GerKlaassen b,n, Tom VanIerland b.).

The European Union has recognized that management strategies need to be calculated and observed and effected over time. “…one carbon offset represents the reduction of one ton of CO2,e.g. the offset value denotes a net emission reduction (CO2-eq ton). In practice, this means methods for quantifying emission reductions should be conservative to avoid overstating a project’s effect…Current carbon offset programmes generally require that offset rates should be real, surplus (additional), verifiable, permanent and enforceable in terms of maintaining the integrity of an emission trading system” (Kikuchi 357). Kikuchi recognizes that carbon offset is directly correlated to the greenhouse gas effect.

“Current carbon offset programmes generally require that offset rates must be real in terms of maintaining integrity; however, these accounting processes differ from project to project, and furthermore there is doubt about how this diminution is included as a negative secondary effect in accounting for a WPG-based carbon offset” (Kikuchi 361). As Kikuchi mentions, carbon offset programmes need to change. The image above shows how carbon offset works within the current management model. Carbon offsets should be backed by regulations and tracking systems—which will define the creation of carbon offsets.

There are so many benefits to green urban management planning; one of which is employment. Green collar jobs will be created in order to act on these management strategies. In turn the economy will pick up because there is employment and gains in the economy. And the work done from the economy  on the environment will eventually change the society into a more eco-friendly society. All are connected; if any are ignored, green management planning will not work.

“The method of accounting for carbon offsets reflects on the above-mentioned notion, i.e. the future environment and humanisation. If the accounting method remains ambiguous and uncertain, it will be difficult to forecast future climate change and assess whether a project is really cost-effective. It is important to establish an accurate method, because ultimately the method will determine the success of sustainable development” (Kikuchi).

Funnily enough, Kikuchi published this article in 2011, yet used data from 1997. Interestingly enough, his warnings have come undone. The European Union is expected to fail to reach its goal for environmental progress by 2020. The original goal of cutting costs down by 20% has now been reduced to 10%. One very possible explanation is that EU could not make the management strategies work for the economy, the environment, and the society. Kikuchi warns of this in his article, “Environmental and socio-economic factors in carbon offsets: an approach to sustainable management and planning in climate change strategy.”

The cut was an attempt to meet a feasible goal to reverse the human-caused effects of climate change. Yet climate change still exists and now it will exist longer. What is important is that the management strategy is not to blame. The EU is not a completely failed management strategy. It should be an example of what not to do and what to do. Most importantly form this, it is an example to follow green strategies from all sectors of life: economy, environment, society.

Sources

Environmental and socio-economic factors in carbon offsets: an approach to sustainable management and planning in climate change strategy

             Kikuchi

Analysis of the EU  policy package on climate change and renewables

Pantelis Capros a, Leonidas Mantzos a, Leonidas Parousos a, Nikolaos Tasios a, GerKlaassen b,n, Tom VanIerland b.).