Reflection

Throughout this course I have been reminded of the meaning of the term "wicked problems".  Wicked problems are dilemmas in which the requirements continuously change or are in contradiction to one another, as such, there is no answer, no true or false, no right or wrong.  Indeed everything is only a question of better or worse.  During this class we have read about and discussed many of the small infinity of moving parts that make the environmental crisis what it is today, government, economy, and civil society in particular.  We have also been asked to think in terms of action.  Instead of considering environmental problems for their own sake, this class has taught us to engage with problems and evaluate solutions based on their effectiveness. 

From a personal perspective, I am very glad that I waited to take this class until my senior year. Having studied environmental science and policy throughout my college career, I have noticed that students are rarely given the opportunity to step back and take a look at the big picture, where we are forced to grapple critically, philosophically, and emotionally with the challenges we now face.  I have also been reminded of how important it is to truly understand the social, political, and economic context behind the environmental crisis, and the way in which each of the individual problems relate to each other.  Contextual knowledge and big-picture thinking are both necessary if we are to identify what we can aspire to, and hopefully how to get there. 

This class has also shaken some of my most fundamental beliefs about the environmental crisis.  First, studying environmental political history has given me a better understanding of how long to takes to effect significant, positive change; and, conversely, how quickly we can cause irreversible damage.  Being only 21 years old it seems like global environmental problems - climate change, world hunger, etc. -  have always been around, when in fact we have only recently as a species had to deal with problems of such grad scale and rapid rates of change.  I'm often shocked to think that we are still having many of the same conversations about the environment that we were having thirty years ago, but this is also a very new kind of problem requiring dramatically new ways of thinking about ourselves and the world we live in.  While I have come to understand the reasons for our inability to change quickly, this class has also been a constant reminder that the environment does not operate on the same schedule.  McKibben's 15 year prognosis is particularly haunting. 

Secondly, I have been asked to question the basic assumptions I make when trying to develop solutions for environmental problems.  The democracy assumption is probably the best example of this.  Perhaps it's a cultural thing, but a concern for democracy and fairness tend to permeate the American environmental movement.  However, this is not necessarily conducive to effective problem solving.  Maniates echoed this frequently, democratic, individualized change is unlikely to create a movement with sufficient alacrity and weight to confront the mess we've made for ourselves.  What we need instead is well organized, leveraged change, presumably led by experts and political elites.  While I have yet to fully explore what I really think about this, the idea has nonetheless made me think in new ways about political and social change. 

"Intro to Doom", "Despair 101", and other such epithets are all somewhat appropriate descriptions of our class on a day-to-day basis, but I leave invigorated.  As insoluble, heart-wrenching, and huge these challenges are, they are equally important.  It's going to be a long fight, a hard fight, and we're unlikely to see any cathartic conclusion in our lifetime.  Dig in.  Happy Holidays, I leave you with these:

 

 

I have to say that I got more out this class than I expected.  I took it because International Environmental Politics is an SIS core class, and I wanted something a bit different as I have taken economics-based classes before and have studied conflict on a number of times as well.  I have also always been a bit embarrassed about my lack of knowledge of environmental issues all the while claiming to be quite concerned with the world's growing environmental challenges.  As such, this class appeared to offer a good opportunity for me to learn exactly what I was concerned about.

This class has left me more concerned, and now, I can pinpoint some of the things that concern me the most.  For instance, I am now nearly certain that we genuinely need to dramatically alter our society and culture to address climate change and its broader effects.  Even from a strict fiscal point of view, general lifestyle choices in the U.S. are not sustainable (many people and our government face nearly insurmountable debt), but the environmental issues that we currently face cannot be overcome without seriously reevaluating and reordering our priorities and making substantial changes to how we live.  As Maniates stresses, it isn't enough to change some light bulbs or to take public transportation instead of driving; we need to collectively make a concerted effort to enact real change on a community, state, national, and international level.

There were definitely days that I left class feeling as though my hope for the future had been effectively destroyed and as if we really could not overcome the challenges that we face going forward.  However, it does give me some hope to hear the different perspectives on environmental issues outside of the way it is framed in the media.  Also, hearing about new technology and the different initiatives that are either out there already or being developed has made me feel that, while we face enormous obstacles, we can avoid disaster.   After this semester, I can say that I view climate change and the environment more broadly as the biggest issues that we presently face.  That climate change has become a politicized debate about whether or not it is even happening or, if it is happening, about who is responsible rather than a conversation about what we can and must do to fix the problem is disturbing.  With that in mind, I'm apprehensive about the future but not completely without hope.

If only some men just wanted to watch the world burn

Wouldn't it be easier if the were some clear bad guy, whose sole purpose was mayhem and destruction? Then it'd be easy, we could point at that person or entity and say, there, that's the root of our troubles and getting ride of that will make everything better. Unfortunately  we have nothing of the sort. Our biggest identifiable enemy is probably the fossil fuel industry. The issue is that they are not totally evil. We need fossil fuels to function.

If we extrapolate this, the real problem is us. There are too many of us, living too extravagantly to keep up our life style. Sure, we do great things, but so much damage can be linked back to us. We are a utilitarian species that has developed into colonies that use up the resources around it at a rate that we cannot replenish. We are that big bad enemy when it comes to earth, and our institutions stand in the way.

What I have taken away from this course is the need for a massive intellectual and societal shift. I have also been solidified in the idea that it'll take something substantial to spark this shift. Substantial could be innovative, but it could also be destructive.

The Last Post...

Like most, if not all, of my peers, my reason for taking this class was to expand my knowledge of one of the most challenging and pressing problems of our generation. Unlike our parents who had very limited access to information about this issue, our generation suffers the opposite fate. We have too much information. Everywhere we look from the toothbrush made of recycled yogurt bottles in Whole foods to the recycling bins on campus, there are daily reminders of our current crisis. My initial reaction after the first few classes was complete and utter despair. We’re screwed was something I replayed in my head over and over again. Over the course of the class, however, I can say that at the most it helped me become a bit more hopeful about the future and at the very least it encouraged me to explore the issue in depth. Listed below is what I have taken away from all of the course readings and class discussions (because we are a culture of sound bites):

1. The world is changing and we are the reason.

2. Most of the changes are not a result of the current situation but a delayed reaction to past   activities. 

3. That does not absolve us from blame or responsibility. 

4. There is no single perfect solution that will save us from imminent destruction. 

5. The answer might be a composition of different ideas. 

6. Individual action is great but things need to happen on a global scale if we ever want to seriously tackle the problem. 

7. The Earth is worth fighting for. 

While reading Paul Hawken’s “The Most Amazing Challenge”, two simple sentences stood out to me because it so perfectly described the wave of emotions that I experience every single time I think of the environmental challenge. “If you look at the science about what is happening on Earth and aren’t pessimistic, you don’t understand the date. But, if you meet the people who are working to restore this Earth and the lives of the poor, and you aren’t optimistic, you haven’t got a pulse.” 

Going Rogue

Food and Water Watch - Longmont, CO Bans Fracking in City Limits

Boulder, CO is famously one of the most liberal places in America, and is also my home.  About half-an-hour from downtown Boulder is another small, largely liberal town, Longmont, CO.  Longmont doesn't typically feature in national debates about much of anything, even the attention drawn to the town due to CO's position as a swing state this election cycle was a bit of a surprise.  This November changed things.

This November, Longmont passed Ballot Initiative 300, which made the process known as "fracking" illegal within city limits.  The measure to put the ban in the city charter no less, passed with 60 percent of the vote.  Longmont is not the first town to establish such measures, but its story is certainly remarkable.  Over the past few years, the natural gas industry has been paying more attention to similar, citizen-initiated measures, which would piecemeal eliminate the development of new fracking sites.  In Longmont , the natural gas industry invested heavily to defeat the measure - I've heard figures that range from between $300,000-$500,000 - in quantities that dwarf fundraising from grassroots advocacy groups.  

Criticism of Ballot Initiative 300 has focused on its inability to stand up to the inevitable wave of litigation from the natural gas industry, state, and federal government.  The Daily Times Call quoted Governor John D. Hickenlooper in September 2012 saying, "'There's nothing worse than being a governor in a legal battle with one of your own municipalities,' he said. 'But I don't see any alternative.'"  


It is unlikely that the initiative will be able to stand up in court; but despite its lack of long-term effectiveness, the initiative has other values.  First, the ban is a new, unprecedented example of locally based action overcoming large industrial investment.  Second, the ban has started new discussions, and rekindled existing debates over the expansion and development of fracking sites in and around residential areas.  Finally, the success of the initiative means that both industry and various levels of government will have to start taking local concerns more seriously.  

I believe Longmont's Ballot Initiative 300 is an appropriate response to an environmental issue because it uses existing leverage points to draw attention to environmental concerns, empower local communities, and demonstrate the power of grassroots organizing.  Longmont, in passing such a measure, has to some extent gone rogue - instead of waiting for state and federal regulation of fracking, the city has struck out to determine its own future.  Regardless of the long term success or failure of the initiative, Longmont's given me hope that even small, seemingly unimportant communities can make a big difference for environmental issues on the national stage.

United States-Indonesian Comprehensive Partnership

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=67613

The article outlines some positive results that have emerged from the United States-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership. It is a long-term commitment between the two nations to address issues related to security, economy, development, the environment, and education among other many other issues. The Environment and Climate Change working group within the partnership has tasked with the job of identifying opportunities of economic growth for Indonesia while mitigating climate change. Some of the actions that they have either implemented or in the process of implementing includes a debt-for-nature swap in which the U.S. forgives a certain amount of Indonesian debt in exchange for Indonesian commitments to protect forests and reduce gas emissions from deforestation. Another program that is detailed in depth in the article is the establishment of 450,00 hectares of marine protected areas. As detailed in the article, one of the key areas of cooperation detailed in the partnership was environmental cooperation. The sustainable marine reserve park is a prime example of an effective and replicable response to an environmental challenge. The most important development that came out of the initiative was the transfer of responsibility for maintaining and monitoring the reserve from government officials to local fisherman whose livelihood were directly affected by the success of the reserve.

Environmental issues are often stalled in the international arena; the Kyoto protocol, and most recently the Copenhagen Summit in 2011—the latest international attempt in addressing leading environmental issues—did not produce significant deliverables in the global campaign against climate change. The environmental provisions in the United States-Indonesia Comprehensive Partnership, on the other hand, stand as effective forms of action.

The provisions’ success (measured by the concrete programs in place and level of current implementation) was possible for a number of reasons. First is the political willingness of Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Yudhoyono in the 2012 Rio Summit became developing country leader that unilaterally pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent by 2025. Indonesia’s success will reduce global emissions by 7%, well ahead of the Millennium Development Goal’s requirements. Moreover, by accepting Indonesia’s role as the world’s third largest carbon emitter, Yudhoyono has effectively reversed the traditional developing country stance of blaming the west regarding environmental issues.

Second, the reason plans extended into the implementation phase was the way international environmental groups, United States agencies and donors such as Norway made this possible was by framing environmental concerns as a security concern; Along Indonesia’s coastal areas, residents derive 70% of their protein from fish. Thus, for the Indonesian government, protecting maritime resources became intertwined with the economic livelihood and security of their citizens. Moreover, protecting natural resources fell within ASEAN goals of regional integration.

Lastly, Indonesia’s growing economy makes renewable energy, green and blue markets desirable sectors for investment. Thus, it was within the Indonesia’s best interest to boost their economy by focusing on environmentally friendly sectors. 

Sports, Development, and the Environment

While browsing the projects on the recommended "World Changing" website, I was intrigued by the "Stadium/Sports facility" tab.  As a lifelong athlete, I am a huge proponent of sports of a means of social and community development.  Involving youth in sports is enormously beneficial to their personal growth and can also prevent them from getting involved in detrimental activities such as drug use, crime, etc.  From a community perspective, sports can provide a unifying effect whether through a team to root for or a place to gather.  I had, however, never considered that the construction of a stadium or other athletic facility could be an environmental project until I stumbled across this project: http://openarchitecturenetwork.org/projects/esperance

The link above provides the description for a soccer stadium/community center in Kimisagara, Rwanda.  This project is part of FIFA's larger Football for Hope campaign which broadly aims to provide health, educational, and economic opportunities for disadvantaged youth especially but to the community as whole through the context of sport.  The Kimisagara pitch is located on the the campus of a primary school, and in addition to offering a space to play soccer/football in both an organized and unorganized fashion, the space offers classes on healthcare and other issues, a library, a healthcare center, and a space for microcredit and other informal economic activities.  As such, the program has a clear social and economic development focus.
Admittedly, Football for Hope does not have a strict environmental focus, but the movement emphasizes sustainable development and constructs facilities in a manner to minimize environmental impact.  The Kimisagara stadium, for instance, was constructed largely with local materials, minimizing transportation costs (both monetary and environmental); has a rainwater collection system to provide water for the facility; has planted trees throughout the facility; and is constructed in a manner to make it so air conditioning is unnecessary. Another Football for Hope facility being constructed in Nairobi, Kenya uses power generated by wind turbines and includes a community garden.   These projects represent the type of sustainable development that allows underdeveloped countries the opportunity to develop without having the same detrimental impact that traditional development/industrialization has had.
Football for Hope, fittingly, gives me hope because it addresses a number of developmental issues including economic initiatives as well as education.  Further, it centers around sports, which I love, and is a fantastic example of corporate social responsibility.  As an aside, this type of project is the reason why I objected to the absolute anti-corporate stance of the "Story of Stuff" video that we watched in class a while back.  Large corporations such as FIFA have enormous potential and the financial resources to engage in sustainable development.  A major issue with many development projects is that they are not sustainable due to financial constraints.  Football for Hope, because it is bankrolled by FIFA, is more likely to avoid this problem.

You're not supposed to be here...

Unfortunately, the only quote I could come up for a title with was from Game of Thrones, and it was from a very minor character, so the image associated with it would be lost. Regardless... with respect to this class I have recently geeked out about two things: Thorium and Aquaponics. I will always love thorium, I mean how can you not. It's great. Look at that electron cloud.

Th = <3

Aquaponics, my other new found love, represents a huge potential solution to a wide range of urban food roduction problems. This story specifically focuses on Eric Maundu, a trained industrial robotics technician, has taken to the growing trend among Do-it-Yourself tinkers and tried to grown food in barren, urban locations. Maundu has blended his electronic expertise with his interest in urban enrichment, by making color-powered, technology controlled farms to create food for the user.
http://faircompanies.com/videos/view/internet-food-arduino-based-urban-aquaponics-in-oakland/


I feel that this type of action represents a huge step forward in environmentally conscious action because unlike encouraging recycling or driving less, aquaponics puts much more tangible power and results into the hands of the users. People will be able to farm themselves, take their own produce and consume and sell with, without relying on the larger consumerist system. If all of the farms were to use Eric Maundu's technology, then the farms will only have an initial cost of supplies, water and solar cells, then the production is entirely out of the influence of large corporate, or public systems.

Because the supplies for an aquaponics farm do not require specialized equipment or skills to set up and run, I feel that this is an easily repeatable project. The only barrier would be the initial cost of setting up the project, but I see city grants taking care of some of these problems.

Projects like this give me a lot of hope, because I think that part of the reason there is so much apathy to environmental causes is that we have lost our connection to the land. In urban settings especially people hardly know what a tree is, let alone where food comes from. I believe that putting the land back into people's hands will rekindle their concern for the natural world.

Meditations

This question is so appropriate with only a few weeks before Thanksgiving.  I have been so lucky in my life, having had a number of exhilarating experiences, isolated, in wonder with nature.  Some of my favorite experiences have been out backpacking the Wind River Range in Wyoming, hiking around on the burren in Ireland, and climbing to the top of the highest waterfall in Australia to look down as the water literally turned into mist beneath us.  I've been so lucky.  When I search my memories for the most exhilarating/magical/thrilling experience, however, I keep coming back to a handful of experiences I had looking at trees back home in Colorado during the summer after Freshman year.  
After finishing my first year of college I was so relieved to be going home.  I took up a job with the Boulder County Youth Corps as a assistant forestry team leader for a group of 10 teenagers.  We were responsible for pulling the slash and dried logs left in previous years by chainsaw teams, working to prevent wildfires in the front range.  The task was grueling, but as the summer wore on, I became accustomed to it, and was able to appreciate my surroundings and the people I was working with.  I remember in particular one afternoon at the end of a long, hot work day.  It began to rain just before we had to head back home, and it crescendoed into a downpour.  All 12 of us ran down the mountain to our van through the trees, covered in mud.  When we made it out of the forest, laughing and trying not to trip on the uneven ground there was a rainbow to the East, and gilded clouds illuminated by the low sun.  

Looking back, that summer was one of the most important times as I have tried to discover myself, and what I value.  Working in the forest, interacting with nature every day with all its hardships and thrills, grounded me - bringing me back down from my DC/SIS rush.  So, yes - nature is worth preserving.  But it was not only the trees, the dirt, and the sun that made that summer (and every summer with the Youth Corps since then) so extraordinary; it was also the people I was with.  Nature is best enjoyed with people, despite what the Thoreaus of the world might have you believe.  The best part of nature is the fact that we are a dynamic part of it, something worth preserving because it unites us as all as something we depend on, and as a common denominator for humanity.  The conservationist ideal of a sterile wilderness is misleading, because we can never see nature for what it truly is.  Every time we engage with our natural surroundings we make new meanings of it by virtue of our presence.  When we make such meaning alone, we learn about ourselves; but when we make sure meaning together, we learn about ourselves as a species. 

Jeju Island

I was born in the countryside of Vietnam but I have only ever known the city landscape. You don’t really get much interaction with nature in the city so I felt disconnected with the natural environment. That changed when I studied abroad in South Korea in the spring of my junior year.  The most enchanting and magical experience I have ever had with nature was on a weeklong trip with friends to an island off of the Korean peninsula called Jeju Island.  Jeju Island is famous in South Korea as a popular spot for honeymoons. It is often labeled as the Hawaii of South Korea. The island is particularly known for their sweet and unique breed of oranges, called Hallabang, and scuba diving grandmothers. It is a tiny island but it is packed with a variety of landscapes ranging from beaches to caves to mountains.

On my second day on the island, I traveled by ferry to a small island off Jeju Island called Udo. Udo is 2.28 square miles and resembles the shape of a cow lying down. You can go through the entire island on a motorbike in 1 hour (4 if you stopped to take pictures and enjoy the scenery like I did). My friends and I did just that. We rented ATVs and just took off on the island with little more than a cartoon map that I found on the ferry. On the island, there were 3 beaches with different types of sand – coral, white sand, and soft tan colored sand. Being on the coral sand was amazing (although killer on the feet). The water was completely crystal clear and just seemed to glisten in the bright but not overhearing sun. Being from around the DC metropolitan area, I have been too accustomed to the murky sand water in Ocean City, MD). I have never been in water that is so clear that you can see your own feet! The beach seemed to stretch on for miles with only the outline of Jeju Island visible in the background.

Standing on the pristine beach in the warmth of sunshine was when it hit me. That’s when I thought about how there are tons of little gems like this in the world. Although it seems like we have conquered every surface of the Earth, there is still so much left that we have yet to explore. Maybe it’s best if we leave it that way but standing on that much made me realize that nature should be preserved. That beach was not created overnight. It was formed through hundreds of years of the same repetitive action. In our society, as long as you have money, you can create whatever you want, even your own artificial beach. However, it will never have the same sentimental value like something that has literally hundreds of years of history and stories to tell. 

I have always through I was a cosmopolitan girl. The idea of living in a rural area makes me uncomfortable. Even living in the suburbs is dreadful enough. I love skyscrapers, lights, excitement, and activity. But being on that island made me want to stay and slow down my pace of life. I wanted to enjoy the simpler things in life because they may not be there in that perfect state forever given our increasingly detrimental influence on the environment. 

Are you crazy? The fall with probably kill you...

For those who haven't seen the classic Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid our heroes are trying to outrun the cops and are contemplating jumping off the edge of a waterfall. I can't say that I have ever been on the run from the cops, but I have an experience or two with waterfalls.

Being from Arkansas and having a family business right on the river, I have spent many hours paddling the Buffalo River which is normally not terribly wild. During a summer weekend, we were on the road to the start of our path when the sky opened up. As if the old god Poseidon awoke from his slumber to find humans no longer worshiped him, the rains came down in vengeful sheets. The river was already swollen from the weekend storms, and this one was just too much. By the time we reached our put-in, the river had already flooded. The normally docile put-in had turned into a roaring beast devouring trees and the banks. Intrigued by the new landscape, the four of us jumped into our kayaks and were swept down the river. I found myself paddling through trees which I had been hiking past and climbing the week before. Whirlpools and new paths threw me left and right, and I spent as much time out of my kayak as I did in it. Normally I was confident on the river, but that day, I knew that the water was in command, and I had to respect its domain.

The river continued to throw me down its path. What was normally a four hour paddle was quickly coming to a close in under three. And with the continued rains, it was only getting more vicious. Over the booming thunder, I heard the distinct howl of crashing water. Because of the flood the river's path had straightened and I was headed straight for a ledge. In the speed of the water, I had no time to correct my course, so I could only go over. Relying purely on instinct and adrenaline, I dug into the river to straighten my kayak and then threw my hands up with my paddle and let the current take me. A rock, hidden under the rushing white water, caught my kayak at the perfect angle and knocked me sideways. Before I could process what was happening, I felt myself slide from the seat and tumble through the air. I arched through the rain and the river below me quickly approached. With a hard splash, I was underwater and tumbling through the current. I surfaced a few moments later pinned to a nearly submerged tree branch and still shocked by what had happened.

My kayak floated down to me and I slid back in. After the waterfall, the river seemed to mystically calm as the flood opened up into a field. I silently glided through the submerged grazing land and, overwhelmed by the complete silence I was surrounded by. It was eerie, and I felt incredibly small in the wake of the flood waters which erased the field and nearby road.

Saving nature is of utmost importance to our livelihood. Regardless of how much we try to command and control nature, we still have a primal relationship with it. Beyond the physiological needs, man seems to be spiritually connected to earth. In our cities, we plant trees, to bring a little bit of nature with us when we leave her embrace. We put flowers in our windows, plants on our balconies and grass in our yards. There is still something mystical about being out in a field with the wind blowing around us. Even the most sheltered sterile people I know who were born and will die in a city, cannot escape the appeal of going out for hiking, even it it just means walking through the woods. It's a place where we can quiet our minds and replenish our spirit. When people take vacations, especially those who work in cities, they end up traveling to natural locations. We even bring nature into ours homes in the form of domesticated animals. For eons, religions have centered around nature, and some still exist today including Shintoism and Animism. It is the purist of finding a new wilderness that fuels our desire to find new life, or exist on other planets. So many motivations come from our relationship with nature, and our need to participate in it.

Despite our push toward urbanization, I don't feel is it were man is truly supposed to exist. At our core, we are animals and you can only cage a beast or so long before it needs to be freed.

Freeze-Dried Filet Mignon from Space Is the Future of Food

Only kidding, but it might be as revolutionary. 

50 years ago it was the fall of 1962 in America.  The thin wartime days of rationing were but a distant memory, and the consumption of meats, fats, fruits, all forms of calories really, were on the rise.  Back then it was in vogue to host dinner parties, barbeques, potlucks, cocktail parties as a display of affluence and luxury.  Foreign dishes and imported foods bespoke the globalization of food culture and the increasing ease of long distance transportation; and junk food was beginning to be the calorie of choice for a herd of young baby boomers.  While it may seem mundane to us, the food culture of the 1960's was indicative of a time of change and the availability of cheap and plentiful energy.

You can see the roots of our current American food system even back in the 60's, so perhaps through some reflection on today we can discover the roots of a future food system. 

The crucial decision for the future of the American food will be whether we opt, as a society, to reduce our energy use through a slew of energy policies, or whether we wait for the price of energy to rise due to dwindling resources and increasing demand.  Either way, it is inevitable that the fossil fuel economy will not be able to support our current patterns of consumption indefinitely.  Transportation, packaging, processing, growing, harvesting, fertilizing, and storing food all rely on cheap energy, without which prices would greatly exceed demand. 

This will mean big change for the way a large majority of Americans get their food.  Fruits, vegetables, meats, and grains will begin to occupy a limited space and time, meaning we won't be able to get whatever we want, whenever we want.  All of the fossil fuels that went into making the grocery store a veritable cornucopia will no longer be available, requiring a bit more thought when it comes to self-provisioning. 

I'm optimistic.  I believe that our creativity will allow us to start making food a more purposeful and planned experience integrated into more aspects of our daily lives.  We'll involve more people in the process of getting food from the seed to the plate.  The milkman and the mailman might team up in an effort to cut costs and energy use; or perhaps we will make full use of neighborhood groups that encourage and teach food preparation of more processed goods like butter, beer, and other crucial items. 

A lack of cheap energy will also limit where and when we can grow our food, and, as a corollary,  what we can grow.  Small farms and gardens will be encouraged and facilitated as a way to supplement what comes into urban areas from medium-sized, family farms on the periphery.  Without cheap transportation and farms based on economies of scale we're going to have to eat winter squash in the winter, and summer squash in the summer with fewer non-seasonal exceptions.  Perhaps there is still a role for groceries 50 years from now, but if so they'll have to be based on a co-op model - owned and operated by the people that supply them - rather than the Krogers, Giants, and Woolworths of the world. 

To me, this sounds fun.  I'm excited to take on the challenge of being more purposeful in my eating habits, and of working with others to provision myself and those I love.  It's not all doom and gloom in a post-Carbon world. 

Bet on Big Corn

Attempting to predict what food and agriculture will look like in 50 years is a tall task.  50 years ago microwaves were a luxury, the fast-food industry was in its infancy, and farms were smaller and less specialized.  In short, a person living in 1962 would have been hard pressed to envision the current state of food and agriculture in the U.S. As such, I expect that by 2012 what we eat and how we grow it will be drastically different.

Initially, when I pondered my answer to this question, I thought more about the recent trend toward organics, slow food, and traditional techniques.  Maybe this represented the future.  However, I saw some issues with the plausibility of this, and reading Robert Paarlberg's Foreign Policy article reinforced my skepticism and really got me thinking as to whether organic, slow farming techniques are actually even a good thing.  I will not address his stance on pesticides as it directly contradicts Cesar Chavez's message, but simply, Parrlberg makes it clear that the world would not be able to the current population.  As such, I believe that agriculture and food will become even more mechanized and high tech in the future.  I anticipate that there will be even larger farms that are even more specialized. I expect, however, that there will also be a substantial increase in lab-grown food, particularly meat products.  Feedlots are currently among the most controversial issues within the food industry because of the cruel treatment to which animals are subjected as well as the health risks involved.  As such, I suspect that feed lots will be a thing of the past and that animals will either be raised free range or synthetic meat will be grown in a lab, which I imagine could be more controversial.

As far as what people actually consume, I would like to say that I expect people to eat healthier and consume less processed foods.  Considering recent advances in nutrition and health movements, I think that this is possible.  I also expect that city and state governments will start placing taxes on or outright banning certain products like how some cities have banned trans-fats.  That said, I do not expect corn-syrup to go anywhere as the primary sweetener used in the U.S.  Big Corn, unfortunately, is here to stay.  Realistically, no politician or group of politicians is going to risk passing legislation against it; the corn industry simply has too much money and too strong of a lobby to fight. 

Barring the discovery/invention of a clean, cheap, and reliable fuel source, food transportation costs will have risen swiftly in 50 years.  As a result, though most parts of the U.S. will still be able to afford to have their food shipped to them from all over the world, poorer areas and poorer nations certainly will not be able to do so.  Accordingly, we will either see the rise of some local, cheaper agriculture or we will see the expansion of food deserts in poor areas.  Grocery stores will be large and un-specialized.  Finally, I expect to see a rise in individuals growing their own vegetables, herbs, and spices in the suburbs as way to counteract rising food costs as a result high fuel prices.  In more urban ares, there will be an increase in the number of community gardens.  Overall, food will be extremely different in 50 years; in what way it will be different, however, could vary greatly.

The Future of American Food

The pattern of food consumption in the Unite States has undergone such drastic changes often in short spans of time that it is safe to assume that what Americans will be eating in 50 years will not be identical to what people are eating today.  Who would have guessed 70 years ago that Americans in the 21^st century would be eating processed food injected with an assortment of chemicals, food coloring and artificial flavors? I believe that a driving force of the changes in food consumption is the constant advancement and integration of food, technology, and science. Take the TV dinner  (frozen meals) as an example of the way our consumption patterns have changed. While freezing food has been around for centuries, it wasn’t until the 20^th century when they started to actually develop the techniques that are being used today. Advancements in science allowed manufacturers to freeze food in a short amount of time without compromising much of its original taste. Developments in the assembly line technology allowed for a streamline manufacturing process that could produce safe and consistent frozen meals. I strongly believe that science and technology will continue to play a huge role in the future of the American food system.

In 50 years, Americans will continue to eat even more processed food than the amount we currently consume. Corn, wheat, and rice will still be staples of the American diet due to the strong efforts of powerful lobbying groups on behalf of these industries. Meat consumption in the future will decrease. There have studies that show that meat consumption in the United States has already declined, partially due to the exposure of the production of “pink slime” or lean finely texturized beef (LFTB). One critical change is that we will be eating a lot more food-like substances in the future. It is highly possible that scientists will create more food-like substances that are along the lines of LFTB; Using leftover parts of food that we do not usually eat to make a new food substance that is cheap to produce and easy to store and transport. This is not a far-fetched idea considering the fact that scientists are already toying with the concept and are creating food out of waste and unwanted by products of other food. Some scientists in Japan are already literally creating food out of waste when they devised a method to make hamburgers out of human excrement. This trend will only strengthen in the future when humans run out of land to grow all the foo needed to feel the billions of people on Earth.

Land is going to be scare in 50 years so most of the fruits and vegetables will be grown overseas and imported into the United States. This allows for a wide variety of fruits and vegetables that ignores seasonal rules and other constraints that come with growing our own produce on American soil.  Meanwhile, many of the grains such as corn and wheat will still be grown and subsidized by the government in the United States. There will be a rise in meat products being grown in the lab. A small number of corporations will still have tight control over the food production in the United States. Most of the food will be produced by a handful of companies that have sub-divisions so as to give off an appearance of diversity in the super market. In contrast, I believe that many middle class families will start to grow some of other own foods in their backyards once they can afford to move to the suburbs where they have a small plot of land to farm on.  

Americans will continue to buy their food through super markets but I believe that there will be more stores that resemble wholesalers such as Costco and Sam’s Club than small mom and pop stores. In 50 years, a trip to the super market will exclusively consist of going to large warehouses and getting everything you need for the entire month. On a side note, refrigerators will have to increase in size in order to accommodate all that food. Food that is grown abroad will be imported into the United States using the traditional methods of air and ship travel. Food grown in the United States will most likely be transported through long haul trucking. It is possible that networks of food distribution channels will be created in major American cities. Food will be grown close by and will be transported to the warehouses for storage on a weekly basis. 

Video about Japanese Poop Burger: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/16/scientist-poop-burger-video_n_878210.html