AliveAndKickN

You are what you sell

Every day, while I'm out and about trying to help my clients become more energy efficient, I look at things that are easy to grasp - lighting as an example, which consumes as much as 70% of the total electric bill.  In hospitality and healthcare, I look at commercial laundry, and the potential to reduce hot water and chemicals.  One thing that has always bothered me was the ever present vending machine.  Here I am, walking through a Kosher nursing home where they don't allow outside food to come in, but they have no issue selling Snapple in a refrigerated vending machine.  I found a PDF created by Southern California Edison back in 2003, talking about how an average company spends $250/year on electricity to run each of these inefficient vending machines.  If you trend that forward to today's rates, which are essentially double what they were five years ago, this is more than $500/year in electricity.  At the time of the PDF, supposedly there were 4 million in service nationally.  Factoring in what is typically served in the vending machines, I have to ask any property manager if it's even worth keeping them, especially if it's a property with a cafeteria or access to a nearby convenience store (schools, healthcare, hospitality, malls).  Note - If you remember my previous post about TerraCycle using worm poop as fertilizer as opposed to chemicals, they are at it again.  TerraCycle is now recycling yogurt cups, juice paks, cookie wrappers and more.  Raise money and do something good for the environment. 

Coke says no one wants to pay for the more efficient models.  I know who's paying the electric bills, and I have a pretty good idea of the result of the consumption.  So can anyone guess what my solution would be?

   

What if...Cows really got "mad?"

2007 Net earnings at ADM was $2.2 billion.  Net earnings at Cargill was $4billion.  Net income at ConAgra was $1.5billion.  How much of this is from taxpayer subsidized money?  The Farm Bill is still up for review, but doesn't appear to be changing much from the last one.  Supposedly our transition to shoulder to shoulder animal farming, and long distance distribution is a bigger contributor to environmental issues than anything else (grain and fuel for processing and transportation, clear cutting and drought, runoff into drinking water).  There is a mass run on food prices globally as fuel prices increase.  Anybody see a problem here?

What if we took all of the processed grain eating animals and processed them for food production?  No I am not for animal cruelty, but these animals are currently in this capacity as of our time in history.  Then, we can actually migrate the animals back towards eating grass instead of corn and steroids.  Supposedly Europe is going to start imposing taxes on fuel used for international food distribution (currently there is none, which has made it cheaper to grow elsewhere and ship).  Maine has imposed a tax on soda.  Drops in the petroleum bucket if we don't do something more radical.  Feed the world, and change things for a better environment in the future?  I know too simple.

The seeds I've sown indoors for the past several weeks went into the ground yesterday.  Some more will go in this week.  With any luck, I'll have broccoli, cauliflower, snap peas, beets, cucumbers, squash, and pumpkins.  Throw in some sunflowers, berries and marigolds for color and to attract birds.  With all of this ruffage, I wish I could plant toilet paper.          

30 Cups every second

I saw a commercial this morning for Dunkin Donuts, touting that they pour 30 cups of coffee every second.  Being that I'm not the brightest mind in the room at any given time, I checked my trusty SpongeBob calculator.  That amounts to 2,592,000 cups of coffee/day.  How much of that goes into styrofoam?  How much of that styrofoam gets recycled? 

I make a pot of coffee every morning for me and my wife, and whoever potentially drops by.  We fill up our reusable portable coffee containers, and go on our way.  Whatever is left at the end is made into ice coffee for a later date, and the coffee grounds go into the composter.  It probably costs us a quarter per cup, as opposed to over a dollar, and there's no waste.  So simple, yet seemingly so far away. 

I have no colon. What's your excuse?

With my current status as "running for town council," I have entrusted my campaign to my boys.  So far, they've come up with the above mentioned slogan, as well as the bumper sticker IFRTALOT.  I'm not sure how long I'll keep them as campaign management, and thankfully I am unopposed.  Anyway, in honor of Earth Day, I stopped at Kings Supermarket last night where Marcal Sunrise 100% recycled content toilet paper was on sale (as well as organic milk), and I had coupons from the Record, so it was more affordable.  So far, I would compare the texture to halfway between the bathroom at Giants Stadium and the Ritz Carlton.  With the amount of time I spend in the bathroom, if I can tolerate a little exfoliation, anyone can.  Let's see what the wife says. 

Is earth day sustainable?

With so many companies, individuals, and organizations participating in Earth Day this year, how are we still in the toilet?  At this point, if you are not doing something, you must be in the "dark."  But to digress, I actually worked today (shameless plug - I was helping a hotel make their laundry more efficient and eco-friendly, and with a printer helping them with their inefficient lighting), and now I'm watching Idol/CNN's coverage of the primary.  I compare it to how I am with the kids.  I spend time with them throughout the week, so when the time comes for holidays and/or school events, I let other parents participate.  So in other words, I didn't just go out and eat organically, change a light bulb, use eco-friendly cleaners, clean a stream, plant a garden, and recycle everything possible today.  I try to celebrate Earth Day whenever possible.  Will others?

A busy day indeed

Yesterday, while I was reasearching printing companies for Robin's next stationery endeavor, eco-friendly wrapping paper (shameless plug), we came across what appears to be a good fit with our goals, a printer in the Carolinas who not only prints with as little environmental impact as possible, but also blogs about what he sees as unfortunate behavior in his neck of the woods as well.  Barefoot Press is the organization, and one of their issues is about how Coke and Pepsi appear to be exempt from rationing, even as the entire southeast is at drought levels.  As always, I am not anti-business, but when a product has no societal value and they use up precious natural resources (drinking water, grain, fossil fuel), they get no sympathy from me (happy meal toys, as another example).  Anyway, assuming we can create our product line in an affordable eco-friendly fashion, and tie it in with a good humanitarian efforts such as 1% for the Planet or Earthshare, it could have some viability.  National Wildlife Foundation could not accommodate us as we were too small currently.  I don't see it as a bad thing however.  With more companies looking at sustainability as a good business practice, causes like NWF will continue to become more popular as a tie-in.  I wish them only the best of luck. 

On a different note, the video commercial that Robin and I created for the Obama campaign apparently made the cut, and we've started to spread the word.  I hope it does ok.  There are some talented competitors out there, but I think we did pretty good for novices.  Hopefully the MoveOn world will agree.  Either way, if my message has the desired effect of having the country think in terms of a "New Deal" presidency starting in 2009, I will have succeeded.  A lot needs to be done.

A friend sent me some information about "Chilean Sea Bass" and how it is a fish called the Patagonian Toothfish, which was the trivial part.  The part about being on the EDF's not recommended list was more important.  Thanks Nate for the info, and keep it coming.  I'll get to everything eventually.         

Everybody got plans for Earth Day this weekend?  It should be time to plant outside soon.   

Food, Water, and More Politics

My previous post made it into the Record today, although in its edited state, much of my sarcasm was lost in the shuffle, including the fact that I do shop at A&P.  Anyway, the news this week, aside from the flack that ABC "News" received for their lack of moral fortitude in the Presidential "debate" centered around the shortage of food, or more correctly, the inability to afford food globally.  When I think about people making a few dollars a week and then scouring the garbage dumps looking for scraps, I think about the world around us locally.  We have row after row of useless "food" products lining our supermarkets, turning precious resources into petroleum-based nonsense.  Organic food costs are increasing as well, as it costs more to deliver, causing many organic farmers to reconsider their choice.  We have thousands of patients in nursing homes being kept alive with cans of nutraceuticals against their will (I distribute this stuff by the way), costing Medicare hundreds of thousands of dollars each per year.  We average 390 pounds of trash per mile of shoreline, more than any of the country in the world by far.  Freedom lovers around me scoff when I have discussions like this, citing that the US is great because we have such freedoms.  The question is, what is the cost of this freedom?  These same individuals don't like big government, and the costs that come with it.  So when our freedoms create excess issues like we have now, are we missing the boat?  When a reservoir dries up and bags of dog poop and various other discarded items are found at the bottom, are those business people going to clean it up with corporate money or is it "big government's responsibility?" 

In Maine, the Governor just signed a bill implementing a tax on soda, and an increased tax on alcohol.  In NJ, we are looking at a huge deficit, and closings of various departments, including Agriculture and state parks.  If Maine can take on big food to pay for other programs, can NJ?  Can other states and what would be the outcome?

We still haven't learned yet

Today's paper had the world arguing about how to feed the poor while saving the environment.  Of course no one can agree, especially when it comes to money.  Farmers aren't allowed to make money, as poor people don't get fed.  Some call the shift towards corn-based bio-fuel a crime against humanity, since the food industry's emphasis on corn, chemicals and petroleum now makes it too expensive to eat.  Today's Presidential speech talked about climate change and initiatives taken by Presidential Bush's last eight years.  He took credit for the positive changes that took place naturally as a result of technology.  He set timeframes of 2020 and 2025, as benchmarks to recduce and/or stop greenhouse gas increases, so we now have 12-17 years to completely screw up.  He even used the term "clean coal" in a section discussing how incentives should be "technology-neutral" (wait - wasn't corn-based biofuel the big winner in the energy bill?).  Also, since the southeastern states can't agree on a water-sharing plan, the federal government is proposing a solution.  A couple of endangered fish and mollusks (or are they bi-valves) will take a hit, but of course, that's the price of progress isn't it.  At least we humans will get to water our lawns, and continue to bottle water and soda.  Presidential hopeful Senator McCain offered a solution to the gas price issue by doing away with the gas tax.  The federal government is in serious debt and at the same time, the top 50 hedge fund managers made 30 gazillion dollars in 2007, most of it at tax rates significantly lower than what you and I pay.  Anybody have a different solution maybe?

My very proud Republican friend says that government should keep out of other's business, as long as they are doing the right things.  I agree.  Except...what are the right things?  Congratulations to everyone who ran for school board, won or lost.            

If we're short on food, why are there lunchables?

As prices rise on grains such as wheat, corn and soybeans, farmers are being pressured to spurn conservation.  I just want to make sure I understand this correctly once again, because it seems a bit confusing.  Farmers were previously paid to not use land for crops.  Ok, I can understand the goal for conservation.  Lack of wetlands caused Katrina to be such a nightmare.  Lack of preserved land caused the recent midwest flooding to be such a nightmare.  Now as I also understand it, in the past, farmers were not paid enough for their crops to survive, let alone make a profit.  Now that costs have risen and farmers can make some money, farmers are being essentially asked to take land out from decommission, and put them into commission, thereby putting more food into the system.  So here is my question - has the system worked?  In other words, has cheap food done well in our country?  If so, and there is a shortage of food, then I can understand the pressure.  However, if the opinion is to the contrary, maybe more expensive food isn't such a bad thing after all.  I decided to check my A&P circular that arrived in the paper today.  Going with the assumption that high commodity prices on grain and fuel have affected the food supply, there should be certain items costing more.  Yet here is what was on sale:

Pepsi Cans, Snapple Bottles, Kelloggs Cereals, Pop Tarts, Kraft BBQ Sauce, America's Choice Foam Plates, Grain Fed Pork Chops, Dasani Water Bottles, Jell-O Pudding Singles and Rice Krispy Squares (who has time to make those from scratch!!), Teddy Grahams, Tostitos, Coke 2-Liters, Powerade, Kraft Handi Snaks (whatever that means), Ritz Bits Sandwiches (once again, who has time to put crackers and PB together!!), Lunchables (my favorite), Minute Maid Punches, Entenman's Cakes. 

Now understand that I do in fact shop at A&P, and obviously other items were on sale, but every one of these items is made with grain and fossil fuel.  I am selective in what I purchase, and typically I avoid stuff that is over packaged, made with high fructose corn syrup, and when I buy fresh, it is labeled organic and/or hormone-free.  In other words, I pretty much avoid the middle of the store except for Ben and Jerry's.  But once again, I ask the question, if prices are high, why are the products made with grain and petroleum on sale, or even being made?  And second, with all of the diet ads, health clubs, and self-help books out there, is eating less a bad thing?  Food, energy and politics - you've got me started again.  Who wins with cheap food?  Who loses?         

Can my child get into an Ivy League College?

This week, it was "meet the candidates" night for the schoolboard.  Usually, events like these are not well attended, so you should have seen the look of surprise on the custodial staff when over 100 parents showed up at the school and more seats were needed.  The conversation was cordial among the three candidates, and although the theme was "change" to get ready for the future, I don't think anybody was ready to change for changes sake.  We have a good thing here, and the goal is to improve.  Revenue is going to need to come from somewhere as budgets tighten.  Reducing energy is a good place to start and recycling can generate revenue, so those are good avenues.  So what is important - core programs, extracurricular activities, safety, homework amount?  I'm not an educator so I don't have the answers.  However, I get a feel from our little town that ultimately the goal is for our children to do better that we did.  I worry that parents only want top educated athletes who can play multiple musical instruments, and be prom kings/queens.  Supposedly soccer moms and dads spend 17 full days/year schlepping kids to and from events.  My brother the teacher in a similar type of town on Long Island typically asks his parents one of two things - for his students, he asks how many think their children will get into an Ivy League school.  For his players, he asks how many think their children will get a scholarship.  Often the percentage in the room is significantly higher than actually occurs.  My wife's friend works in human resources for a publishing house in Boston.  She tells stories of "helicopter" parents who descend on her when their kids don't get jobs.   

Whether right or wrong, I take a different approach.  As a freshman in high school, my family moved to Florida.  From tenth grade on, I had a pretty exhaustive schedule.  I went to school during the day, played soccer after school, went to work in restaurants at night, and did it all the same the next day, often sleeping through Humanities.  My grades were fine, I got ample playing time, and I was able to afford an awesome 1970 Chevy Nova and the bondo necessary to patch up the rust.  Weekends were usually the same, but substituting friends for school and something else for Mountain Dew at night.  I did ok.  Without me lecturing, I hope my kids learn to appreciate what they have, and also understand that just as many don't have nearly enough.  When others can't win, I think we all lose something. 

I wish all of the school board candidates good luck, locally and elsewhere.       

What if...My Best Job Function was as a Father?

I've decided to go where few bloggers have dared to go.  Last night I stood in front of an audience of fellow soccer coaches and parents, and announced my idea to help people who maybe can't help themselves as much as we can.  I'm not sure if I said anything coherent, and I'm not sure if the clapping afterward was because my ideas were good or because they were trying to get out in time for the NCAA basketball tournament.  Either way, the "goal" is to raise money for two organizations that use soccer as a medium for helping others - Grassroots Soccer that helps raise AIDS awareness in Africa and Street Soccer USA, an organization in Charlotte that helps the homeless and disenfranchised.  In addition, I've decided to run for town council.  So far, only two of us are running for two seats.  I think the latest CNN poll has me tied for third with Brooke Shields, who hasn't lived in town for years.  I better make sure I don't attend any radical sermons anytime soon. 

I guess I'll find out if any of my rantings has had the desired effect.  Be careful what you ask for.  If I fail, I can always go back to being dad...and work.  My 12 year old thought the attached video was poignant (maybe he didn't use that word, but I like it).  As he gets older, I'll take any input he offers.  Today, he preferred me dropping him off at religious school early, as opposed to stopping at my office to take care of some business first.       

Labels (#6 of many)

My wife and I had the rare opportunity to visit Barnes and Noble for the first time in a long time, as we usually purchase on-line.  But since we were in the area, we stopped in.  Just as I find the aisles in the supermarkets unbalanced, I found BN to be as well.  How many self-help and cookbooks are really necessary?  After finally getting past all of the "for Dummies" and "Idiot Guides," I found books on energy, science, wildlife and gardening in the back near the clearance racks.  I was hoping to find a "Better energy policy for Dummies" guide, or maybe a "Idiots guide to good agricultural stewarship."  Unfortunately, neither of those appear to exist.

This spring, my oldest son is playing soccer for a new coach, as I am taking a backseat to head coaching.  In talking politics with the coach, he proudly proclaimed himself as "conservative as they come."  I honestly don't know what that means and since it was in the middle of the game, I didn't want to discuss or debate, but I was tempted to ask him if he thought that a tree-hugger was a conservative or a liberal.  Conservatives seem to proclaim themselves as the keepers of National Security and of responsible spending.  Tree-Huggers espouse energy efficiency.  Independence from the constraints of foreign oil IS national security.  Reduced energy usage IS smart financially.  I'm guessing that's not what he meant however.

By the way, #s 1 and 2 children haven't stopped nagging me to get more lunchables since my failed experiment last week.  Today they wanted to stop for food on the way home from soccer.  It didn't matter what it was, as long as it wasn't homemade.  In the end, I held my ground, and they were very happy with the chicken piccata and brown rice I made.  #3 child came home from a birthday party today with a great party favor - a flower pot with seeds and kids gardening tools.  Way to go, whoever's birthday it was.  We planted the tomatoes, but we'll hold off on the pumpkins and sunflowers for a while still.   

      

Show and Tell

My portion of the Food and Water evening consisted around displaying and describing my favorite products that bombard my kids every morning while we watch Nickelodeon in preparation for the day ahead.  Since I was going to be away from refrigeration for an extended period of time, and since I am frugal about wasting "food," I limited my choices at the A&P to only dry goods.  I chose products around three central themes - ingredients, packaging, and potential misleading information (I also chose based around the potential for my kids to like me for a change as I typically limit their crap intake).  So what do my kids nag me about daily - Snapple (made from the best caffeine and high fructose corn syrup on earth, since no one wants mediocre stuff), Chef Boyardee Mini-Bites (we need more beef in a can to get that real military feel), Coca-Cola (take precious drinking water, add color, bubbles and petroleum and ship it), Echinacea (which enhances the immune system on the front but is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease on the back), Ortega Taco Kit (since no one has time to put together taco shells, spices and taco sauce separately) and of course my favorite, Lunchables (proper use of kids toys to market eight cents worth of crackers and cheese), and Glucerna (I didn't go into too much detail on that one, as half of my counterparts are getting close to that age). 

Unfortunately my plan didn't have the desired effect.  Upon seeing their dreams come true this morning,  like kids rolling out of bed on (insert gift-giving holiday here), the wolves gorged on sugar, processing and caffeine.  Dr. Jekyll took over when it was time for school and it took listening to Weird Al Yankovich and Sir Mix a Lot in the car to calm them down.  Best laid plans.

Michael Pollan and Kim Stevenson of the NY Times see the upcoming price issues as having the potential to "produce" some desired effect.  Everything processed and packaged requires shipping, which requires petroleum, which is becoming very expensive.  Meat and dairy from animals that eat corn instead of grass will become more expensive.  Americans who are accustomed to paying less as a percentage of their income for foods like these may abruptly turn towards local fruits and vegetables and grass-fed animal products, which are less likely to suffer the huge price increases.  What will Monsanto, Cargill, ADM, and ConAgra do?  Hmm...   

What if..North Korea Poisoned the Meat?

Tonight's meeting was a presentation given by Food and Water Watch, a DC group that was previously part of Ralph Nader's consumer safety group.  Their campaign, if you couldn't tell from the name, is aimed towards creating a more sustainable environment towards the food we eat and the water we drink.  Among other things, the presenter posed a poignant question - what if a North Korean person or group, or someone else from the "Axis of Evil" claimed responsibility for the potential poisoning of the gazillion pounds of recalled beef sent to our schoolchildren?  Would the NJ National Guard units be on their way to the Korean peninsula as we speak?  Obviously this wasn't the case, and there was no repercussion since it was an isolated accidental case (by the way, food companies are not obligated legally to issue a recall - it's optional since they self-police).  Food and Water Watch is trying to keep the Farm Bill from passing "as is", since the system of having 4 companies controlling 85% of our food obviously isn't working.  It probably won't pass until the 2008 election anyway, as the current congress can't make a deal that works.  The presentor doesn't believe market forces will change the system enough, as only certain people of means will be able to have a choice.  Those who shop at Wal Mart and/or people who don't have much option, will take what they get unfortunately (does Whole Foods take food stamps?).  As a wholesome organic company gets big enough and takes market share, the bigger companies gobble them up and try and change the rules.  Now I understand business, and progress, and as long as companies like Stonyfield get acquired but maintain their integrity, I have no issue.  When quality is reduced, everyone loses except shareholders once again.

Once again, I ask what's wrong with this picture:

The farmer has only a few choices in seed.  He has to plant fence to fence in order to break even so he needs chemicals to nourish the soil.  He has only a few companies to sell his crops to, and it costs more to transport them further away to sell them.  Or how about this scenario.  The farmer has to keep animals shoulder to shoulder to make a living.  He has to feed them corn and steroids to fatten them in 18 months instead of 3 years.  He has to inject them with antibiotics to keep them from getting sick in such close proximity.  The runoff from the crap pools pollutes the local watershed.  Once again, he only has a few companies to sell his animals to, and it costs more to transport it further away to sell them.  With no one looking out for the individual farmer, everyone wonders why the next generation runs away to the big city.  With subsidies from the farm bill putting Mexican corn and sugar farmers out of business, we wonder why the family farmers are being replaced with illegal immigrants.  Interestingly enough, although the issue was the infrastructure of our water system needing an overhaul (since it apparently hasn't been done in 30+ years), much of the questions revolved around foreign companies owning our water systems, such as Suez, which owns United Water.  In the end, patriotism keeps us from looking at the bigger picture - we're doing this to ourselves, and only a handful are benefitting from it.      

Fuel prices are going through the roof.  Corn prices are going through the roof.  Less than 2% of all food brought into the country is actually inspected.  Five million new people are diagnosed with nutritionally related illnesses each year.  Would it make sense to change?  Still willing to let the NJ government do away with the Department of Agriculture?  Are there ways of raising revenue while reducing bad habits - drive thru fast food tax anybody?  What if NJ were to sell Bergen and Hudson Counties to NYC?  The state could reduce its debt and get out of congestion pricing at the same time.