Oil: A World in Short Supply

Did you catch Michael Klare's talk on extreme oil? It is part of the Minerva course called " Oil: A World in Short Supply". Below you can get a quick look at some of his ideas. 

On May 11 Michael Klare, Five Colleges Professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College, came to Union to speak about the era of extreme energy, America’s continued reliance on foreign oil, planning green cities, and rethinking what the good life means in society today. His talk was entitled “The Perils of Extreme Oil: Extractive Strategies in the Twilight Era of Petroleum”.

Klare described how the world’s energy demand will rise by 50% in the next twenty-five years with much of the world depending on the oil coming from Saudi Arabia. He talked about the obstacles of relying on other sources of energy such as the mounting evidence of risks with drilling for shale, the growing environmental effects of extracting coal, and the shaky future of nuclear power. More and more energy will come from extreme energy options like the in Arctic, from deep water sources, from politically hostile environments, and from war zones. The United States has increased imports from Canada and Nigeria. This is problematic because the tar sands from Canada are dirty, pollute drinking water, and release more CO2 emissions than oil combustion. Then there is the reliance on Nigerian oil which pollutes the water in the Niger River Delta and promotes military violence. Three wars have resulted from reliance on oil extracted from the Persian Gulf. There will start to be competition for oil in which countries like China are willing to use military power to take control over the resource. There is no way to make oil safe; society must make a major transformation that requires a rethinking of what the good life means. This talk was certainly worthwhile. Klare is a knowledgeable and fiery speaker. 

 

Oil: A World in Short Supply

The latest speaker in the Minerva course "Oil: A World in Short Supply" was Tariq Ali. Read a summary of his talk below!

On May 16 the writer, filmmaker, political analyst, and historian from London, Tariq Ali spoke at Union about the history of imperialism in the Middle East, how oil creates unpleasant regimes and war, The Great Transformation, and the growing economy and competition from China. His talk was entitled “The Oil Wars and World Politics”.

            Ali talked about the history of the Arab world and how European imperialism divided up the once open world into nation-states. In 1951 there was a democratic revolution in Iran; the people wanted the oil found on their land to be used to develop their country instead of England. The British crushed opposition through torture, repression, and crushing unions until all the educated people fled the country. Ali spoke about The Great Transformation by Karl Polanyi; in the 1940s, the author predicted the choices that would be made in the economic world. Polanyi spoke of labor, nature, and money as fictitious commodities created by capital. One must create social states to control the elements of environmental destruction, the use of labor as a commodity, and the production of money to make more money. In today’s economy, one sees the opposite. That is, workers must put up with slave like conditions and societal advances come at the cost of humans and the environment.

Ali says that the single most important development in the 21^st century is the fact that the center of the world market has shifted eastwards towards China where commodities are produced cheaply due to poor labor conditions. Cars are selling like crazy in China who is catching up to other developed nations with extraordinary use of fossil fuels. He states that America should reduce dependency on cars and create a high speed rail system like that in Europe; however, this will only change through mass demonstrations and if the citizens are willing to give up their life for the cause. Finally he talks about how Americans think that Muslims don’t want democracy when in fact they are willing to die for it.

            Tariq Ali is a highly intelligent and articulate speaker. He talked about the wars fought over oil in a way that Michael Klare did not; he looked at the bigger picture in the world and from an insider perspective as he is from Pakistan. Ali didn’t state that oil itself as a commodity was the problem; rather, the war fought over oil is the real issue. 

 

Oil: A World in Short Supply

Did you hear Riki Ott's talk as a part of the lecture series accompanying the Minerva Course "Oil: A World in Short Supply"? Here's a summary of what she said!

On May 4 marine toxicologist Riki Ott, PhD, spoke about the transition from oil as society’s main energy source, the BP oil spill, and how the US government protects profit over democracy. Ott travels the country to speak about the Exxon Valdez and BP oil spills. Her talk was entitled “From Exxon Valdez to BP Disaster: Changing the End Game”.

Ott described how oil dependency is linked to consumerism, commodification, privatization, globalization, and militarization. She believes that society must change its main energy source as well as its lifestyle, culture, and economy. She talked about the similarities between the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 and the BP oil spill. The effects of the Exxon spill were much worse than scientists had thought, but the laws haven’t changed since. She discussed how BP saved millions of dollars by spraying a chemical dispersant to hide the magnitude of the spill. Ott described how surprised she was that the BP spill didn’t rally support from the public. She talked about how democracy was hijacked at first by the railroad companies then later the corporations. Corporations don’t have to follow certain laws and are protected by constitutional rights through courts. Finally, she stressed the importance of creating a self-reliant community. 

Riki Ott is very knowledgeable about both the Exxon Valdez and BP oil spills. She is an interesting and energetic speaker. Ott really understands the secondary and tertiary effects of the spills on the environment and the people who make those places their home. 

  
Check out Ott's websites at:
www.changingtheendgame.org
www.movetoamend.org
www.energyactioncoalition.org
www.bpoilslick.blogspot.com

Oil: A World in Short Supply

Have you heard about the Minerva course "Oil: A World in Short Supply"?

Each year the College offers an interdisciplinary course open to all students that focuses on a single topic and is taught by a variety of professors. Known as the Minerva Course, this spring’s course is entitled “Oil: A World in Short Supply.” Past topics have included presidential elections, food, technology and society, and globalization.

The 10-week course also includes lectures by accomplished guests. The lectures are free and open to the public.

On Monday April 11 we heard from historian and sociologist Robin Blackburn. Professor Blackburn is a professor of sociology at Essex University in the UK and a distinguished visiting professor of historical studies at The New School, NYC. His talk was entitled “Sweet Power: Global Powers and the Premium Commodity from Sugar to Oil”. 

He spoke about how the Civil War was fought over commodities like cotton and tobacco.Blackburn talked about slavery and the establishment of the slave trade in England, Africa, and the United States. He talked about cotton and sugar and how England came to treasure these commodities. He discussed how slavery developed in the U.S. as the most efficient way of harvesting a large volume of crops from the land. He talked about how this single commodity use spurred war in the U.S.

However it is this blogger's opinion that Blackburn discussed slavery in too great of detail. Oil was not a major topic of his discussion. Students were hoping for more on the subject, but instead got a history lesson. That being said this blogger understands that he is a historian, but he is a sociologist as well. He could have definitely spiced up the lecture with some aspects from sociology. Maybe we could have heard about other wars that were fought over commodities. While Blackburn was definitely knowledgeable in his area of study, hopefully the next speaker will not focus so much on the past

So come and check out the speakers!

On Wednesday, May 4 at 7 p.m. in the Nott come hear Riki Ott, marine biologist, author and former commercial fisherwoman. She will be talking about “Exxon Valdez to Gulf Disaster: Changing the Endgame”.

On Wednesday, May 11 at 7 p.m. in Olin 115 come listen to Michael Klare, journalist and political science professor. He will be discussing “The Perils of Extreme Oil: Extractive Strategies in the Twilight Era of Petroleum".

On Monday, May 16 at 7 p.m. in the Nott come hear Tariq Ali, British writer, filmmaker, political analyst and historian. His talk will be about “The Oil Wars and World Politics.” 

On Wednesday, May 25 at 7 p.m. in the Nott come listen to Mia Birk who is an urban planner. She will be discussing “Pedaling toward a Healthier Planet”.

See you there!

Union's Winter Environmental Speaker Series!

So you knew about Union’s Environmental Science, Policy and Engineering Winter 2011 Seminar Series, right?

Michael Hansen of Consumer Union continued the series “Inside the Controversy on Genetically Modified Food” with a talk on “Genetically Engineered Plants and Animals: Answers to Questions They Don’t Want Asked (Science, Regulation, Environmental and Human Health Impacts)”.

Here Shabana Hoosein '11, gives us a nice summary of the talk. 

“Genetically Engineered Plants and Animals: Answers to Questions They Don’t Want Asked (Science, Regulation, Environmental and Human Health Impacts).”

            Michael Hansen is a Senior Staff Scientist with Consumer’s Union and his educational background is in the field of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. His post-graduate work was on the impacts of biotechnology on agricultural research. Hansen’s talk was a great mixture of politics and science. In the first part of his talk, Hansen spoke about genetics from an ecological perspective. He said that the more complicated work you do with DNA, the more unstable it is. Most things in nature work in a similar way. For example, if you alter things in the environment, the environment will not be able to recover and exist naturally.

Hansen brought along another valid point from the science perspective. He said that in other DNA modification studies, there is usually some sort of “selective marker” to show if the modified gene is being expressed. Genetically modified crops use antibiotic resistance as a selective marker. Therefore, to test if the genetically modified gene will show, they link it to the antibiotic gene and test if the antibiotic gene shows. When ingesting the antibiotic marker, there is a risk that the antibiotic resistance is transferred to E. coli bacteria present in the guts of humans. This would make E. coli bacteria resistant to antibiotics. E.coli is the leading agent responsible for food poisoning. If we create antibiotic resistant E.coli, it would be more difficult to treat food poisoning cases.  The antibiotic marker is currently not used anymore to make new GE plants. However, what Hansen said is that the crops currently out there still have the antibiotic marker in them.

Hansen continued his talk on the FDA’s involvement with GM crops in our markets. In 1992 the FDA claimed that, “new technologies are extensions at the molecular level of traditional methods used to achieve some goals as traditional plant breeding.” However, the FDA does not hold their own experiments, require pre-market assessments or make any conclusions on their own. Many people in the public may believe that the FDA is on the consumer’s side, but that is not the case. I thought this was a strong argument to show that the FDA does not have much of a say behind the science that they agree with (or disagree with). Hansen also points out that in 2001, the FDA admitted that biotechnology and traditional breeding are indeed different because of external pressure from political riots in Seattle. This goes to show that government organizations like the FDA rely on private companies or public upheaval to determine the organization’s opinion. The second half of the argument really tied it all together and made me realize that the government does not work alone.

            Everything that Hansen was saying was very strong until things got technical. His argument on gene transformation was not explained very well. He said in 2003, insertional mutagenesis was used on male children who were born without an immune system. The male children were doing well until 3 out of the 11 children were diagnosed with leukemia. Firstly, mutagenesis is very different from gene modification. Secondly, were there any other environmental factors that could have had an impact on these children developing leukemia? Most likely, the leukemia was developed through this mutagenesis gene transformation. There is some evidence that RNA can actually change the DNA and therefore cause mutations in your genome, which can lead to cancer. Conventionally, it is believed that DNA makes RNA and RNA makes proteins. During gene therapy, RNA is usually injected to heal a patient. On the other hand, some evidence suggests that this injected RNA alters the DNA of the patient.  As a member of the audience, it seemed like Hansen was persuading us to believe that mutagenesis on human genes is just as bad as genetic modification on plant genes. However, mutagenesis IS different gene splicing and the human body is much more complex than plant structures.

I feel like Hansen wanted explain many things with great scientific detail and evidence, but he did not have the time. He went through a bunch of scientific papers just to give the audience an idea of the data that we have on genetically modified foods. So far, Hansen has been my favorite speaker. Even though he kind of leaves the audience hanging (and only giving them main points), he encourages everyone to do more research and look into these studies on our own.  Not only that, Hansen gave a lot of raw data and data from around the globe. Therefore, he did not only look at the opinions of developing or poor countries.

At the end of his talk, he made two conclusions about genetically modified crops. The first conclusion is that there is insufficient data. We need to have studies that have a solid design, large sample sizes and are observed over an extended period of time. The second conclusion was that the US policy on GE plants is inadequate. There are many unanswered health questions, no safety assessments (or labeling) required and increased use of pesticides. I liked the end of his talk because he was able to sum up his views clearly, while not being overly repetitive. Then again, I didn’t enjoy the tension during the question and answer section. Hansen’s passion and confidence in science makes me believe his strong arguments the most out of the 3 speakers we have seen so far.

Ozone Cookbook!

 Are you a vegetarian? 

Do you find yourself throwing together the same boring meals all the time?

Wait, Union's own environmentally conscious Ozone House puts together a vegetarian cookbook?

 Ozone cookbook is an entirely vegetarian cookbook created by Ozone House. It is sold in the spring, and all proceeds go to a great cause. Submit your favorite recipes! It's seasonal this year so if you know of a great fall soup, or some awesome chip dip for the summer, please write and design an 8.5 X 11 (i.e. standard computer paper) with your recipe, and either scan it and email Maddie Cullerton at

cullertm@garnet.union.edu, or put it in mailbox #0468.

Be sure to submit your recipes by the end of spring break/the first Wednesday in April!


Is it time you take a walk on the wild side...and go green by not eating meat?

Check out Chew On This: 30 Reasons to go Vegetarian

Do it in the Dark!

If you weren't at the last U-Sustain meeting, then you missed the results of Do It in the Dark, Union's campus-wide energy saving competition!

At the meeting, we heard from Professor Puliafico about the competition for all student dorms, Minerva houses, off campus housing, and Administrative buildings.

Trophies with a light bulb fixed to the top were handed out to these first place winners in four different categories based on the size of the building:

Apartment Living: 702 Roger Hull Place
Mid-Size Living (Minerva Houses): Golub House
Large Dormitory (Fox, Davidson, College Park Hall): Richmond Dorm
Administrative Building: Silliman Hall

Congratulations to the winners!