ThinkLady

One local food meal = one step toward reducing foreign oil dependence

A couple of weeks ago Transition OKC helped host a Local Food Meet and Greet. The Meet and Greet provided a host of folks passionate about growing a local food system the opportunity to network and get to know each other better. It was enthusiastically and well-attended, with more than 110 people coming on a sunny Saturday afternoon to IAO Gallery in Oklahoma City to nosh on locally produced food, wine and do a little “speed meeting.”

The event was organized by the “Going Locavore Group,” a loosely organized and growing grassroots coalition (or alliance) of several Oklahoma City organizations focused on catalyzing and transitioning our food system to a healthier, more sustainable and resilient one – and one strategy for doing so is to localize it. The team organizing the event was for the most part all-volunteer, and although we were scrambling up until the last minute to put all the details in place – we pulled it off – a total team effort if there ever was one. If you have any interest in networking with this group, or want more info, email us at localfoodokc@gmail.com. 

As one of the volunteers working on this event, part of my task was to put together a slide show about the reasons for transitioning to eating local food, and to provide a high-level overview of some of the initiatives in other states focused on growing regional and local food systems. As we researched, we discovered coalitions in New York City and Vermont have aggressive strategic plans for regional and localized food sheds and the body of work on this topic is growing exponentially -- encouraging.

Above you’ll find one of the slides from the presentation and I’ll be sharing more of these in the coming days. Eventually will put the whole presentation online here at ThinkLady and at other sites such as Sustainable OKC’s blog  Fresh Greens and Transition OKC so if it is useful in any way to other local food efforts, it’s available for anyone to use and adapt.

In the meantime, given the high price of gas these days, the fact the era of cheap, easy-to-produce oil is over, and the growing production decline in one of the U.S.’s major suppliers of oil – Mexico -- thought this slide might be a good one to start with. It illustrates one way we can begin to reduce our dependence on foreign oil imports. Ebullient and grateful hat tip to Barbara Kingsolver and Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life, for helping us imagine a different way of eating in the world.

Imagine abundant local food. Imagine the jobs it will create and the ways it will strengthen our local economy. Envision the health it will bring to our school kids, our communities, the resilience it will give our communities. Imagine how much we can reduce our country’s oil addiction if we eat not just one, but two local food meals a week, three, five, etc. Imagine. And then try it. I think you’ll like it.

If you’d like info on how to get started eating locally head over to Transition OKC’s website where we have a page full of local food resources.

Technorati Tags: Community,local food,localization,locavores,conservation,resilience,peak oil,transition,sustainability

Demand an apology to arugula

Yesterday I read the press release about Oklahoma House Bill 2151, by state Rep. Don Armes, R-Faxon. In Orwellian language, Armes claims the bill will, “… simplify regulation of livestock producers by making the state the single-source regulator in Oklahoma (other than the federal government).”

I was struck by the labeling, divisive language of Armes’ quotes.

"Unfortunately, there’s been a trend of over-reach by fringe groups who don’t know much about animals, agriculture production, or the free market, yet still feel the need to impose their version of ‘animal Nirvana’ on local farmers and ranchers through arbitrary regulations," said Armes, R-Faxon. "This bill will simply ensure that livestock regulations are developed by experts at the state level who know what they’re doing."

And this:

"Let's be honest: The majority of people in San Francisco probably think the chicken just magically appears ready to eat next to the arugula and tofu in the grocery aisle," Armes said. "In a place like Oklahoma, where there are literally more cattle than people and agriculture production generates billions of dollars in gross state product, it just makes sense to have trained experts making regulatory decisions."

Honesty? Really! There are so many prevarications and inane statements in just these two quotes it's hard to know where to start.

First, about that "let's say hateful things about Californians" thing: I have a sister and brother-in-law who are former residents of the Bay Area and are farmers. They live two hours north of San Francisco and operate a small, sustainable and organic family farm in Mendocino County, Calif. They are amazing, informed people with a firm grasp on the agricultural business, very connected to their land and to the local food movement in their county as well as in that demonized Bastion of Enlightened Eating known as San Francisco. I am so proud of them for what they are working hard to do. Wanna talk sweat equity? This is it!

This summer they shared their abundance of produce with local food banks and they are constantly hosting visitors at the farm to teach them how to be more self-sufficient and live sustainably. Most especially my sis and bro-in-law understand the inhumanity, pollution and public health hazards of industrialized factory farms. As farmers they were huge supporters of Proposition 2, the ballot question Armes references in his press release.

Second, given all the problems our nation and Oklahoma faces, are belittling, mischaracterizations such as these from Armes the mark of leadership, or of someone bought and paid for by the Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) industry?

Blogger Oklavore wrote a beautiful, eloquent reply to this nonsense:

I am sick of people using food to exacerbate perceived divisions. Just yesterday a state representative invoked “arugula” to conjure feelings of “us” and “them.” How is it that a salad green has come to represent elites, or in this case ignorant, elitist city-folk? Remember Obama’s so-called “arugula moment” in mid-2007? Ridiculous. It grows in the wild and is easy to cultivate, for goodness sake! What’s the big deal? It’s been hijacked as a political tool (remember “freedom fries”?). Could it be that Californians have actually gotten more informed about food and agriculture and that’s why they voted for Proposition 2? What do you think?

More of Oklavore’s reply here. And more about California’s Proposition 2 here.

Third, as Oklavore notes, why pick on arugula! As I write this, I am feasting on arugula harvested from my backyard cold frame. It grows in the winter dammit! It's great with eggs. It's great in dips. It's heavenly in salads. I think it would be wonderful to flood Rep. Armes email inbox demanding he apologize to arugula! Or maybe we can take him a nice supply of arugula from Oklahoma's local farmers along with a stack of studies about what CAFOs are doing to our grand land. Or maybe we call the TV stations and invite them to a salad sit-in! 

But fourth and finally and more to heart of the matter: The demand for an apology to arugula is light-hearted, but this bill and its true intent are deadly serious. I think this bill has nothing to do with supporting local agriculture, and everything to do with protecting big agribiz CAFOs from any possible future federal regulation of their Grinch-hearted, inhumane CAFO pens and their filthy practices. 

CAFOs will spend millions in lobbying and advertising and spin factories to protect their taxpayer-subsidized machine as long as possible regardless of the overwhelming mountain of evidence confirming the damage they do to Oklahoma’s rural communities and economies, people, environment, public health, watersheds, tourism and natural resources. So maybe we can help Rep. Armes understand we the people aren’t as uninformed as he thinks and won’t take this gross assault on arugula, on family and friends in California, and most importantly, on Oklahoma's rural and urban communities. From our container and backyard urban gardens, from our small, thoughtfully run farms, from our hearts and minds yearning for healthy communities, clean skies and water, and humanity for all people and all species, we can can speak louder than Armes' bully pulpit.

Here’s Armes’ email address: donarmes@okhouse.gov and his phone number (405) 557-7307.

If you want, throw in a few links to studies about CAFOs in your email too. See below for links to get you started. Please spread the word and share more studies and info if you want.

· CAFOs Uncovered: The Untold Costs of Confined Animal Feeding Operations

· Industrial Livestock at the Taxpayer Trough: How Large Hog and Dairy Operations are Subsidized by the Environmental Quality Incentives Program

· Local control and CAFOs: A public health issue for rural counties

· Assessment of Impacts on Health, Local Economies, and the Environment with Suggested Alternatives

· Farmers Worry About CAFO Dairy: Pollution, Land Values Are Concerns

Getting our energy act together

Last week the Energy Bulletin highlighted the executive summary of the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) World Energy Report. The full report will be out this week. The Executive Summary is 13 pages well worth reading, however, the IEA asked the Energy Bulletin to remove the executive summary from its Web site which it did. Hopefully, that summary will be available later somewhere online. 

The IEA is a highly respected and credible energy policy advisor to 28 member countries founded during the energy crisis of the 1970s. The United State is a member of the IEA. The IEA's mandate today is ...

... to incorporate the “Three E’s” of balanced energy policy making: energy security, economic development and environmental protection. Current work focuses on climate change policies, market reform, energy technology collaboration and outreach to the rest of the world, especially major consumers and producers of energy like China, India, Russia and the OPEC countries.

I read some of the summary yesterday, before the Energy Bulletin had to remove it from its Web site. What I found remarkable about the executive summary was its frank, blunt and even dire language. This is another wake up call to the world and especially big energy consumers like the U.S. The situation is not hopeless but we are running out of time. As the assessment makes very clear, the time is now to get up off our collective fossil-fuel powered ass and get our energy act together. Maybe that means using a different source of energy for getting our ass around; bicycling anyone??

The summary makes some great points about conservation and how much money and energy conserving will save us -- a lot -- completely obliterating the notion conservation is a "personal virtue." It can only exist as a personal virtue if one sees oneself as completely autonomous from the rest of the planet, people, species, and economy. I haven't met anyone like that. Have you?

An aside: Using "personal virtue" as an excuse for continuing to guzzle energy sounds like an excuse, code words for continuing selfish behavior. The energy crunch will require unselfish acts on the part of everyone. And yeah, yeah, here we go because we'll have plenty of folk saying we can't regulate personal energy use. I can empathize; I dislike having anyone telling me how to live, what I can do. Preference would be that we don't have to regulate personal behavior, however we do have laws against drunk driving, stealing, murder, etc. This is "regulating personal behavior." And lest we forget human nature, we know, given the recent financial crisis which came about due to deregulation and greed, that some just can't regulate their greed. When that kind of egregious behavior hurts the rest of us, we have to take action.

Okay, so what if we taxed luxury energy use (we'd have to define what that would mean) and used those tax revenues to implement conservation education, home energy conservation measures for low-income levels, R&D for clean, renewable energy systems, and building the infrastructure for wind and solar energy delivery systems, state-of-the-art rail system, etc? Those who can afford the luxury use can continue up to a point, but at greatly increased price. Those of us who can't afford to use above the luxury line, don't. Those who can't use luxury energy, benefit in two ways: 1) by learning how to conserve, and in implementing those steps, we decrease our own energy usage and save money, and 2) funding of the infrastructure from the luxury energy use revenue stream means middle and lower incomes will pay less for these publicly funded services.

Before the Energy Bulletin took the executive summary down, the Energy Bulletin selected some highlights from the executive summary and more of the those highlights are available on their Web site. The summary opens with this …

The world’s energy system is at a crossroads. Current global trends in energy supply

and consumption are patently unsustainable — environmentally, economically,

socially. But that can — and must — be altered; there’s still time to change the

road we’re on.

Closes with this …

The energy future will be very different

For all the uncertainties highlighted in this report, we can be certain that the

energy world will look a lot different in 2030 than it does today. The world energy

system will be transformed, but not necessarily in the way we would like to see. We

can be confident of some of the trends highlighted in this report: the growing weight

of China, India, the Middle East and other non-OECD regions in energy markets and in

CO2 emissions; the rapidly increasing dominance of national oil companies; and the

emergence of low-carbon energy technologies. And while market imbalances could

temporarily cause prices to fall back, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the era

of cheap oil is over. But many of the key policy drivers (not to mention other, external

factors) remain in doubt. It is within the power of all governments, of producing and

consuming countries alike, acting alone or together, to steer the world towards a

cleaner, cleverer and more competitive energy system. Time is running out and the

time to act is now.

More info here ::: http://www.energybulletin.net/node/47128

And the New York Times and Wall Street Journal provide some analysis:

NY Times ::: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/business/07energy.html?em 

WSJ ::: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122600164194705909.html?mod=googlenews_wsj