I suspect it is because they had already invested money into blade engineering and couldn't back out of that. Another waste of taxpayers money. So, now they all these probability comparisons of how fewer birds hit trubines that cars, buildings, etc., to justify the large blades. Each individual blade is soo long they have to cut the tip off in order to get it inside a huge hanger to test its endurance with their simulators.
Earl
Paul Barby wrote:
Message Let me venture a comment from observation, not from proven facts:Today's huge wind machines are just that, HUGE! They have a blade span that is much wider than the Dutch Windmill and not nearly as easy to see. More to the point, the velocity of those blades is phenomenal with the outer ends of the blades moving at great speed. They are stationed across a landscape so that they catch all the wind flow, spaced in rows behind each other in alternate spots so that what was clear between the towers in the first row are caught by the towers in the following row staggered in those "clear" slots from the row in front of them. I don't know what height the blades reach but appear to be approximately 200'. Any bird crossing the area below 200' is playing roulette with the blades from multiple towers that span a wide area, quite different from solitary Dutch windmills.Of course, smaller blades would not cut nearly so wicked a path . . . BUT they are not as efficient. Ah, the dilemmas of technology.Paul Barby-----Original Message-----
From: ok-sustainability-admin@lists.essential.org [mailto:ok-sustainability-admin@lists.essential.org] On Behalf Of Cathy Gardner
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:25 AM
To: ok-sustainability@lists.essential.org
Subject: [ok-sus] Wind energy
I'm curious, Terry, in what way you found wind power a horrible thing? The Dutch have used it successfully for centuries. Now I will admit that as you drive over the hill in California and come upon that huge wind farm, it's a startling sight. But it is equally startling to me every time I see the refinery down here burning off their excess junk, with flames shooting skyward and the stench carrying for miles. I think our real challenge is to weigh the benefits and risks of each approach to supplying ourselves with the energy we require - and if you want bad news for birds, check out what the oil industry does to them. The bottom line is that technologies like solar, wind and geothermal simply must be our future - when you dig past all the rhetoric, the bottom line still is that we are running out of fossil fuels, whether it be 10 years or 100 years.
I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's just an unfortunate fact of human existence on this planet that every one of our actions has immeasurable consequences and it's sometimes difficult to clearly determine our best course.
Cat
I'm back to updating the family website. Check it out!:
http://cathy_canfield.tripod.com/wolfcreek2000/
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
-- Earl Hatley Director of Tribal Environmental Management Services College of Law - NELPI University of Tulsa 3120 E 4th Place Tulsa, OK 74104 (918)631-3049
--------------000109010300080606040300-- From earl-hatley@utulsa.edu Mon Jul 1 18:48:09 2002 From: earl-hatley@utulsa.edu (Earl Hatley) Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 12:48:09 -0500 Subject: [ok-sus] How Hot Is Too Hot References: <01e001c21bef$cf3e5e60$7700a8c0@ok.cox.net> Message-ID: <3D2095D9.8010601@utulsa.edu> --------------070009010006050805090304 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I was in Alaska two weeks ago and camped in the forest where the beetles have killed most of the spruce trees, near Homer. I was also in the King Salmon and Port Heiden areas. Mosquitos from hell everywhere. The native people I work with in Alaska all complain about the changing climate. Elders can't predict the weather anymore. They attribute this to changes in fish and animal migration patterns. Animals are moving into Alaska they never seen before. Earl Susie Shields wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From:Shauna Struby
Earl
Susie Shields wrote:
How Hot Is Too Hot?
June 24, 2002
How Hot Is Too Hot?
By BOB HERBERT
ne of the more startling stories in The Times recently was Timothy Egan's article on the climate in Alaska, where the average temperature has risen seven degrees in the last 30 years and mosquitoes have shown up in normally frigid Barrow, the northernmost town in North America.
Large portions of Alaska are melting and other strange things are happening. Just a few hours' drive from Anchorage, a four-million-acre spruce forest has been killed by beetles, a development that is both astonishing and depressing. It is believed to be the largest loss of trees to insects ever recorded in North America.
"Government scientists," wrote Mr. Egan, "tied the event to rising temperatures, which allow the beetles to reproduce at twice their normal rate."
Meanwhile, enormous wildfires have been raging in bone-dry regions of the West and Southwest. Fires whipped by high winds in the mountains of eastern Arizona have driven thousands of residents from their homes. One local official, Jim Paxon, said: "The forest is burning like you're pouring gasoline on it. And the wind is like taking a blow torch to it."
In Colorado, which is enduring its worst drought in decades, residents have been trying to cope with at least five major fires, including the so-called Hayman fire, the largest in the state's history. Investigators believe it was deliberately set by a U.S. Forest Service worker. The long drought and continuing hot weather provided the conditions that enabled this apparent act of arson to explode into an unprecedented conflagration.
Big fires are becoming the rule. By late last week authorities reported that in the first six months of this year, nearly two million acres have burned or are currently burning in the United States, which is almost twice the average of the last 10 years.
Strange, indeed. Mosquitoes in northernmost Alaska. Much of the West and Southwest ablaze. Extended droughts. Extreme heat waves.
Can you say global warming?
The year 2001 was, globally, the second hottest on record. The hottest was 1998.
Now imagine that just a few more years go by and the world becomes hotter still, which will almost certainly be the case. What then?
Do you think, maybe, we should be paying more attention to this?
What is missing in most conversations in the U.S. about global warming is a sense of urgency. A Bush administration report earlier this month acknowledged that human activity — the burning of fossil fuels that send heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere — was the primary cause of the recent warming of the planet, and that the warming will result in some extremely serious consequences in the U.S.
President Bush (who has distanced himself from his own administration's report) wants to rely mostly on voluntary — not mandatory — efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Under the president's strategy, it's estimated that emissions will actually increase over the next decade. We're speeding toward a wall and the president is not only refusing to step on the brake, he's accelerating.
Ten years is too long to wait to do something real about this problem. Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton who is an expert on climate change, has studied the imminent threat that planetary warming poses to the world's coral reefs. These are ecosystems so abundant in animal and plant life that they are sometimes called the rain forests of the oceans.
Dr. Oppenheimer noted that one of the essential questions of the global warming debate is, "How warm is too warm?"
When you consider that the increased warming is already threatening to decimate the world's coral reefs, and that we're already seeing the melting of the tundra in Alaska, and that alpine ecosystems are already being squeezed off the tops of mountains, it's not too difficult to reach the conclusion that "too warm," in Dr. Oppenheimer's words, "isn't awfully far from where we already are."
Closing our eyes and pumping another decade's worth of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at the current very dangerous rate would not seem to be a very bright idea. The gases remain in the atmosphere for centuries, and in some cases millenniums, which means the damage cannot quickly be undone.
What a miserable legacy for this generation to leave to its children and grandchildren.
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy 
-- Earl Hatley Director of Tribal Environmental Management Services College of Law - NELPI University of Tulsa 3120 E 4th Place Tulsa, OK 74104 (918)631-3049
--------------090301030005080607080506 Content-Type: image/gif; name="fetch>UID>.INBOX>6665" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID:
This is the kind of=20
mentality we are up against when trying to promote sustainability . =
.=20
.
(read =
news release and action alert below)
Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, June 26, 2002=20
WASHINGTON =96 Behind closed doors, far-left lawmakers are = conspiring to ram=20 through legislation aimed at putting Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood and = their=20 allies in charge of your life.
The bill in question purports to deal = with=20 development that some people might deem objectionable. But like so many = other=20 schemes prompted by real or imagined problems, the "remedy" turns out to = be far=20 worse than the disease.
Clinton's Damage Never Ends =
While=20 the nation=92s attention is focused on the war on terrorism, S. 975, the = Community=20 Character Act, seeks to implement a Clinton executive order that the = leftist=20 establishment could use to dictate what you can own, what you can drive, = the=20 kind of home in which you can live =96 a mammoth intrusiveness into your = life.=20
American Policy Center, a think tank headquartered in Warrenton, = Va., says=20 that if the measure and its companion in the House (H.R. 1433) become = law, they=20 could also be used to dictate "the way you get to work, how you dispose = of=20 waste, the number of children you may have, even your education and = employment=20 decisions.=94
On the last point, NewsMax.com has already dealt with = efforts to=20 put the feds in charge of your career choices. S. 975 would facilitate = that all=20 the more.
S. 975 passed the Senate Environmental and Public Works = Committee=20 on April 25 over the objections of its more conservative contingent. It = awaits=20 action on the Senate floor, where its primary backers hope to sneak it = through=20 when you=92re not looking.
One of the no votes on the committee came = from Sen.=20 James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., who has expressed his concerns to NewsMax.com. = He=20 charges the measure "threatens the ability of local governments to make = their=20 own decisions on important economic development matters.=94
A former = mayor of=20 Tulsa (1978-1984), Inhofe remembers confronting the same land-use = issues. One of=20 the first people to lobby the new mayor in the early years of his tenure = was a=20 prominent national advocate of land-use planning, housing, = transportation and a=20 host of other issues. This activist was advocating a plan to entice = local=20 governments to accept federal grants, while downplaying the inevitable = federal=20 strings attached.
Inhofe led his community in rejecting such = proposals.=20
'Designed to Blackmail Local Governments'
"They were = largely=20 designed to blackmail local governments into giving up real local=20 decision-making authority,=94 the Oklahoman says.
"By voting this = legislation=20 out of committee,=94 he told his colleagues, "we are saying it=92s OK = for the=20 federal government to get involved in state, local and tribal land-use = planning=20 and that local planning is not important.=94
'Changing the = Concept of=20 Private Property'
American Policy Center traces this development = back to=20 Executive Order 12852, issued by Bill Clinton in 1993 to create the = President=92s=20 Council on Sustainable Development. "Sustainable development,=94 as = envisioned by=20 its proponents, "calls for changing the concept of private property, = protected=20 by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, to nothing short of a = national=20 zoning system,=94 says the think tank.
"Under such a system, the = federal=20 government, backed by an army of private, non-governmental organizations = (NGOs)=20 like the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and the National Education = Association=20 will influence, if not dictate, property and other policies to the = states and to=20 local communities,=94 the study adds.
Sen. Inhofe sees this as "a = dangerous=20 precedent.=94 Proponents claim the program would be voluntary. But the = Oklahoma=20 lawmaker says that ignores the fact that "such a program creates a = strong=20 incentive for conducting planning activities solely in accord with = federally=20 imposed guidelines.=94
The senator has "grave concerns with the = notion of the=20 secretary of commerce in Washington evaluating a state=92s need for = federal funds=20 and then prescribing the criteria for the content of a state plan, = usurping the=20 expertise that exists at the local level.=94
Hillary, Jeffords, = Boxer,=20 Lieberman, Specter, Reid ...
Committee Chairman Jim Jeffords = (the GOP=20 turncoat who now claims to be "independent" but caucuses with and even = campaigns=20 for the Democrats) is a driving force behind getting S. 975 approved by = his=20 panel.
Other main backers of the bill, according to APC, are Sens. = Arlen=20 Specter, R-Pa.; Max Baucus, D-Mont.; Harry Reid, D-Nev.; Bob Graham, = D-Fla.;=20 Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.; Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Ron Wyden, D-Ore.; = Thomas=20 Carper, D-Del.; Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; Jon Corzine, D-N.J.
Under = the bill,=20 as critics see it, locally elected officials would no longer be the = driving=20 force in making decisions for their communities. Most decisions would be = arrived=20 at behind the scenes by non-elected "sustainability councils=94 armed = with=20 truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines and taxpayer money. =
Yet=20 another think tank, the Chicago-based National Center for Public Policy=20 Research, has done a study showing "the potential damaging effects of=20 =91sustainable development=92 in over 100 metropolitan areas around the = country.=94=20
Back in the 1970s as mayor of Tulsa, Inhofe fought this plan because = he was=20 concerned the power of the citizens=92 votes would be nullified.
As = a U.S.=20 senator in 2002, he worked with his colleagues to try to make = improvements in=20 the legislation. While one change was made before the committee vote, = the=20 senator says the bill still "continues to present serious constitutional = and=20 policy problems.=94
Those who=20 value individual control over their life decisions might want to notify = their=20 congressmen (www.house.gov)=20 and senators (www.senate.gov) that they are well aware of S. = 975 and H.R.=20 1433, and that they will be watching their elected lawmakers to see that = they=20 oppose this government=20 encroachment.
I just wanted to volunteer my .05 worth on one of Robert's comments from his wonderful list...
"Small towns and rural areas are generally better to live in..."
I suspect I might be the only active poster on this list who lives in a small town/rural area (Ardmore, population about 25,000). The ideal of small town life and close relationships is wonderful, but we also deal in a few sad realities here.
#1 - No recycling facilities to speak of, excepting the aluminum recycler. Oh, and of course we can return our Walmart bags for recyling (big sarcasm here - they used to maintain a recycling collection bin in their parking lot for paper and glass, but I guess as it was always full it was just too much trouble).
#2 - No good sources for organic/"health food" style shopping. We have one shop which would entirely fit in my master bedroom, crammed floor to ceiling and run by the 7th Day Adventists. It's a great resource, but extremely limited. We have a little Farmer's Market on Weds & Sat mornings, but none of the growers is organic.
#3 - Biggest pet peeve...Walmart has taken over. Literally. Ten years ago, we had two independent grocers, two branches of Winn Dixie, a Buy For Less and a Homeland. Today, Buy For Less and Homeland cling to life. We've also lost our Wards and our Big Lots. I am being literal when I say that if you need a new pair of socks, you may choose from Penneys, Stage, Goody's or Walmart. That's it. Our half empty mall still has a couple of boutique-type stores, and thank goodness Hobby Lobby went in when K-Mart pulled out, because it's the only game in town (other than Wally World) to buy fabric since our Hancocks shut down 2 years ago.
#4 - What a great idea to limit your use of an automobile...except...oops, no public transportation. Even for those lucky enough to live in town (I live on an acreage to the east), our narrow, widened-to-the-very-edge streets are dangerous for bikes and pedestrians, and heaven forbid we'd have the forsight to install sidewalks/bike trails.
#5 - Robert talks about the extreme importance of a fulfilling, contributing job. It can't be stressed enough that how you make your living affects every other aspect of your life. Ardmore's economy is completely based in two industries - Tire production (Michelin) and Warehousing (Dollar General, Best Buy, Circuit City). Can a hard worker support his/her family? Probably. Are they finding meaning in what they do? I doubt it. But what are our choices down here?
Small town life can be a wonderful thing. But we face a mountain of problems as we enter the 21st century - problems that will have to be addressed if we are to keep small town America vital.
Cat
I'm back to updating the family website. Check it out!:
http://cathy_canfield.tripod.com/wolfcreek2000/
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access --0-426586624-1026236463=:57867-- From earl-hatley@utulsa.edu Tue Jul 9 19:30:40 2002 From: earl-hatley@utulsa.edu (Earl Hatley) Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 13:30:40 -0500 Subject: [ok-sus] Small town living/shopping References: <20020709174103.58273.qmail@web12107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3D2B2BD0.1070303@utulsa.edu> --------------000509020802040901000902 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Know what you mean. I live 7 miles north of Vinita, pop. under 4,000. Next largest town is Miami, pop. 9,000, 25 miles away. I worked for a tribe near Miami for awhile, when that came to an end I got a great (though temporary) job in my field in Tulsa, 70 miles away. I must have a job with meaning so I don't mind the commute. We have a large farm, but that will not pay the living unless we get back into the cattle business, ify even then. Instead we are restoring the entire farm, except for the 100 acre plow field, back to native prairie, flowers, and wildlife habitat. Bulding and rebuilding ponds for habitat also. The whole farm will be habitat someday except for the plow field, which this year is growing organic soybeans. Next year organic wheat. We do hope, within the next two to three years, to transform the plow field into a multi-corp field growing traditional corn, bean, and squash seeds obtained from tribal sources that have never been altered by non-Indians (Rebecca and I are both Cherokee). We are trying to make a natural/traditional life out away from everything, and a town like Vinita will not be a shopping mecca for people like us. Wal-Mart is the main store, with small specialty item stores on main street. Being mobile is essential. Vinita doesn't recycle, although the Modoc tribe in Miami has a great recylce center, so we take recycleables there. Ya have to make the best with what ya got. Frankly, I wouldn't trade living in the country for living in any town, Vinita is way too big. You can't see the neighbors from where we are. Thats what I like. Tried living in town, can't do it. Don't have a point this, just sharing some feelings after reading yours. Earl Cathy Gardner wrote: > I just wanted to volunteer my .05 worth on one of Robert's comments > from his wonderful list... > > "Small towns and rural areas are generally better to live in..." > > I suspect I might be the only active poster on this list who lives in > a small town/rural area (Ardmore, population about 25,000). The ideal > of small town life and close relationships is wonderful, but we also > deal in a few sad realities here. > > #1 - No recycling facilities to speak of, excepting the aluminum > recycler. Oh, and of course we can return our Walmart bags for > recyling (big sarcasm here - they used to maintain a recycling > collection bin in their parking lot for paper and glass, but I guess > as it was always full it was just too much trouble). > > #2 - No good sources for organic/"health food" style shopping. We > have one shop which would entirely fit in my master bedroom, crammed > floor to ceiling and run by the 7th Day Adventists. It's a great > resource, but extremely limited. We have a little Farmer's Market on > Weds & Sat mornings, but none of the growers is organic. > > #3 - Biggest pet peeve...Walmart has taken over. Literally. Ten > years ago, we had two independent grocers, two branches of Winn Dixie, > a Buy For Less and a Homeland. Today, Buy For Less and Homeland cling > to life. We've also lost our Wards and our Big Lots. I am being > literal when I say that if you need a new pair of socks, you may > choose from Penneys, Stage, Goody's or Walmart. That's it. Our half > empty mall still has a couple of boutique-type stores, and thank > goodness Hobby Lobby went in when K-Mart pulled out, because it's the > only game in town (other than Wally World) to buy fabric since our > Hancocks shut down 2 years ago. > > #4 - What a great idea to limit your use of an > automobile...except...oops, no public transportation. Even for those > lucky enough to live in town (I live on an acreage to the east), our > narrow, widened-to-the-very-edge streets are dangerous for bikes and > pedestrians, and heaven forbid we'd have the forsight to install > sidewalks/bike trails. > > #5 - Robert talks about the extreme importance of a fulfilling, > contributing job. It can't be stressed enough that how you make your > living affects every other aspect of your life. Ardmore's economy is > completely based in two industries - Tire production (Michelin) and > Warehousing (Dollar General, Best Buy, Circuit City). Can a hard > worker support his/her family? Probably. Are they finding meaning in > what they do? I doubt it. But what are our choices down here? > > Small town life can be a wonderful thing. But we face a mountain of > problems as we enter the 21st century - problems that will have to be > addressed if we are to keep small town America vital. > > Cat > > > > I'm back to updating the family website. Check it out!: > > http://cathy_canfield.tripod.com/wolfcreek2000/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Do You Yahoo!? > New! SBC Yahoo! Dial >
We are trying to make a natural/traditional life out away from everything, and a town like Vinita will not be a shopping mecca for people like us. Wal-Mart is the main store, with small specialty item stores on main street. Being mobile is essential. Vinita doesn't recycle, although the Modoc tribe in Miami has a great recylce center, so we take recycleables there.
Ya have to make the best with what ya got. Frankly, I wouldn't trade living in the country for living in any town, Vinita is way too big. You can't see the neighbors from where we are. Thats what I like. Tried living in town, can't do it. Don't have a point this, just sharing some feelings after reading yours.
Earl
Cathy Gardner wrote:
I just wanted to volunteer my .05 worth on one of Robert's comments from his wonderful list...
"Small towns and rural areas are generally better to live in..."
I suspect I might be the only active poster on this list who lives in a small town/rural area (Ardmore, population about 25,000). The ideal of small town life and close relationships is wonderful, but we also deal in a few sad realities here.
#1 - No recycling facilities to speak of, excepting the aluminum recycler. Oh, and of course we can return our Walmart bags for recyling (big sarcasm here - they used to maintain a recycling collection bin in their parking lot for paper and glass, but I guess as it was always full it was just too much trouble).
#2 - No good sources for organic/"health food" style shopping. We have one shop which would entirely fit in my master bedroom, crammed floor to ceiling and run by the 7th Day Adventists. It's a great resource, but extremely limited. We have a little Farmer's Market on Weds & Sat mornings, but none of the growers is organic.
#3 - Biggest pet peeve...Walmart has taken over. Literally. Ten years ago, we had two independent grocers, two branches of Winn Dixie, a Buy For Less and a Homeland. Today, Buy For Less and Homeland cling to life. We've also lost our Wards and our Big Lots. I am being literal when I say that if you need a new pair of socks, you may choose from Penneys, Stage, Goody's or Walmart. That's it. Our half empty mall still has a couple of boutique-type stores, and thank goodness Hobby Lobby went in when K-Mart pulled out, because it's the only game in town (other than Wally World) to buy fabric since our Hancocks shut down 2 years ago.
#4 - What a great idea to limit your use of an automobile...except...oops, no public transportation. Even for those lucky enough to live in town (I live on an acreage to the east), our narrow, widened-to-the-very-edge streets are dangerous for bikes and pedestrians, and heaven forbid we'd have the forsight to install sidewalks/bike trails.
#5 - Robert talks about the extreme importance of a fulfilling, contributing job. It can't be stressed enough that how you make your living affects every other aspect of your life. Ardmore's economy is completely based in two industries - Tire production (Michelin) and Warehousing (Dollar General, Best Buy, Circuit City). Can a hard worker support his/her family? Probably. Are they finding meaning in what they do? I doubt it. But what are our choices down here?
Small town life can be a wonderful thing. But we face a mountain of problems as we enter the 21st century - problems that will have to be addressed if we are to keep small town America vital.
Cat
I'm back to updating the family website. Check it out!:
http://cathy_canfield.tripod.com/wolfcreek2000/
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access
-- Earl Hatley Director of Tribal Environmental Management Services College of Law - NELPI University of Tulsa 3120 E 4th Place Tulsa, OK 74104 (918)631-3049
--------------000509020802040901000902-- From jpeaceokc@yahoo.com Tue Jul 9 21:22:11 2002 From: jpeaceokc@yahoo.com (Robert Waldrop) Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:22:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ok-sus] Small town living/shopping In-Reply-To: <20020709174103.58273.qmail@web12107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020709202211.16965.qmail@web14402.mail.yahoo.com> Cathy, Thanks for your excellent reminders of reality. I sit here in my nice little Gatewood neighborhood, where I can walk to two major grocery stores (Buy for Less and Homeland), plus two Asian marketplaces, 20 or more Asian restaurants, a very nice bakery, a doctor, dentist, 3 dollar stores, several convenience stores, 1 great American greasy spoon diner (run by Lebanese, of course), a great independently owned record store, Ekerds pharmacy, and several more businesses and points of interest I'm sure I've missed, such as the OCU library. The area of OKC centering on NW 23rd and Classen is one of the most human scale areas to live in in the metropolitan area. One can find very cheap housing, I think one of my previous posts noted there is a house across the street for sale for $29.5K. Bus transportation is very dense in this area, with buses on NW 23rd, Indiana, and Classen heading into the downtown transfer center. But this is an oasis in the wasteland of Oklahoma City. Up by where I work, the choices are big box chain store and big box chain store. There are a few independent restaurants, but mostly it is franchise city. Perhaps part of the lesson in all of this is first of all to consider how much stuff we really need to buy. Everybody has different circumstances and thus a different answer to this, but a strict "examination of conscience" regarding our purchases should be one of the first things on our sustainable to do list. After we determine that we really do need whatever, then we look for the best way of achieving it. In some cases, it may be better to order something from a catalog, perhaps from an independently operated business on the internet even, like Lehmans non electric catalog, than buying it from a local branch of glomart. Regarding jobs and fulfillment, my point in writing that was to show that any job can be a source of fulfillment, depending upon ones interior disposition about it. This is as true for dish washers as it is for musicians. The fulfillment comes not from the specifics of the job itself, but rather from considering it an honorable vocation through which you support yourself and your family. Thus, your "job" isn't a 9 to 5 wage slavery, but rather a successful and happy family. One of the things you do to accomplish this is earn money elsewhere. The point is not the "elsewhere", but rather the family. Thus, warehouse work or craft artistry, being a doctor or picking up garbage, all is "gift". Sorry to segue off into such mysticism. Regarding your farmers market, you could talk with the growers and find out what exactly they are doing with their crops, especially regarding pesticides and herbicides. I tend to view commercial fertilizer as a lesser evil compared to the pesticides and herbicides. You might be able to find someone growing without pesticides/herbicides, even though they are using some commercial fertilizer. There are worse things that a person can buy, and I think sustaining a local marketplace is good. Your little Seventh day Adventist operation sounds like something worth supporting. Perhaps if you network with people supporting that store, you could get enough buying power together to approach somebody about starting a small community supported agriculture farm like the McGehee's are doing in Okemah. Transportation is a big issue, both in practical terms and in terms of the damage it does to the environment. Try as I can, I can't figure a way to get to my work without driving a personal automobile. The bus doesn't go there, it costs $25 one way to take a cab, car pooling isn't practical given my odd and sometimes irregular hours. So I either quit the job or drive to work, and I'm just not up for quitting that job at this time in my life. But there are other things I can do without driving, and so that is where I am putting my present focus. I also had been going into work six days a week; I reorganized my job so that generally I only go into work 5 days a week now, thus saving one whole day a week of driving, more than a thousand miles over a year. The point of emphasizing food, transportation, housing, and "stuff" in my list is that these are the areas where our choices have the most impact: for good or for bad. All environmental choices are not created equal, some are much more important than others. For example, consider the lowly light plastic disposable cup. Or even the disposable plastic shopping bag, so ubiquitous. Yes, we should minimize use of those things, but that's not where most of our effort should be focused. One rule of thumb suggests weight as a standard. Add up the weight of all the plastic cups you use in a year, and let's say you use 2 a day for a year. All together that adds up to just a few pounds of cups. But add up the weight of all the gasoline you use in a year, or the amount of food you buy in a year, or the amount of culinary water from a city water supply you use in a year, or the cars and appliances you buy, or your housing (even if amortized over say 30 years) and very quickly it is obvious where the real issues are. So if over a year's time, you didn't use a ton of gasoline, you've done something good for the environment. You won't use a ton of disposable dinner plates in a year, which isn't an argument in favor of using disposable plate, but rather an indication of where your effort should be. And part of the reason of my exercise, also, is to consider living now as we may have to live over the next 20 years. It is my position, based on my research, that the price of energy is likely to climb quite a bit over the next ten to twenty years. So one way to approach how we use our cars now would be to ask ourselves, "Would I make this trip if gasoline was more than $5/gallon?" I think it will be hard to make the transition quickly, so I'm suggesting that we start now. Instead of thinking of gas as $1.39/gallon, or whatever it is in your area, think of it as $5/gallon, and as you drive, ask yourself, "If this were really true, how would I do this differently?" People everywhere are going to face increasing problems in adapting their typical high energy American lifestyles to the realities of the 21st century. The entire past 100 years have been the binge of all binges, fueled by the concentrated solar energy of millenias, extracted and burned in a very short amount of time (compared both to the history of our species and the history of the earth). Economically, our price system, which is supposed to be an accurate guide to the relative worth of things and earnings, is in shreds, it doesn't work, so we can't trust prices as an accurate measure of scarcity. As the distortions become impossible for the system to evade or smooth over, things could get very rough. Thus my emphasis is on creating local systems, because I don't think glomart is going to make it in the 21st century. I don't know what any of this is going to look like in the future, I do know that if we don't start seeds now, however small, there may not really be much of a future. No planting = no garden = no harvest. And after the binge comes the hangover, and usually, the more riotous the binge, the worse the hangover. Robert Waldrop, OKC --- Cathy Gardner
I grew
up in a small town of 850, and it was the county seat, in southern
Illinois. I would love to live there again, as the sense of community is
so great.
But
even during the go-go years of the 90s, unemployment was 9 percent. The
biggest "employer" in that county is the welfare state.
Things
got worse recently when the state shut down a prison in the neighboring county
because crime has gone down in Illinois. Can you imagine that we live in
such a world where people protested to keep a prison open, because they are so
desparate for jobs?
I hope
to be able to retire there someday.
Diane
Fitzsimmons
Norman, Oklahoma
------_=_NextPart_001_01C22826.0A5F4800--
From Chikaskia@aol.com Sun Jul 14 19:31:36 2002
From: Chikaskia@aol.com (Chikaskia@aol.com)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:31:36 EDT
Subject: [ok-sus] test
Message-ID: <42.2a1e9d50.2a631d88@aol.com>
--part1_42.2a1e9d50.2a631d88_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
list got too quiet~
--part1_42.2a1e9d50.2a631d88_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
list got too quiet~
--part1_42.2a1e9d50.2a631d88_boundary--
From jpeaceokc@yahoo.com Tue Jul 16 02:00:36 2002
From: jpeaceokc@yahoo.com (Robert Waldrop)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 18:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ok-sus] Two gardens are better than one
In-Reply-To: <20020709012006.45466.qmail@web14408.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020716010036.99571.qmail@web14408.mail.yahoo.com>
I wrote previously about getting a lot for a community
garden. Well, I guess blessings are running in pairs
around here because today I took possesion of not one,
but two empty lots on the same block, one at 1619 NW
18th, and the other is the SE corner of NW 19th and
Blackwelder, just around the block from each other.
Both are about the same size, 190' x 60' (curb to
fence). I found the water meter for the NW 19th
property, haven't found it for the NW 18th property
but the people who sold it to me said we could use
their water until we got it hooked up.
I also found a very interesting website today. The
architects on this listserv probably already know
about the book Pattern Language. Besides the book,
there is a website, http://www.patternlanguage.com ,
with a lot of the text and the patterns available on
line (click on "patterns" and you can learn more than
you ever believed possible about designing spaces and
places. Very interesting website, if I ever get an
extra fifty bucks, I'd like to add the book to our
library, but in the meantime, the website is very
comprehensive.
Robert Waldrop
http://www.oklahomafood.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
From sshields@cox.net Tue Jul 16 15:45:54 2002
From: sshields@cox.net (Susie Shields)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 09:45:54 -0500
Subject: [ok-sus] .Living Planet report 2002
Message-ID: <00dd01c22cd7$7d77f700$7700a8c0@ok.cox.net>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C22CAD.944E02A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Living Planet report 2002Living Planet Report 2002=20
World Wildlife Fund=20
http://www.panda.org/livingplanet/lpr02/=20
The Living Planet Report is WWF's periodic update on the state of the =
world's ecosystems, as=20
measured by the Living Planet Index, and the human pressures on them =
through the consumption of=20
renewable natural resources, as measured by the Ecological Footprint. =
There is a cause-effect linkage between the two measures.=20
Living Planet Index =20
The Living Planet Index (LPI) is derived from trends over the past 30 =
years in populations of hundreds of species of birds, mammals, reptiles, =
amphibians and fish.=20
The LPI is the average of three ecosystem-based indices. Between 1970 =
and 2000, it declined by about 35%.=20
The forest species population index declined by about 15%, the marine =
species population index=20
fell by about 35%, while the freshwater species population index dropped =
55% over the 30-year=20
period.=20
The stark trends indicated by the LPI are a quantitative confirmation =
that the world is currently undergoing a very rapid loss of biodiversity =
comparable with the great mass extinction events that have previously =
occurred only five or six times in the Earth's history.
=20
World Ecological Footprint=20
The Ecological Footprint (EF) is a measure of the consumption of =
renewable natural resources by a human population, be it that of a =
country, a region or the whole world.=20
A population's EF is the total area of productive land or sea required =
to produce all the crops, meat, seafood, wood and fibre it consumes, to =
sustain its energy consumption and to give space for its infrastructure. =
The EF can be compared with the biologically productive capacity of the =
land and sea available to that population.
The Earth has about 11.4 billion hectares of productive land and sea =
space, after all=20
unproductive areas of icecaps, desert, and open ocean are discounted. =
This amounts to about a=20
quarter of its surface area. Divided between the global population of =
six billion people, this=20
total equates to just 1.9 hectares per person. While the EF of the =
average African or Asian=20
consumer was less than 1.4 hectares per person in 1999, the average =
Western European's footprint=20
was about 5.0 hectares, and the average North American's was about 9.6 =
hectares.=20
The EF of the world average consumer in 1999 was 2.3 hectares per =
person, or 20% above the earth's biological capacity of 1.90 hectares =
per person.=20
In other words: Humanity now exceeds the planet's capacity to sustain =
its consumption of renewable resources.=20
We are able to maintain this global overdraft on a temporary basis by =
eating into the earth's capital stocks of forest, fish and fertile =
soils. We also dump our excess carbon dioxide emissions into the =
atmosphere. Neither of these two activities are sustainable in the =
long-term - the only sustainable solution is to live within the =
biological productive capacity of the earth.
However, current trends are moving humanity away from achieving this =
minimum requirement for sustainability, not towards it. The global =
ecological footprint has grown from about 70% of the planet's biological =
capacity in 1961 to about 120% of its biological capacity in 1999. =
Furthermore, future projections based on likely scenarios of population =
growth, economic development and technological change, show that =
humanity's footprint is likely to grow to about 180% to 220% of the =
Earth's biological capacity by the year 2050.
=20
Living Planet report 2002: collaborating organisations=20
Of course, it is very unlikely that the Earth would be able to run an =
ecological overdraft for another 50 years without some severe ecological =
backlashes undermining future population and economic growth. But it =
would be far better to control our own destiny than to leave it to =
nature. If we are to return to a sustainable development pathway, it =
means making changes in four fundamental ways.=20
First, it is necessary to improve the resource-efficiency with which =
goods and services are produced.=20
Second, we must consume resources more efficiently, and redress the =
disparity in consumption between high and low income countries.=20
Third, population growth must be controlled through promoting universal =
education and health care. And, finally, it is imperative that we =
protect, manage and restore natural ecosystems in order to conserve =
biodiversity and maintain ecological services, and so conserve and =
enhance the planet's biological productivity, for the benefit of present =
and future generations.
-30-=20
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20
Click here to find your contact lenses!=20
This listserv is for announcements and discussion
by Green Party members in Oklahoma. For more info=20
about Green Parties of Oklahoma, see =
http://www.greens.org/oklahoma/home.html
Listserv email addresses:
Post message: okgreens@yahoogroups.com=20
Subscribe: okgreens-subscribe@yahoogroups.com=20
Unsubscribe: okgreens-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com=20
List owner: okgreens-owner@yahoogroups.com=20
URL for accessing the listserv via the WWW:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/okgreens=20
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.=20
------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C22CAD.944E02A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Living Planet Report 2002
World=20 Wildlife Fund
http://www.panda.org/livingplanet/lpr02/ =
World=20 Wildlife Fund
The Living Planet Report is WWF's periodic update on =
the state=20
of the world's ecosystems, as
measured by the =
Living=20
Planet Index, and the human pressures on them through the consumption of =
renewable natural resources, as measured by =
the=20
Ecological Footprint. There is a cause-effect linkage between the two =
measures.=20
Living Planet Index
The Living Planet Index (LPI) is derived from trends = over the=20 past 30 years in populations of hundreds of species of birds, mammals, = reptiles,=20 amphibians and fish.
The LPI is the average of three ecosystem-based = indices. Between=20 1970 and 2000, it declined by about 35%.
The forest species population index declined by about =
15%, the=20
marine species population index
fell by about =
35%, while=20
the freshwater species population index dropped 55% over the 30-year=20
period.
The stark trends indicated by the LPI are a = quantitative=20 confirmation that the world is currently undergoing a very rapid loss of = biodiversity comparable with the great mass extinction events that have=20 previously occurred only five or six times in the Earth's = history.
World Ecological Footprint =
The Ecological Footprint (EF) is a measure of the = consumption of=20 renewable natural resources by a human population, be it that of a = country, a=20 region or the whole world.
A population's EF is the total area of productive land = or sea=20 required to produce all the crops, meat, seafood, wood and fibre it = consumes, to=20 sustain its energy consumption and to give space for its infrastructure. = The EF=20 can be compared with the biologically productive capacity of the land = and sea=20 available to that population.
The Earth has about 11.4 billion hectares of =
productive land and=20
sea space, after all
unproductive areas of =
icecaps,=20
desert, and open ocean are discounted. This amounts to about a =
total equates to just 1.9 = hectares=20 per person. While the EF of the average African or Asian =
was about 5.0 = hectares, and=20 the average North American's was about 9.6 hectares.
The EF of the world average consumer in 1999 was 2.3 = hectares=20 per person, or 20% above the earth's biological capacity of 1.90 = hectares per=20 person.
In other words: Humanity now exceeds the planet's = capacity to=20 sustain its consumption of renewable resources.
We are able to maintain this global overdraft on a = temporary=20 basis by eating into the earth's capital stocks of forest, fish and = fertile=20 soils. We also dump our excess carbon dioxide emissions into the = atmosphere.=20 Neither of these two activities are sustainable in the long-term - the = only=20 sustainable solution is to live within the biological productive = capacity of the=20 earth.
However, current trends are moving humanity away from = achieving=20 this minimum requirement for sustainability, not towards it. The global=20 ecological footprint has grown from about 70% of the planet's biological = capacity in 1961 to about 120% of its biological capacity in 1999. = Furthermore,=20 future projections based on likely scenarios of population growth, = economic=20 development and technological change, show that humanity's footprint is = likely=20 to grow to about 180% to 220% of the Earth's biological capacity by the = year=20 2050.
Living Planet report 2002:=20
collaborating organisations
Of course, it is very unlikely that the Earth would be = able to=20 run an ecological overdraft for another 50 years without some severe = ecological=20 backlashes undermining future population and economic growth. But it = would be=20 far better to control our own destiny than to leave it to nature. If we = are to=20 return to a sustainable development pathway, it means making changes in = four=20 fundamental ways.
First, it is necessary to improve the = resource-efficiency with=20 which goods and services are produced.
Second, we must consume resources more efficiently, = and redress=20 the disparity in consumption between high and low income countries. =
Third, population growth must be controlled through = promoting=20 universal education and health care. And, finally, it is imperative that = we=20 protect, manage and restore natural ecosystems in order to conserve = biodiversity=20 and maintain ecological services, and so conserve and enhance the = planet's=20 biological productivity, for the benefit of present and future=20 generations.
-30-
| Yahoo! Groups=20 Sponsor |
This=20 listserv is for announcements and discussion
by Green Party members = in=20 Oklahoma. For more info
about Green Parties of Oklahoma, see
Listserv=20 email addresses:
Post message: okgreens@yahoogroups.com=20
Subscribe: okgreens-subscribe@yahoogroups.com=20
Unsubscribe: okgreens-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com =
List owner: okgreens-owner@yahoogroups.com =
URL=20 for accessing the listserv via the WWW:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
------=_NextPart_000_00DA_01C22CAD.944E02A0-- From jpeaceokc@yahoo.com Tue Jul 16 19:12:14 2002 From: jpeaceokc@yahoo.com (Robert Waldrop) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 11:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ok-sus] Sustainable living programs In-Reply-To: <00dd01c22cd7$7d77f700$7700a8c0@ok.cox.net> Message-ID: <20020716181214.79870.qmail@web14406.mail.yahoo.com> One of the presentations at the May conference that I didn't get to go to was the one about the program the Unitarian Church used in Oklahoma City to increase awareness of sustainable living issues in their congregation. Could someone tell me more about this, especially, was it a curriculum that they found somewhere or did they develop it themselves? Robert Waldrop http://www.oklahomafood.org __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com From jpeaceokc@yahoo.com Tue Jul 16 22:30:39 2002 From: jpeaceokc@yahoo.com (Robert Waldrop) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 14:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ok-sus] Confessions of a granola conservative In-Reply-To: <20020716181214.79870.qmail@web14406.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020716213039.77563.qmail@web14401.mail.yahoo.com> This is an interesting article from the conservative publication National Review suggesting some common ground between conservatives and the sustainability movement, at at least the domestic household level (which I tend to think is the most important right now.) Food for thought in a conservative state. Also, thanks everybody for the tips about the Unitarian program. Robert Waldrop, OKC http://www.oklahomafood.org http://www.nationalreview.com/dreher/dreher071202.asp July 12, 2002 8:45 a.m. Birkenstocked Burkeans: Confessions of a granola conservative. by Rod Dreher Talking with a conservative friend the other day, I mentioned that my wife and I were having a friend over to dinner, and were going to serve him all kinds of delicious vegetables from the organic food co-op to which we belong. "Ewgh, That sounds so lefty," she said. And she's right. We're probably the only Republicans who subscribe to this service, which delivers fresh vegetables once weekly to our neighborhood from farms out on Long Island, and at a good price. But so what? Are lefties the only ones allowed to consume quality produce? We made fun of our liberal friends who did this stuff last summer, until we actually tasted the vegetables they got from the farm. We're converts now, and since you asked, I don't remember being told when I signed up for the GOP that henceforth, I was required to refuse broccoli that tastes like broccoli because rustic socialist composters think eating it is a good idea. Then again, Julie and I are probably the crunchiest - as in granola - conservatives we know (hey, my bride even makes her own granola). In some respects, the life we live and the values we share have more in common with left-wing counterculturalists than with many garden-variety conservatives. What we share is a disdain for, or at least a healthy suspicion of, mass culture. It makes for interesting bedfellows. Boston College professor Peter Kreeft discovered this phenomenon a few years ago. Kreeft said he and three friends fit John Courtney Murray's four American political types: radical, liberal, traditionalist, and conservative. One day, Kreeft, a traditional Catholic, discovered a close affinity with the Marxist atheist in the group. What did it was driving around Cambridge and judging everyone's reaction to a new housing development the conservative Republican had moved into. It was clean, well lighted, green, and spacious, with attractive amenities. Kreeft and his friend Dick, the radical, thought it was an abomination, because it was ugly and therefore inhuman. The conservative said the fact that they cared about how the place looked marked them as "artsy-fartsy," but the traditionalist and the radical argued that beauty was one of the most important things there is. Soon, Kreeft and his radical friend found out that despite the gulf that separated them on politics, they shared a number of areas of agreement (suburbs bad; nature good; big business and big government bad; small business and small government good). Kreeft determined from this that "beneath the current political left-right alignments there are fault lines embedded in the crust of human nature that will inevitably open up some day and produce earthquakes that will change the current map of the political landscape." Well, maybe. All I can tell you is that the crunchy-granola lefties are often right about little things that make life richer. Take food, for example. After we married, Julie and I had to teach ourselves how to cook. We quickly discovered how much better food tastes if it hasn't been processed. We'd go to farmers' markets in the city to buy produce, and before we knew it, we were making and canning our own apple butter. Not only did the stuff taste dramatically better than what was on offer in the supermarket, but there was a real sense of pride in knowing how to do these things for ourselves, like our grandmothers did. We realized one day that pretty much the only young to middle-aged people we knew who cared about these things were ... lefties. We were also startled to discover how large the homeschooling movement is here in New York City, and that it's primarily a phenomenon of the left-wing counterculture. Given our backgrounds in Texas and Louisiana, we assumed religious conservatives were the only folks interested in homeschooling. I did some reporting on homeschoolers in Manhattan, and learned that most of them did it for the same reasons we plan to: an unwillingness to trust the state schools here with something as important as our children's education. All sorts of things started to occur to us. The music we like - jazz, hard country, bluegrass, Cuban son - is something you can only hear on, umm, public radio or see on public television. When we began talking about buying a house, we realized we wanted something old and funky, in the sort of neighborhood that your average Republican would disdain. We found that though the Shiite environmentalists drive us nuts, there was also something off-putting about the way many conservatives speak with caustic derision about environmental conservation. Two weeks ago, some conservative friends were driving me down the Pacific Coast Highway, and I was overwhelmed by the beauty, as they are. "I'm afraid we have to tip our hats to the tree-huggers," said one. "If it weren't for them, much of what you see would be covered with tract houses and malls." Here's something else I've noticed: The Granola Conservatives I know tend not to be wealthy, but labor in the creative and intellectual vineyards as writers, professors, and artists. They also tend to be religious. It's foolish to go too far in metaphysicalizing questions of taste, but a big part of it, at least for those of us who are part of older Christian traditions, comes from learning to see the world sacramentally. In the sacramental vision, which is shared by Catholics and the Orthodox, the spirit world is mediated through the material world, which is another way of saying we experience God in creation. To someone imbued with a sacramental vision, qualities inherent in things - from the food we eat to the buildings we live in - matter in profoundly spiritual ways. Admittedly, this is very close to what David Brooks identified as classic bourgeois Bohemian ("Bobo") behavior. "Marx once wrote that the bourgeois takes all that is sacred and makes it profane. The Bobos take everything that is profane and make it sacred," he writes in Bobos in Paradise, his highly entertaining foray into pop sociology. "We take the quintessential bourgeois activity, shopping, and turn it into quintessential bohemian activities: art, philosophy, social action." In Brooks's view, the Bobo will spend lots of money on things he believes (though not consciously) possess the power to transfer spiritual or moral qualities to its owner. This debased form of sacramentalism is an ersatz, consumerist version of the real thing, which doesn't fetishize objects themselves, but which is really a way of thinking about the importance of aesthetics to the good life. This may be a distinction without a discernible difference; Brooks told me that conservative writers just have to live with the fact that we share certain tastes with the predominantly liberal intellectual class. But if there's nothing to it, and the consumer choices people make are purely a function of social determinism, then it leaves no room for the person who purchases certain products simply because the products look good, taste good or offer superior value, despite costing more. It means accepting bad beer, lousy coffee, Top-40 radio, strip malls, and all popular manifestations of cheapness and ugliness as proof that One Is Not an Effete Liberal. And that's just as phony as anything the Bobos stand for. Curious about the possible spiritual aspect of this phenomenon, I wrote to my crunchy-right friends Julianne Loesch Wiley (a Catholic) and Frederica Mathewes-Green (Orthodox), both of whom have long been active in the pro-life movement, to ask them how they reconciled their conservatism with their countercultural tastes. Frederica responded first, saying that she embraced her "mother-earth hippie aesthetic" in her liberal youth, and has stuck with it even though she's now firmly in the religious conservative camp. "What hooked me then, and continues to hold me, and what is the underlying theme of the contemporary liberal side of this aesthetic, is authenticity," she said. "I read a piece in American Demographics a few years ago about this, that the hook for progressives is this concept of 'authenticity,' the distrust of mass-produced sentiment or materials." She thinks secular leftists, having emptied the world of God, hunger for something to anchor their lives, and seek it out in various manifestations of Boboism. As a believing Christian and a religious conservative, though, Frederica still feels a kinship with this longing, "because I find in the presence of the old and funky furniture and things I live with a reminder of the goodness of the material world God made, and visited, and fills." "Every single thing that comes into my house, down to the salt shakers, have to first pass a test of being persuasive, winsome, original, odd - 'authentic.' I think that this is a cousin to what you and Julie are doing with food and other tastes. You're looking for true quality and refusing to be satisfied with Purina People Chow. You have your antennas up for what is real, original, worthy. And to many conservatives, that sounds stuck-up and suspiciously lefty." Catholic Julianne says she absorbed a lot of her "natural" ideas through her anti-abortion activism. Awe over the miracle of birth led her to study natural-childbirth practices, which hooked her up with herb-savvy Earth Mother types in Birkenstocks - "and before you know it, I was eating nutritional yeast on my baked potatoes. Eeuh! Liberal!" Teaching her kids to read early made Julianne think that maybe the intellectually deadening public school wasn't the best thing for them, and she became a homeschooler without quite realizing what was happening. "That's supposed to be right-wing," she wrote. "But I was first introduced to homeschooling by John Holt, who was left-wing. How do I know? There were certain telltale phrases he used. He didn't trust the Establishment. He didn't trust the government schools. But that's right wing now. Funny how I went straight from left wing to right wing without ever once passing through a phase where I trusted the government." That's an amusing line, but it also points out how so many of us depend on labels to frame our experiences so as not to be disturbed by the idea that somebody on the other side might be on to something good, beautiful or true. Somebody's got to pioneer these things. My wife gets a kick out of the fact that she's the only housewife in the neighborhood who carries home her organic vegetables in a National Review Online tote bag. Who knows, one of these days, maybe one of the liberal housewives doling out the Swiss chard on delivery day will ask her about the flat tax. Dare to dream, you Birkenstocked Burkeans, and pass the hippie carrots. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com From jpeaceokc@yahoo.com Wed Jul 17 02:12:39 2002 From: jpeaceokc@yahoo.com (Robert Waldrop) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 18:12:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ok-sus] New at Oklahoma food In-Reply-To: <20020716213039.77563.qmail@web14401.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020717011239.54007.qmail@web14402.mail.yahoo.com> Resources added July 16, 2002 Spencer’s Orchard, east of Choctaw, sweet corn, peaches, plums, vine ripened tomatoes, squash, cucumbers, potatoes, sweet onions, green beans, okra, peppers, 2 miles east of Choctaw on 23, 2 miles north, one mile east, 1/4 mile north, 454.3471 OK Fresh Farms, Harrah, tomatoes for slicing, canning, salsa, home grown, on NE 50th between Luther and Peebly Road, 454.6941. $10 for 20 pounds roma tomatoes. Stratford watermelons, 580.759.2480 http://www.oklahomafood.org Robert Waldrop __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com From gardnergirl_99@yahoo.com Wed Jul 17 18:48:06 2002 From: gardnergirl_99@yahoo.com (Cathy Gardner) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ok-sus] Unitarian programs In-Reply-To: <20020717160011.4489.69645.Mailman@venice.essential.org> Message-ID: <20020717174806.50021.qmail@web12101.mail.yahoo.com> --0-1623826532-1026928086=:48227 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Could the people who answered Robert on the Unitarian program for sustainable living also post that information to this list please? I have been wanting to present some type of frugality or sustainability program at our church for quite awhile now and would love more info on what they're doing. Cathy --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes --0-1623826532-1026928086=:48227 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Could the people who answered Robert on the Unitarian program for sustainable living also post that information to this list please? I have been wanting to present some type of frugality or sustainability program at our church for quite awhile now and would love more info on what they're doing.
Cathy
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes --0-1623826532-1026928086=:48227-- From jim@mindthunder.com Wed Jul 17 19:35:04 2002 From: jim@mindthunder.com (jim botkin) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 13:35:04 -0500 Subject: Fwd: [ok-sus] Sustainable living programs Message-ID:
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/interiortabs.gif") | |
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/news_left.gif") |
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/worldregionaledition.gif") |
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/bluefourpixel.gif"=20){kind=tracking} |
|
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/clearpixel.gif"){kind=tracking} |
Last updated: 02:01 AM EDT
State growing 'greener'Wednesday, July 24, 2002 By John J. Monahan
BOSTON-- Gov. Jane M. Swift yesterday ratcheted up =
environmental=20
standards for state agencies, signing an executive order calling =
for=20
cleaner-burning state vehicles, more recycling in state offices =
and a=20
reduction in mercury waste.
|
|
|
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/cornermenu.gif")
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/printer.gif")
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/premium_icon.gif"){kind=icon}
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/subscriberlinks.gif")
![](3D"http://www.telegram.com/images/arrow.gif"){kind=icon}