Think about cheap food.  What foods come to mind?  Packaged, processed, and unhealthy foods: 50 cent bags of chips, dollar menu items, couple dollar frozen meals, 25 cent twinkies.  An article by Michael Pollan featured obesity researcher, Adam Drewnowski, who found that:

…the rules of the food game in America are organized in such a way that if you are eating on a budget, the most rational economic strategy is to eat badly–and get fat.

Sad.  This can all be linked to the subsidies in our food system favoring cheap corn (processed into High Fructose Corn Syrup).  For more info, read Pollan’s NYT article.

So what?  Cheap food is good because it helps those on a budget and it saves room in everyone’s budget!  Not so simple…perhaps cheap food helps some get calories, but what is the real cost of the nutrient-poor, calorie-dense processed food?  An unhealthy population ridden with obesity and burdened healthcare costs.

Check out the short video from GOOD Magazine about this topic below.  Now, I don’t think this video really offers a sustainable solution to the problem.  Many do not have the luxury to cook at home more, and even if they did, the fact that many in inner-cities can get potato chips at a corner store, but can’t buy fresh produce is a larger, fundamental problem that needs a solution.  The GOOD shortclip does, however, illustrate the link between cheap food and obesity:

The “City of Brotherly Love” has plenty of affection for the green movement.  Besides earning 5^th place in Walk Score’s “Most Walkable Places to Live” listing and promoting a lifestyle a piedi, the city is filled with bicyclists. According to the 2008 American Community Survey, Philadelphia has the most bike commuters per capita among the nations ten largest cities (cited from BicycleCoalition.org). Bike racks are crowded and any available parking meter post is coupled with a cruiser. So if you’re visiting and looking for an active way to explore the city, check out the bike and moped tours available through Philadelphia Bike Tours.

While you’re taking in the sights, keep an eye out for the latest in eco-friendly trash collecting – Philadelphia’s solar-powered trash compactors, which are part of the city’s Philly Throws Green program.  Designed and created by Big Belly, these high-tech trash and recycling bins hold up to five times the amount that fits in a typical trash can.  The solar-powered receptacles use 1,200 pounds of force to compound the trash, thereby requiring 1/5 the number of usual trash pickups and saving the city about 80 percent in greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants in managing public waste.  The bins enable on-the-go recycling in busy areas and send out a signal when they need to be emptied.  To get a closer look at these efficient bins, watch the video below from GOOD.

And as Yes! Magazine recently reported, Philadelphia’s Water Department has proposed a green stormwater engineering plan that will incorporate landscaping efforts such as green roofs, rain gardens and porous pavements to absorb excess rainwater, thereby putting the excess water to good use and preventing the flooding of city sewage systems that create toxic runoff and spillover.  The $1.6 billion plan still needs to be built and approved by the EPA, but this earth-friendly way of thinking is certainly putting Philly on the fast track to becoming one of the greenest cities in America.

**For more info on Philadelphia’s bike culture, read Mother Nature Network’s recent “U.S. cities spur bike use for climate, health.”

Today we focus on being better, not doing better,  in business.

Someone recently mentioned to us that there is no way to measure the success of a business model based on “doing good”.  This person, of whom we won’t throw around any names, is a professional (and professor) who helps business focus and become more successful.

I instantly felt better about our chances.  I mean – you can’t exactly fail if you can’t measure success.

So today I really just want to push a company that has everyone else’s well-being at heart, GOOD.  GOOD publishes a monthly magazine dedicated at giving 100% of users’ subscription money to charities or social causes.

GOOD Magazine spreads across the information highway.  For instance, a nice little video production from GOOD about the overwhelming imports from China this Christmas, one about Cornography, and finally a little diddy about internet porn.

So this holiday season, give GOOD to someone.

Disclaimer: we don’t get a dime from GOOD.  They have no affiliate programs.  No cash for subscriptions.  And you won’t be “helping me get to Europe next semester because my parents won’t help pay for a class trip“.

LaurelHouse Studio

Demand More Better

Kill Screen is a print project. That means paper and ink and getting stuff in the mail. But we haven’t forgotten about this Internet thing, and we’re pleased to announce a new collaboration with the awesome website of the fantastic GOOD Magazine.

Every week, we’ll be running a column spearheaded by Jamin Brophy-Warren. Here’s your latest fix, Playing with Color:

In [The Saboteur], the occupied areas are shaded black and white with strong notes of red on the Nazi insignia. As you liberate each of the Parisian arrondissements, the areas return to their previous cheery demeanor and flood with color. The shift not only indicates the change in mood, but also serves as a guidepost for the player. Colorful areas are safe; the monochromatic regions are dangerous. “Black and white sucks the life and removes the mood of the world,” [lead game director Tom] French says.

Getting the right shades was a long process. “I don’t speak art,” French says. “But I knew when something was a little bit dark and needed to pop. It’s like I could say ‘Choose Pantone 483.’”

And don’t miss last week’s debut on Post-Katrina New Orleans as “Fictional Space.” And yes, we play Left4Dead 2. We’re probably playing it right now.

… before I ran out of ideas and decided to skip one week and submit two blogs at once. The deadline is looming and still no topics to speak of… help!

When it comes to your personal life, how far should you take your eco-sensibilities when other people are involved? Most of us know or are in the process of working out the limits and boundaries of our green lifestyles. But how often do we think about these in relation to the people around us? When is it appropriate to put up a fight? Is it okay to point out wasteful behaviour? At what point does encouragement become pushing and informing become preaching?

Read more unobjectionism here.

PFSK just posted the GOOD Magazine event, featuring MAPOs and our recent talk on the development of Sunset Park. Check it out!

Climate Cover-Up

Have you heard about the climate email crisis? Scientists at University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit personal emails were hacked and published online. Climate change-deniers (i.e. dummies) are now using these emails to try to prove these scientists have been manipulating information about climate change.

In response to this, I have seen two interesting articles about James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore’s new book
Climate Cover-Up. The book is about how PR companies and experts are hired by energy companies to invent propaganda that convinces the public climate change is a hoax.

George Monbiot from the Guardian says the book “fascinating, funny, and beautifully written.” Ben Jarvey from Good Magazine points out that just over half of registered Republicans believe climate change is even happening and questions, “Why some stolen personal emails from climate scientists that don’t actually discredit their work is a bigger news story than the very severe, enormously dire findings released by the scientifically sound Copenhagen Diagnosis.”

Don’t worry – no super long post for today.

Today I’d just like to take a second to highligh GOOD magazine/community, again.  (I really like them, guys!)

One section on their website is Transparency - self-described as “Video explorations of the world around us.”  The section of the site is full of little videos, full of interesting tid-bits (the food waste video I reference a few days ago was once in this section, although now I am not sure where it has gone…).  Some of my favorites include: Drinking Water, Emerging City Innovations, and Alcohol Olympics.

(Yeah, I really love the Drinking Water one… especially because it relates to the video by the Advent Conspiracy that I love.)

Anyway, the Transparency videos are pretty great, for sure.  They collect information from a bunch of different sources, and put them together for us to see easily.  And, the graphics and music are always super engaging!  The videos are very short, also – usually less than 2 minutes, so that’s nice.

Basicallly, they’re short, eye-catching, memorable bits of reality… Pretty great.  Thanks, GOOD!

this is a cool little video about food and waste in the united states

my favorite part is when it tells us that 50% of the food that we waste is enough to feed all of the hungry people in this nation – that’s about 9.6 million, by the way.

austin has about 0.7 million people.
new orleans has about 0.3 million people.
new york city has about 8.3 million people.
so, austin + new orleans + new york city almost equals the total number of hungry people in this country.

interesting.

and by that i mean, how messed up.

so, what do we do?  i mean, taking our wasted food and giving it to hungry people isn’t exactly an answer – even though i just said that 50% of our wasted food could feed all the hungry people here.  but we don’t want to give them rotten food… so, what can we do?

well, one thing we can do is literally create less waste (and the video gives us some ideas on how to do this).  doing this may not directly affect hunger, but it can still create some positive change – for example, by wasting less money because of the actual cost of throwing food away. and by saving food instead of throwing it away, individually we will have more money to help others – for example, by giving to the living water initiative (the advent conspiracy that i wrote about earlier).

but i am still left with the conundrum… how will wasting less help feed the hungry?  i feel that, as an economics student, i should be able to answer this. in fact, it was issues/challenges/opportunities such as this that drove me to study the dismal science in the first place.

how exactly does cutting down our food intake help the people of the world?

interesting.

and by that i mean, i’m going to start looking for the answer to that question.

(by the way, that video is from the GOOD magazine/initiative and website.  it’s a really super-great community of people and ideas working for to help people live up to their good potential.  check it out!)

According to a new study, a happy writer is a lousy writer. Mark Peters writes on Good’s site:

It turns out that “low-intensity” negative moods are linked to better writing than happy moods. As shown in the research of University of New South Wales Psychology Professor Joe Forgas, when we’re not walking on clouds or doing a happy dance, we tend to be more careful and mindful of details.

Actually, when I went to hear Rita Dove read at LA’s downtown library, she mentioned a similar idea. Of course, she was speaking from personal experience, not a scientific study.

What a depressing thought, think I’ll go write something….

This is the story of a bright, bright star. A girl-woman who will inspire you to get off your butt, kick the fear until it runs away, and make your most amazing dreams come true. Her website says it all. Enjoy every page and, in the sub-text, you’ll see the blueprint used by a teenage refugee Wise Latina Woman from Liberia to make her dream of creating a business doing what she loves while helping others at the same time.
http://www.strongheartfellowship.org/akawelle/index.php

You go Lovetta! We love you.
Happy Thanksgiving and a great (inspired) weekend for you all… Anja

I got sent a pdf of the print version last month, but it’s now available online.  They asked me to make a prediction about Copenhagen back in the summer, by writing about it as if it had just happened.  I guess I was wrong about the US legislation!

Matt Dernoga, campaign director for University  of Maryland for Clean Energy:

I have mixed emotions. COP15 was better than analysts were anticipating six months ago—President Obama arrived toward the end, committing America to targets for which the Senate had just voted. Western Europe did well (aside from Italy). Canada was an embarrassment. China committed to certain reductions in energy intensity, and to emissions peaking no later than 2020. This was earlier than the 2035 they were rumored to be pushing, and helped hold talks together. Interestingly, the real unsung hero was Japan. Fresh off elections in late August, it set a target of 25 percent below 1990 levels. This brought China along, as it wasn’t about to lose the clean energy race to a regional rival. It reminds me of the debate over the bill the United States passed. Most politicians and some environmental organizations are calling it a win. Greenpeace, 350.org founder Bill McKibben, and NASA scientist James Hansen say the framework in place doesn’t reduce emissions fast enough to avoid runaway climate change. My take is that we didn’t get enough to declare victory, but we won enough to keep on fighting.

When I blogged recently about the impact meat production has on the environment, one commenter replied asking if it was possible to eat meat with less of an impact and, if so, then it might be more effective to talk about those options as opposed to preaching a self-imposed ban. He also said, “I’m always more partial to the ’speak what you are for, not what you are against’ approach.”

This got me thinking. What is the best approach when trying to encourage others to think a little more about their habits or to act in an environmentally friendlier way?

This is the gist (jist?) of my latest blog for Good, which you can read here.

Vegan deliciousness to come! My bf introduced me to an easy frozen treat and this weekend a friend and I are cooking up a dinner, dessert and brunch storm. Stay tuned!

The New York Times jest tym wydawnictwem, które przez wielu stawiane jest za wzór zanurzenia się tradycyjnego dziennikarstwa w świat social mediów. Jak oni to robią?

Ich strona www i jej zintegrowanie z Facebookiem jest wzorowe. Ich aplikacja na iPhona jest doskonała. Ich multimedialne wykresy dorównują tym z GOOD Magazine. A ich wsłuchiwanie się opinię czytelników jest rzeczywistością  a nie pustym słowem.

Oczywiście, wszystko byłoby idealnie gdyby szło to w parze ze wzrostem udziałów rynkowych i zysków. Ale tak nie jest. I małą pociechą jest tutaj fakt, że spada wszystkim – poza Wall Street Journal.

Nakłady gazet codziennych w USA

W każdym bądź razie wolę taką aktywną walkę o istnienie w nowej rzeczywistości od pasywnego czekania na to, co przyszłość przyniesie.

W tym kontekście polecam rewelacyjną multimedialną prezentację NYT na podstawie, której można sobie m.in. wyrobić zdanie, jak daleko w tyle są polskie media w tym wyścigu. Przy okazji jest ona gotowcem pokazującym, co można robić, aby wykorzystywać możliwości jakie niosą ze sobą social media.

I będąc nieco złośliwym mogę powiedzieć, że te same media rwą włosy z głowy narzekając na to, że polskie szkolnictwo wyższe jest w światowym ogonie a tymczasem same tkwią w XX wieku pod względem swojej obecności w sieci. Czyżby zgodnie z powiedzeniem: “W cudzym oku źdźbło, a w swoim belki nie widzi.”?

Smutne w tym wszystkim jest to, że nie jest to już kwestia pieniędzy, ale po prostu ludzkiej wiedzy i otwartości na wprowadzania zmian.

Oh the good people at GOOD magazine.  Here’s an interesting plot of US oil production compared to when “the best” rock songs were produced (according to Rolling Stone).  The article is here which discusses their method a bit more.

Don’t confuse correlation with causation, people.  That simple sentence is the reason why scientists can get things wrong – they can not think through this basic difference.  But anyway.  Pretty tight trend here huh?

A great video from GOOD Magazine displaying internet porn statistics in a clever and intriguing way. This definitely got my attention away from Pinky for a second. [VIA]

If you believe in the power of good, you may enjoy TBD – a newsletter that, much like Good Magazine, shares positive news about our world. A welcome change from the doom and gloom most newspapers bring, for sure. One of the interesting companies I learnt about from TBD is Vittana, which is a sort of Kiva for education, that allows people who are so inclined to lend money to contribute towards the education of people who need financial aid in developing countries. Once the beneficiaries have a job and income, loans are paid back in full. It’s a simple enough idea that amazingly enough hasn’t been put into practice before. The Grameen Bank showed us that microfinance can work, and Vittana, hopefully, will show that it can work for education.

You probably know GOOD magazine.  Maybe it’s a blog, maybe it’s a website, I don’t know.  I don’t do journalism.  Really.  GOOD is the mother of all creations on the internet – the infographic.  A visual and concise way of displaying trends and many different types of information, from global energy use to meat consumption to healthcare spending.  It seems to try and tackle some of the bigthink, TEDesque problems we all face today.  I love this website.

Just today I read a great article on second generation biofuels (the ones that we all actually want that doesn’t take food sources away from people) and was given the link to a nice little diagram on how the smart grid would/should work when implemented.  Obama has given billions to improving the smart grid situation, and to me is arguably the most important initiative they can run with right now.

Oh and this nice video.  Just a quick reminder that insane amounts of water and carbon go into our daily lives.

My latest post for Good is about how meat is bad for the environment:

Did you know that what you eat may have as big an impact on the environment as how often you drive your car?

Government agencies and the media choose to focus on reducing our carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions by increasing our renewable energy sources, using eco-bulbs and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. Meanwhile, our potential to fight global warming from all angles is unrealised due to a lack of information about the other badies: methane and nitrous oxide.

You can read the rest here.

Damn that post is not all that much longer than my average but being fact-heavy I really had to put my thinking hat on. Basically I looked like this when I wrote it: XO

We are becoming more aware of the consequences of our actions as a species, and that is good news for actually making some changes and reacting to the world around us we have created.  We are at a time when we are using the planet’s bio-capacity so quickly that we risk a catastrophic collision with ecological reality.  Yes, extinctions can be a natural part of evolving ecosystems, and left unchecked and unchanged our species will destroy itself.

I prefer to be the optimist and think our society does have the will to change, although if we want to avoid that catastrophe, we need to not just do fewer bad things:  we need to do different things altogether.

In an article written by Alex Steffan (GOOD magazine, State of the Planet 2009), he makes some great quotes which I will pass on to you here:

“We need people to actually step up and do big things.  We need people to change their thinking and not just their lightbulbs.”

“The biggest political difference on the planet right now iw what time frame you define moral responsibility in.  Most politics is really all about hoping the good times last until the rich old people die”

“But there is another political force growing fast and that’s the politics of optimism.  It’s a politics that says transformation is not just a duty, it’s an amazing opportunity.  We might, instead of doing nothing and leaving our kids a ruined planet, decide to build them an awesome future and spend the rest of our lives enjoying it.  That is a choice we wake up to every day: cynicism or change.”

Personally changing our own habits and purchases and reducing our energy consumption and waste will make a difference, but we also have to ask our neighbors to also do the same and we have to ask our businesses and politicians to do the same.  We have to take responsibility for where we are as a whole on this planet and work together as a whole to save it.