Taking Responsibility for a Livable Planet

In the summer of 2011 when I was pregnant with my son, the thoughts that kept me up at night were what kind of living conditions my son would encounter here on earth during his lifetime.



This may sound like a far-fetched concern, but it boils down to simple questions. Will he be able to drink water from the tap? Will he live to see the great glaciers on the mountains where I grew up? Will he have the chance to snorkel at a coral reef? Will the earth and its ecosystems still support wild salmon, polar bears, bees and other animals that we have taken for granted?

A key year for policymakers, scientists and others engaged in finding climate solutions by 2050. That is the year by which the earth will have warmed by at least two degrees Celcius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), according to conservative estimates, if dramatic measures are not taken to reverse human-caused trends. This two degrees Celcius figure translates to a loss of coral reefs, glaciers and other ecosystems, a loss of polar bears and other species, and the destruction of cities and towns at sea level, among other severe effects.

For my son 2050 is the year he will be my age. By that time he will be facing the consequences of our decisions today. He will likely wonder what I did—what we all did—to help prevent the severe effects we know are coming in the absence of change. What conveniences did we let go? What innovations did we implement? What steps did we take to protect ecosystems?

Sustainable C is back to study and explore climate solutions that I—that we all—can live by. It is my attempt to develop answers. It is my attempt to take responsibility. It is my attempt to anticipate when my son is my age, and he asks me what I did to help.

Sustainable Humanity and Energy Policy

There is more than one price to pay for our energy choices. The most obvious prices are listed on utility bills and legislative budgets. Less obvious is the price people pay for living near mining operations and power plants with deficient environmental management. Less told is the story of people who live with toxic air, poisoned water and contaminated soil.

On a road tour dubbed "Cleaning the Air," a group of concerned individuals set out on a ten-day, nine-city tour around Earth Day 2010 to explore this untold story and set the record straight. The tour was an intiative of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Little Village Environmental Organization and the Envirnonmental Justice and Climate Change Initiative. The tour precedes a report ranking the nation's coal power plants based on their emissions of air pollutants (nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide) in proximity to low income communities of color.

Read more about the climate justice initiative on the NAACP website here, http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/04/22/naacp-honors-earth-day-with-climate-justice-initiative-videos/. To follow the tour from your computer, check out Jacqui Patterson's blog and interviews here, https://climatejusticeinitiative.wordpress.com/.

The Cleaning the Air Road Tour raises key questions of equity and human rights. It names the price people have paid, and should mobilize action toward cleaner, healthier, more equitable energy policies.

Is the Generation of Nuclear Energy Sustainable?

From all accounts I have read, the world is nearing an energy crisis. Oil supply has peaked, compelling oil companies to last-resort, environmentally-disastrous measures, such as steam blasting bitumen out of the Canadian oil sands. Water supply is of increasing concern. National Geographic’s April 2010 edition focused on dwindling sources of clean water, and The Economist is poised to follow suit next week with a special report on water…”finite, vital, much wanted, little understood.” http://www.economist.com (print edition for week of May 15th-21st 2010). Despite its toxic profile, nuclear energy is increasingly at the top of many countries’ energy agendas.



But is it sustainable?

The trouble with nuclear is that every step in its production chain is severely toxic to wildlife and human life. From the uranium fuels nuclear generators to the water-intensive cooling towers used at the power plant, and from the disposal of spent uranium to the ultimate decommissioning of the plant, nuclear business is deadly business.

This is a topic worth exploring in detail. As a starting point, let’s take the first step in the process of nuclear fuel cycle – uranium mining. Uranium is a radioactive material that fuels nuclear power plants. Uranium mines operate in 70 different countries, with a majority of operations in developing countries, where hazardous waste regulations are relatively lax. http://www-nfcis.iaea.org/UDEPO (registration required).

The uranium mining process unsheathes high concentrations of radioactive elements and other elements that can wreak havoc on people’s health near the mines. These elements include uranium decay products such as radon, thorium-230 and radium-226, as well as heavy metals (copper, manganese and cadmium) and poisons including arsenic. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, exposure to these materials has been linked to cancer, leukemia, birth defects and genetic mutations. www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/understand/health_effects.html.

One detailed example of how a uranium mine has poisoned human habitat is featured in Greenpeace’s recent report titled, “Left in the dust: AREVA’s radioactive legacy in the desert towns of Niger.” www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/Left-in-the-dust/. This report leaves the reader begging the question, “Why? Why nuclear?” For those of us who engage our elected officials on the topic of energy, and certainly for our elected officials, this report should be recommended reading.

More of the nuclear fuel cycle could be explored, but the basic point is this. Before we choose nuclear—whose fuel cycle is proven to be disastrous to human health—it is vital that we exhaust all other options. The ongoing health and sustainability of humankind depends on such well-reasoned policy choices.