Nice local food finder: "Local Harvest"

"Cool Tools" has a nice free find(er) this week:

LocalHarvest is a comprehensive one-stop resource for finding locally grown food in the continental U.S. The site provides a customizable search feature on its homepage, and a simple zip code input provided me with a description and link to my closest Community Supported Agriculture option. Other search options include farmer’s markets, restaurants that serve food made with organic ingredients and grocery co-ops. -- Elon Schoenholz

LocalHarvest http://www.localharvest.org/

Sample excerpts:

* Shared Risk

There is an important concept woven into the CSA model that takes the arrangement beyond the usual commercial transaction. That is the notion of shared risk. When originally conceived, the CSA was set up differently than it is now. A group of people pooled their money, bought a farm, hired a farmer, and each took a share of whatever the farm produced for the year. If the farm had a tomato bonanza, everyone put some up for winter. If a plague of locusts ate all the greens, people ate cheese sandwiches. Very few such CSAs exist today, and for most farmers, the CSA is just one of the ways their produce is marketed. They may also go to the farmers market, do some wholesale, sell to restaurants, etc. Still, the idea that "we're in this together" remains. On some farms it is stronger than others, and CSA members may be asked to sign a policy form indicating that they agree to accept without complaint whatever the farm can produce.

*Advantages for consumers

• Eat ultra-fresh food, with all the flavor and vitamin benefits
  
  
• Get exposed to new vegetables and new ways of cooking
  
  
• Usually get to visit the farm at least once a season
  
  
• Find that kids typically favor food from "their" farm – even veggies they've never been known to eat
  
  
• Develop a relationship with the farmer who grows their food and learn more about how food is grown

It's a simple enough idea, but its impact has been profound. Tens of thousands of families have joined CSAs, and in some areas of the country there is more demand than there are CSA farms to fill it. The government does not track CSAs, so there is no official count of how many CSAs there are in the U.S.. LocalHarvest has the most comprehensive directory of CSA farms, with over 2,500 listed in our grassroots database. In 2008, 557 CSAs signed up with LocalHarvest, and in the first two months of 2009, an additional 300 CSAs joined the site.

* Variations

As you might expect with such a successful model, farmers have begun to introduce variations. One increasingly common one is the "mix and match," or "market-style" CSA. Here, rather than making up a standard box of vegetables for every member each week, the members load their own boxes with some degree of personal choice. The farmer lays out baskets of the week's vegetables. Some farmers encourage members to take a prescribed amount of what's available, leaving behind just what their families do not care for. Some CSA farmers then donate this extra produce to a food bank. In other CSAs, the members have wider choice to fill their box with whatever appeals to them, within certain limitations. (e.g. "Just one basket of strawberries per family, please.")

Perfect 4th comic

"Frazz" is a great comic that neither of the papers most often available in Salem carry. Too bad for them.

For your old e-waste, check here first

Image by georgehotelling via Flickr

Interesting and good idea: create a website the vacuums up old electronic items that would otherwise be landfilled or disassembled and instead tries to find a use for them. If you have some old electronic junk sitting around unused, check this out -- you might get a few bucks for it, and even if you don't they'll help recycle it for you, either by directing you to a local recycler or by sending you a box that you can use to ship it to them for free.

Nice.

Time for another revolution: Against corporate irresponsibility

Image by Mr Magoo ICU via Flickr

Native Oregonian Nick Kristof's alarming column in the NY Times makes clear that the revolution we need now is against corporate-controlled science that urges us to keep producing and eating, drinking and breathing new chemicals --- unique molecules created in laboratories --- without a care in the world.

The corporations that rule politics in the US are unique entities --- devices for generating private profit while avoiding private liability for harm caused to others. Thus, they enjoy the right to keep spreading pollutants and hormone-mimics that disrupt cell biology until there's an airtight scientific case against them AND the political will to force those pollutants off the market, which often takes decades.

In other words, chemicals are innocent until proven guilty, and the onus (the burden of proof) is on us to force these dangerous molecules off the market -- which requires that the bodies and deformities pile up first, while the companies profits' pile up, giving them the resources to fog the issues and protect their "right" to keep on manufacturing and releasing toxins to hurt others.

As we celebrate Independence Day, it's time for another revolution, this time to throw off the shackles of an outmoded way of thinking about corporate privileges and responsibilities. We must shift the onus off us and put it back on those corporations who create and peddle compounds that kill and maim.

It's long past time for a revolution in regulation, one that says that molecules not found in nature are not innocent until proven guilty. Rather, molecules created in laboratories must be considered as suspect until they are scrutinized closely and cleared, just like people the national borders. It's astonishing how much we spend in response to fear of terrorists from abroad when we have huge sectors of US industry that are merrily poisoning us right here at home without a second thought.

The consequence of this revolutionary idea is that corporations will no longer be able to put a product or material into commerce until they show that it is safe for human exposure and for release into the environment. No more making victims first and then making the survivors fight to abolish the compounds that kill and deform.

. . . Now scientists are connecting the dots with evidence of increasing abnormalities among humans, particularly large increases in numbers of genital deformities among newborn boys. For example, up to 7 percent of boys are now born with undescended testicles, although this often self-corrects over time. And up to 1 percent of boys in the United States are now born with hypospadias, in which the urethra exits the penis improperly, such as at the base rather than the tip.

Apprehension is growing among many scientists that the cause of all this may be a class of chemicals called endocrine disruptors. They are very widely used in agriculture, industry and consumer products. Some also enter the water supply when estrogens in human urine — compounded when a woman is on the pill — pass through sewage systems and then through water treatment plants.

These endocrine disruptors have complex effects on the human body, particularly during fetal development of males.

“A lot of these compounds act as weak estrogen, so that’s why developing males — whether smallmouth bass or humans — tend to be more sensitive,” said Robert Lawrence, a professor of environmental health sciences at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “It’s scary, very scary.”

The scientific case is still far from proven, as chemical companies emphasize, and the uncertainties for humans are vast. But there is accumulating evidence that male sperm count is dropping and that genital abnormalities in newborn boys are increasing. Some studies show correlations between these abnormalities and mothers who have greater exposure to these chemicals during pregnancy, through everything from hair spray to the water they drink.

Endocrine disruptors also affect females. It is now well established that DES, a synthetic estrogen given to many pregnant women from the 1930s to the 1970s to prevent miscarriages, caused abnormalities in the children. They seemed fine at birth, but girls born to those women have been more likely to develop misshaped sexual organs and cancer.

There is also some evidence from both humans and monkeys that endometriosis, a gynecological disorder, is linked to exposure to endocrine disruptors. Researchers also suspect that the disruptors can cause early puberty in girls.

A rush of new research has also tied endocrine disruptors to obesity, insulin resistance and diabetes, in both animals and humans. For example, mice exposed in utero even to low doses of endocrine disruptors appear normal at first but develop excess abdominal body fat as adults.

Among some scientists, there is real apprehension at the new findings — nothing is more terrifying than reading The Journal of Pediatric Urology — but there hasn’t been much public notice or government action.

This month, the Endocrine Society, an organization of scientists specializing in this field, issued a landmark 50-page statement. It should be a wake-up call.

“We present the evidence that endocrine disruptors have effects on male and female reproduction, breast development and cancer, prostate cancer, neuroendocrinology, thyroid, metabolism and obesity, and cardiovascular endocrinology,” the society declared.

“The rise in the incidence in obesity,” it added, “matches the rise in the use and distribution of industrial chemicals that may be playing a role in generation of obesity.”

The Environmental Protection Agency is moving toward screening endocrine disrupting chemicals, but at a glacial pace. For now, these chemicals continue to be widely used in agricultural pesticides and industrial compounds. Everybody is exposed.

“We should be concerned,” said Dr. Ted Schettler of the Science and Environmental Health Network. “This can influence brain development, sperm counts or susceptibility to cancer, even where the animal at birth seems perfectly normal.” . . .

Kristof is really on a roll lately. This second piece is repeats a point made by many, often hilariously (that we're evolved to face hazards that appear out of the bushes, with big teeth, and we have a hard time dealing with or even recognizing far graver hazards that only appear as scientific data . . . until it's too late) but it's great to see this idea being discussed in the archaic media.

Inspiring photo

One of nine inspiring photos for urban gardeners, each worth many thousands of words - now THOSE are raised beds!

LOVESalem HQ just got new hardiplank cement siding affixed with honking big spikes fired into firring strips that are spiked to the cinderblocks, so that will probably support a TON of these, with drip lines run up to and across each "bed" (gutter) to for all kinds of smallish things that will love the heat reflected off the insulated wall.

And this has gotta be great accessible gardening for older/disabled people who can't garden at ground level or in low raised beds.

This is one of those palm-in-forehead "Why didn't I think of that!" things . . .

HOME: the best video ever put over the Internet

This is your planet on fossil fuels. Image via Wikipedia

Just watched this astounding production yet again. Profoundly moving, profoundly beautiful, profoundly disturbing. Please set aside some time to watch it - a little more than 90 minutes -- though if you watch with an open mind, it will take you far longer to get it out of your head.

Slowly but surely, reality wins out: Berkeley dumps biofuels

Note that corn ethanol -- the primary US biofuel -- is among the worst fuels for carbon emissions, not to mention land diversion from growing food, etc. Image via Wikipedia

Many people know that Seattle, WA has stopped buying biofuels made from crops because the science has finally overcome the very aggressive, very well-funded biofuels lobby.

The reality is that crop-based biofuels are MUCH WORSE for the climate than petroleum, and they aggravate world hunger and species extinction, in addition to helping lead to destruction of temperate rain forests all over the world.

But few know that Berkeley, CA, that green Valhalla to the South, has also made the same decision -- no more psuedo-green biofuels! Thanks to an alert activist in Seattle, the word made it up here.

This is good news. Oregon has lost its way on this issue, but seeing the most progressive areas wake up and start rejecting biofuels has got to help get us back on course -- which means eliminating the subsidies and blending mandates and actually implementing a meaningful low-carbon fuel standard (which kills all cropped biofuels).

Why conserving energy has to be our first, second, and third priorities

Image by David Reeves via Flickr

The always-excellent High Country News has a great op-ed by Randy Udall on our energy pickle, which is greatly aggravated by our belief in magic pony solutions (biofuels, hydrogen, etc.) that we expect will suddenly appear and make it so that we don't have to change anything or turn off the 60" plasma TVs.

Renewables: The Final Frontier

Why historian Vaclav Smil thinks there are no easy solutions to our energy problems

Op-Ed - From the June 15, 2009 issue of High Country News by Randy Udall

. . . When it comes to energy, the scientist who best exemplifies Vulcan logic is Vaclav Smil. The world's foremost energy historian, he began a recent essay with this blunt statement: "Our transition away from fossil fuels will take decades -- if it happens at all."

. . . He does not believe that our cars will soon be powered by fuel cells or pyrolyzed turkey guts, that clean coal can solve the climate problem, or that venture capital will discover an energy analogue to the cellular phone.

Al Gore's proposal to re-power America with renewable energy in a decade is "delusional," Smil writes. "Gore has succumbed to Moore's curse, the belief that performance improvement in energy systems can model that of computer processing power." . . .

Given climate realities, we desperately need a rapid energy transformation, but wishing can't make it so. As a Vulcan might say, what is desirable is not necessarily probable. Change takes time. James Watt's steam engine revolutionized the mining and transportation of coal, but it still took a century for coal to displace wood. Solar photovoltaic cells were invented 55 years ago, and yet today in the U.S. they produce less electricity than Glen Canyon Dam. Eight years after its introduction, the ingenious Prius has yet to become 1 percent of the automotive fleet.

Like it or not, Smil believes we are captive to past investments, to the multi-trillion-dollar energy networks we have already created, and, above all, to the scale of our energy appetites. Only the last of those factors seems amenable to rapid change, and thus his advice to President Obama: "Explain to the nation that Americans, who consume twice as much energy per capita as rich Europeans (and have nothing to show for it), should try to live within some sensible limits, which means using less fuel not more."

. . . We have much larger appetites today. Melanie Moses, a biologist at the University of New Mexico, calculates that a typical North American consumes energy at a rate sufficient to sustain a 66,000-pound primate.

That's a very big ape, and Smil is not the only one asking whether it's realistic to meet his gargantuan appetite with wind and solar, dilute flows of power that today provide less than 1 percent of U.S. energy. Unlike oil shale -- the thermodynamically doomed effort to turn chicken manure into chicken salad -- wind, solar and geothermal have high energy returns and a bright future. Nonetheless, it will take many doublings before they will meet a significant percentage of our needs . . . .

In his personal life, Smil is an avid conservationist, proud of his super-efficient house and frugal Honda. In his recent work, there is a hint of frustration with what he sees as the cannibalization of our host planet. Contemplating our journey to the future, where no man has gone before, he writes, "I am always trying to imagine what would be the verdict of a sapient extraterrestrial informed about the behavior of affluent Earthlings."

Great gardening site for DIY groceries

Very nice site -- well documented stuff from a "learn by doing" gardener who is trying new things and telling (and showing) you how they work. Not from Cascadia, but it seems very relevant anyway. Photo is the "$50 Greenhouse" (actually more like $150 when you chase every detailed cost down, but still, that's about 1/20th of the cost for an equal-sized store-bought kind.)

Is Salem Audubon looking for you?

Image by Andrew Parodi via Wikipedia

A friend sends:

This is for you to think about regarding anyone you might know who would be interested in working with Audubon in protecting/promoting natural resources. Their director is retiring and they need part-time help in their Reed Opera House office.

The profile for an application is on their website, home page lower right corner.

The fascinating fact is that they have money and are about to build a nature center here in a wonderful spot near downtown. Nothing firm yet, but looks promising.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SALEM AUDUBON SOCIETY

Salem Audubon Society is an affiliate of the National Audubon Society in Salem, Oregon with approximately 1600 members. Salem Audubon Society provides nature education to school children, offers birding field trips and other member programs, and is involved in environmental advocacy. Salem Audubon has been considering potential sites for building a nature center.

THE POSITION
The Executive Director is responsible for the overall administration of Salem Audubon Society in its transition from a traditional birding organization to an organization developing and managing a nature center. This person provides organizational leadership, administers programs, manages finances, and supports the work of the board. This is a currently a half time position, but has the potential to evolve into a full time position.

QUALIFICATIONS:
1. Ability to convey the mission of Salem Audubon Society: Promoting the appreciation of nature and respect for natural places.

2. Demonstrated ability in financial management, including developing and managing a budget.

3. Demonstrated leadership skills and collaborative management style.

4. Bachelor’s degree preferred. Other demonstrated experience will be considered.

TO APPLY: Individuals interested in applying may submit a resume and cover letter to davidlichter@comcast.net.

DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION: July 17, 2009