NC-12 via the NYT

North Carolina’s little ol’ two-lane highway, number 12, the one that runs North-South via the Outer Banks, is making national news.

The headline on the front page of The New York Times reads, “A North Carolina Lifeline Built on Shifting Sands“.

“Maintaining it ‘is totally a lost cause…It will bankrupt the state,’ said Stanley R. Riggs, a coastal scientist at East Carolina University.”

“According to a 2011 state report, coastal tourism brought $2.6 billion to the state’s economy in 2009, supporting 50,000 jobs.”

“Beth Smyre, an engineer for the State Department of Transportation who is leading the planning effort – ‘There are people living out there, there are tourists visiting out there. We have to provide a reliable and safe transportation system out there.’”

More at The New York Times.

Save Walk Raleigh

If you live around Raleigh, then you have likely seen the Walk Raleigh signs showing how easy it is to get around the city not by car or bike, but by foot. These signs have garnered international attention and support, but could be permanently removed depending on the outcome of the March 6th Raleigh City Council meeting. You can help save Walk Raleigh by signing their online petition today.

You Are What You Eat

Last week, I watched a movie called Forks Over Knives, which is a documentary that looks into the question of just how much our diet – we being those adhering to the Western Culture – affects our overall mortality.  The research presented by the film was startling.  Over and over again, scientists could correlate intake of animal proteins and processed foods with incidences of cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and early death.  Even more astonishing is that patients who had to take several dozen pills per day just to combat heart disease and diabetes or whom were told they had no more than a year to live were able to reverse their conditions by changing their diet and exercising.  Jaw drops here.

The diet here that seems to be the elixir of life is a whole foods, plant-based diet.  Basically, it calls for people to cut out animal products and processed foods from their diet entirely, and to instead consume only things that are still more-or-less recognizable as something that was grown from the land.  Thus, things like almonds are a yes, whereas Twinkies are a no, destined to live out the rest of their uneaten, preservative-laden immortal lives on the back of a shelf somewhere, just waiting to be found by archaeologists a couple thousand of years from now.

Is this extreme?  Maybe, depending on your personal perspective.  But consider, too, as Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn points out during the film, that slicing the front of someone open to put a part of a vein from their leg in as a bypass route for blood to get through the heart is a bit extreme, too.

It makes a lot of sense to switch to a plant-based diet in North Carolina in particular, considering the grave extent to which obesity has taken hold here.  According to the Center for Disease Control, every one in three adults in the United States is obese, but in North Carolina 57% of adults are either overweight or obese.   Perhaps it is ingrained in our culture to be afraid of getting up and moving; physical inactivity correlates pretty

Comparison of National Physical Inactivity and Obesity Levels in 2008 {Source: Center for Disease Control}

directly with incidences of obesity in the United States.  Certainly people should exercise more, but incorporating that can take more of a lifestyle change than just choosing to eat healthier foods at every meal.  Of course, there’s a part of me that’s shouting “We should just get rid of cars! Then everyone will have to walk to get places and will be healthy again!”, but there’s clearly things wrong with that logic and exercise can be a topic for another time.  If we really want to get people healthier more quickly, we simply need to start living off of the land again. And we as North Carolinians have a verifiable cornucopia of produce at our fingertips!  This chart, published by the NC Department of Agriculture, makes that clear.  It’s so easy to get your hands on some of the most delicious fruits and vegetables I’ve ever tasted, too. NC Farm Fresh is a great resource for finding farmer’s markets nearby, or for finding gardening centers, lest you should be moved to start producing your own bounty.  And there is no shortage of blogs to provide you with some idea of what to do with all of those fresh fruits and vegetables if you don’t fancy chewing on raw onions and peppers daily (although I rather like raw peppers and have eaten them with lunch before, to the disgust of one my co-workers who would never do such a thing).  My favorites are Fat Free Vegan Kitchen, and Doing The Vegan Hipster Thing (I realize how this sounds..).  I promise you’ll make delicious food that will actually make you feel good.  You’ll never miss a Twinkie again.  And if I can manage to eat this way more or less as graduate student who works on average ten hours a day, you probably can, too.  No excuses!

It’s time we take back our bodies with healthy lifestyles, and stop destroying ourselves with our food.  Food is meant to nourish our bodies, to keep us alive – not kill us.

The Earth Warmed Over

The 2012 Fundraising Plan for the Heartland Institute (HI) was leaked to the public earlier this week. HI is essentially a conservative nonprofit, in that it focuses on promoting a number of right-wing issues. A large amount of the group’s funding and effort, though, goes towards refuting the idea of global warming. As the documents illustrate (Section 6-H, pg. 18), HI is paying Dr. David Wojick to produce curriculum modules for K-12 students, saying,

“Many people lament the absence of educational material suitable for K-12 students on global warming that isn’t alarmist or overtly political. Heartland has tried to make material available to teachers, but has had only limited success. Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective.”

As the number of people on our lonely planet continues to increase, why do groups and individuals strive so hard for license to harm the environment?

These lights come from fuel-burning humans {Credit: NASA}

Vis-à-vis the quote above, the first sentence is laden with irony; HI wants to interpose Continue reading

Cost v Price

‘Tis the season, and in honor of the annual courtship of consumers by retailers, I thought we’d have a little talk about semantics. Remember that time you bought that expensive brand-name shirt? You know, the blue one.

Credit: J-Crew

Exorbitantly priced, you handed over the cash knowing that it was not actually worth what you were paying. The true cost of the item (materials, employee time, factory space, etc) was significantly less than what you were charged. Cost vs. price. It’s OK, though, because owning that piece of clothing justified its price in your mind. Retailers bank on that, that’s how they make a profit.

Now the opposite case. When you buy a clearance item, the price is just a token amount. In this instance, you’re paying at or below the item’s actual cost to its originator; the retailer would rather cut its losses and remove the item from its more valuable floor space. It requires an intimate knowledge of all costs, hidden or explicit, for a retailer or manufacturer to set prices most advantageously.

Last Friday, I sat in on a seminar by Dr. Edgar Lara Cruzio on NC State’s Centennial Campus. A researcher at Oakridge National Labs in Tennessee, he made a similar “cost vs. price” analysis with regards to world energy usage.

Below is a plot of the cost of electricity from a variety of different sources. It comes from green econometrics, a blog on the economics of alternative energies. The numbers change a little depending on the source but, no matter the plot, solar energy is always much more expensive than energy derived from fossil fuels.

Or is it? The hidden costs of fossil fuels to the consumer are difficult to calculate. We’ll focus on coal. Explicitly, you pay for a slight mark-up on the cost of mined coal, plus plant operating costs, employee time, etc. Implicitly, some of your taxes go towards coal subsidies, and some go towards cleaning up environmental disasters like coal-ash sludge (or an oil spill). You pay a bit for the repairs of civic buildings damaged by acid rain. Work in mines is irrevocably associated with poor health, as is living near one; introducing mine-related illnesses into the healthcare system increases costs for everyone. Can we put a price on the ecological impact of mountain-top removal and steep-slope mining? It’s difficult to say how you pay for the excess carbon dioxide put off by coal production and consumption.

If we could imagine a plot like the one above, with the plethora of implicit costs associated with the use of fossil fuels included, solar would come out looking more equitable. Then we could ask ourselves if using clean energy justifies an increase in the price we pay…it sure works for J. Crew shirts.