I have been interested in sustainability for several years. I’ve read quite a bit of literature on the subject and have worked to integrate sustainable principles in both personal and professional projects. In this sense, I cannot say that the content of this class was completely new or transformative for me. However, I can say, without a doubt, that this class has significantly broadened and deepened my understanding of sustainability.

In terms of breadth, the range of topics that we have covered in one semester is truly impressive. Food, water, waste, energy, climate, housing, transportation, business, behavior change, social justice–and the list goes on–were all discussed in a substantive way. In terms of scale, we addressed issues ranging from personal lifestyle all the way up to global economics and planetary limits. However, most significant for me, was how much time we spent focused on the intermediate scale: public policy, urban design and management at the community level.

This was largely new material for me. As a SPEA outsider, it was fascinating to be exposed to these issues. At the urban level, there are some many promising solutions within reach, and also so many nitty gritty practical and political challenges to overcome. I was grateful to learn from the SPEA students who bring varied expertise in public policy and environmental science. And of course, it was a huge help to be led by IU Director of Sustainability, Bill Brown, who is daily working to infuse sustainability into the IUB community.

The opportunity to work with the city of Bloomington brought another layer of real-life experience into the ways that sustainability and local government intersect. It was fascinating to chat with Vince Caristo and Justin Wykoff and get a glimpse of the day to day workings of city planning and engineering. These are professions that I previously knew little about and had rarely considered. Now as I bike, walk, or drive around town, I cant stop analyzing the minutia of bikelanes, crosswalks, curb extensions, yields, etc. etc. I’m not sure if this is a good thing or not.

Without a doubt, the most memorable aspect of the course was interacting with my classmates. I had never taken a graduate class in SPEA, or a graduate class on sustainability before. It was such a pleasure to learn from students who bring a wide diversity of perspectives and yet share such an amazing passion for sustainability. My favorite classes were the ones in which we tackled tough controversial questions, like social justice, business ethics, climate politics. I really enjoyed learning by engaging in debate and hearing arguments from multiple sides of an issue. The blogs provided a fantastic forum for students to express their unique perspectives in a more personal and substantive way. I look forward to re-reading many of the posts as there is a wealth of knowledge represented. Most importantly, I hope to continue to keep in touch with the class and maintain this great network of talented and enthusiastic sustainability professionals.

Thanks all for a great semeseter.

On the other hand, a little bit of knowledge goes a long way in dispelling these concerns. And when it comes to worms, its pretty easy to get up to speed on everything you need to know. Resources abound, and after reading a couple short books, I felt like a complete worm expert. Realistically, a simple one-page-guide like this one is enough to get you up and running, because after all, worms are incredibly resilient, low maintenance creatures, with very simple needs.

Once I knew what I was dealing with, it didn’t take much effort to put together a proper worm habitat. Although it was easy, I have to to admit that I’m rather proud of my worm bin, and especially the fact that I was able to make use of 2 repurposed materials––used plastic bins and some junk mail––that otherwise would have gone to waste.

Maintaining a vermicomposting system does require a bit of change to my daily behavior. Instead of throwing scraps in the trash, I need to remember to set them aside in a bucket. Then once a week or so, I head down to the basement to feed the worms, add some soaked, shredded paper, and check to make sure everything looks ok. Eventually, I’ll need to take the time to empty the bottom bin of its finished compost. And if things go well and the worms keep multiplying, then I’ll eventually need to thin the population and either start a second bin or give some worms to a friend.

Overall, these new routines are a pleasant and welcome change from the alternative. The result is that I don’t need to take out the trash nearly as often, which eliminates labor, not to mention unpleasant odors. I definitely consider the shift to vermicomposting to be a small, but meaningful improvement in the aesthetics of my everyday life.

It may seem like a small change, but is rewarding on multiple levels. First, there is a clear environmental benefit. Diverting food waste from the trash reduces the amount of plastic trash bags consumed. It reduces the amount of fuel needed to truck garbage to a landfill. And perhaps most importantly, it reduces the amount of methane produced in landfills. According to the EPA, “Food waste is now the No. 1 material that goes into landfills and incinerators.”

On a more philosophical level, I think this project is really representative of what the movement toward sustainability is all about. The practice of landfilling food waste is an outdated industrial model that uses resource-intensive technology to work against the processes of nature: take something organic, wrap something in plastic, ship it far far away where it is out of sight and and out of mind.

Vermicomposting, in contrast, is exemplary of sustainable design. It requires working with natural processes in a smart and symbiotic way, shaping them to our benefit, keeping the flow of resources local so that nutrients can be returned to where they originated. It is low-tech, low-effort, it just requires a little bit of careful planning, design and attention. I feel like I have a brought a little bit of nature into my home. It is a small wonder to observe the useful transformation that the worms perform. In the end, the result is an improvement of quality of life rather than a lot of work or sacrifice.

We started collecting food scraps in a bucket under our sink. From my reading I learned that, in addition to vegetables of kinds, worms can eat other common scraps such as egg shells, stale bread, grains like rice or oatmeal, tea leaves, coffee grounds. Crushed egg shells are especially good to feed your worms because they aid in the worms digestion process, provide a source of calcium and lower acidity in the bin (which is convenient since we eat a lot of eggs). Some things that worms should not eat: meat and dairy products, fats and oils, overly acidic things like citrus.

The fats and oils issue is a bit of a bummer. We often have to throw out cooked leftovers from the fridge, but I’m afraid to feed these to the worms since they usually contain at least some amount of oil or butter. Oils are dangerous to the worms because can coat their skin and prevent them from breathing. I wonder though, exactly how sensitive of an issus this is? For example, this week I hesitated about whether to feed the worms some leftover oatmeal that had only a tiny bit of butter. I’ll need to do some more googling about this… In any case, worms cannot eat everything, which means that if we want to eliminate our food waste completely were going to need to be more careful about finishing leftovers.

Here you can see our first batch of worm food, which we accumulated over about 4-5 days. It includes a lot egg shells and tea leaves, some stale bread, and a bit of mustard greens that had started to wilt in the fridge.

In addition to food scraps, there is another crucial element that needs to be regularly added to the worm bin: bedding. Bedding material provides the worms with a comfortable environment to live in. It insulates, provides a source of moisture and also allows airflow. Worms will also eat the bedding, so it needs to be replenished over time. One of the most common bedding materials to use is shredded paper.

Saumya and I seized the opportunity to turn junk into a resource and began shredding our dreaded pile of junk mail to use as a worm bedding. There is some deeply satisfying in shredding junk mail and feeding it to worms who eventually transform it into rich black compost. We soaked the paper in water and then wrung it out in order to provide the right amount of moisture in the bin. The bedding goes on top in order to keep the food buried and discourage fruit flies.

I covered the bin with an old towel to keep it dark, insulated, and ventilated and put the bin in our basement. Worms are supposed to thrive in temperatures from 55-77 F, and our basement is currently around 60 F. Hopefully, this won’t drop too much over the winter.

There you have it. The worms should be pretty well taken care of at this point. All there is do is wait and let them do their thing.

First, the worms were not able to process our food scraps quickly enough, so we ended up putting most of our scraps in the trash. At one point, we got a pretty bad infestation of fruit flies which was annoying and took some time to get rid of. At another time we found that we had an excess of moisture in the bucket, which caused the worms to crawl up the side and try to flee. Related to this problem, the bin started to smell due to food that was rotting rather than being consumed.

After doing some reading, I’ve learned that all of these problems can be easily avoided by using a proper container and bedding material.

The key to an effective worm bin is aeration. Worms need a humid environment. If they dry out too much, they can no longer breathe through their skin and will die. However, too much moisture can cause the bedding to become compacted and prevent airflow. Without enough oxygen, worms will suffocate. Also, anerobic bacteria will develop which is what produces the awful smell of methane.

For these reasons, worm bins need to have some drainage on the bottom and plenty of surface area on the top to allow air flow. Rectangular tubs are thus much preferred to buckets because they allow for better airflow.

As I started learning about various types of worm containers, I became aware of these commercial worm bins that can be purchased online. In addition to optimal drainage and ventilation, the killer feature of these bins is that they use a system of stackable trays to make harvesting compost much easier. As the worms start to produce a lot of compost, you gradually start feeding the trays above. The worms will migrate upwards towards the new food, conveniently leaving behind the tray of compost to be emptied.

Since I’m sucker for convenience (and an Amazon addict), I was strongly tempted to purchase one of these things. However, I wasn’t too excited to shell out $80-100 for a couple plastic trays. Also, the idea of purchasing a new manufactured product seemed counter to the spirit of this project––which is sustainability, after all. Luckily, I found the ticket to a DIY solution when the IU Surplus Store posted these perfect used plastic bins for sale.

These things are perfect in just about every way. They are rectangular, stackable, and already have holes for worm and air movement. I was even able to grab one without holes to use as the bottom tray where liquid collects. Best of all, they cost a whopping 20 cents each! Before transferring the worms I just had to make one small modification. For the starting holding tray (second from the bottom), I added some window screen material in order to prevent worms or any solid material from faling below.

Next step: transfer the worms and start feeding them.

I started my project by reading up on various composting methods. In particular, I wanted to first decide between using a traditional compost pile or bin or using a vermicomposting system. Traditional composting utilizes bacteria and various microrganism as decomposers, whereas vermicomposting is strictly worm-based. In the end, I decided worms would be the superior choice for several reasons.

First, worms do the work faster. 1 pound of worms can process 1/2 pound of food waste per day! Under appropriate conditions, a worm population will naturally multiple, so ideally you can maintain a large enough population to avoid any accumulation of food waste. Traditional composting takes more time, and the speed is affected by the temperature. With winter coming up, I’m worried about accumulating a lot of unfinished compost by the time our lease is up this summer.

Secondly, worms are less work. They can be kept indoors and the only maintenance they require is regular feeding, addition of bedding material, and occasional harvesting of the compost. In contrast, traditional compost bins need to kept outdoors, and need to be regularly turned or aerated, which can be a little more labor-intensive.

Thirdly, we already have some worms to get started with! About a year and half ago, a dear friend gifted us a small bucket of composting worms from his personal system:

Unfortunately, we didn’t know a whole lot about how to take care of them at the time. We soon realized that our small bucket of worms was not able to handle the bulk of our food waste. We cook a lot and so we generate a fair amount of vegetable scraps. Since we couldn’t feed all our scraps to the worms, I eventually became accustomed to throwing everything in the trash, and the worms became mostly forgotten under our sink. Luckily, Saumya remembered to feed them every once in a while. Miraculously, after all this time of relatively neglect, the worms are still alive and well. These are truly resilient creatures.

Now that I’m well read on everything worms, I am determined to grow our little population to a size capable of eating the bulk of our food scraps. Next step: constructing a proper habitat.

In her book Redesigning the American Dream, Dolores Hayden makes a compelling argument about the relationship between gender inequality and urban development. Specifically, she observes that the patriarchal Victorian notion that “a woman’s place is in the home” has had lasting influence on women’s access to urban space:

“Because the working woman was no one man’s property…, she was every urban man’s property. She was the potential victim of harassment in the factory, in the office, in restuarants, and in places of amusement such as theaters or parks. While the numbers of employed women and women in active public life have increased, many of these spatial stereotypes and patterns of behavior remain.”

Indeed, despite all that has changed, the gender inequality that exists in 2012 is profound. It remains a taken-for-granted fact that it is unsafe for women to be alone in public. For example, when my wife, Saumya, and I lived in a dense urban neighborhood of Washington, DC, I felt much safer than she did walking alone at night or taking the Metro. I think there is a (sexist) tendency to assume (erroneously) that the reason men are safer is because they are more capable of defending themselves against attack. And thus, the conventional answer is that women always be accompanied by men who protect them. However, in our case at least, it is quite the opposite: I’ve never been in a fight in my life, while Saumya has studied martial arts for years and is much more capable of defending herself. Of course, the real reason that she is less safe is because, as a woman, she is far more likely than me to be a target of harassment or assault.

This is an unacceptable, and yet widely accepted reality. According to wikipedia:

“rape culture is a concept used to describe a culture in which rape and sexual violence are common and in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media normalize, excuse, tolerate, or even condone rape”.

While the status and safety of women is much better in the U.S than other parts of the world, the accepted threat to women is a significant force shaping our accepted patterns of behavior, housing, and development.

The denial of women from urban space (along with racism and classism) contributed to the formation of the American dream of a family life in suburbs. These stereotypes have driven decades of car-centric development sprawl, and are today a significant barrier to moving towards dense, efficient, mixed-use development. Even though urban centers are becoming more and more desirable places to live, the city is still widely regarded as an unsafe environment for families. This is an example of how the goals of sustainability and social justice are so intertwined. As Hayden says, sustainable development requires “that the presence of women (and their children) in public space be established as a political right” and that urban designers “bring domestic standards of amenity and safety” to the city environment.

The IU Energy Challenge (EC) is a contest in which campus buildings compete to reduce their energy and water consumption. I helped organize the first Energy Challenge (which included 12 residence halls) as part of my masters’ capstone project in Spring 2008. Since then, the Challenge has been run nearly every semester and has grown to include academic buildings and greek houses. It has been estimated that from 2008-2011, the Energy Challenge saved over $1 million in avoided utility costs. This fall, 82 buildings across campus signed up to compete.

Since I haven’t been involved in the Challenge since the first running, it has been fun, surprising, and somewhat surreal to encounter its ongoing development and presence on campus. This fall, I decided to drop by and check out the kickoff event energy fair that happened on Oct. 21.

The event was held in a high traffic location on campus with the intention of generating some student awareness and engagement. Posters were displayed about the Challenge, and EC coordinator Carolyn Raider was chatting with students and handing out informational flyers and magnets. There was a table set up where you could sign your name to pledge to participate in the EC and also write down and share your favorite conservation tips. Soliciting a written commitment is a great community based social marketing (CBSM) tactic for increasing behavioral follow-through.

Several environmental student groups had tables set up and were sharing knowledge about energy efficiency and the effects of coal, respectively.

Despite the great success of the EC over the years, generating student engagement has been and continues to be a challenge. Admittedly, for the average college student, energy conservation is not exactly the most exciting topic in the world. During the kickoff, students trickled in now and then to take a look and ask some questions. However, for the most part, it was difficult to engage the crowds of students walking to and from class and to interest them enough to stop and chat.

It was quite interesting and frustrating, when a crowd of students gathered behind the fair: They were circled around, listening to a fundamentalist preacher guy, who had come to campus to proclaim that everyone there was going to hell (the reasons, of course, included homosexuality, women working outside the home, other archaic and miscellaneous bigotry). The students were not buying it, but they were enthralled. Many were shouting and arguing at the guy or just mocking him and laughing. The crowd stayed and only grew in numbers for the 30 mins or so I was there.

This made me wonder how we might go about making the EC garner such stop and listen attention. Should we be more shocking and confrontational? Perhaps we need our own firebrand preacher to sermonize about the doomsday scenarios of climate change? Or maybe the secret is simply the crowd effect. Assemble a critical mass together and other will come flocking to see what all the fuss is about. Maybe free food?

In any case, despite the challenges, the energy fair is an important way to generate awareness of the EC. Even if they don’t stop and chat, the more times students notice the posters, the more likely they are to eventually tune and participate, if even in a small way. As the results have shown, even very small changes in behavior can add up to major impact on energy consumption.

“I can say with some confidence that we’re losing the fight, badly and quickly – losing it because, most of all, we remain in denial about the peril that human civilization is in.”

Denial in the political sphere is more than apparent this election year. Many Republicans in congress continue to not only deny the existence of global warming, but are openly and vehemently against science–and this includes many members of the House Science committee. Romney does not officially deny climate change, rather he considers it a hilarious joke. While Obama and other Democrats take the issue more seriously, we still remain far from achieving federal carbon regulation or international committment. McKibben recounts the failure of the 2009 Copenhagen climate conference and notes that Obama did attend this years environmental summit in Rio.

In spite of all this, Roseland takes an optimistic stance, and argues that more encouraging and progressive responses are taking place on the local level. This is of course not surprising to read in an action oriented book on sustainable communities. Roseland argues that we can increase buy-in for mitigation initiatives by taking up issues that intersect with people’s other pressing concerns such as air quality or disaster preparedness. I completely agree with this positive, action-oriented perspective, and much of my work has focused on making small improvements in energy efficiency.

At the same, I am quite taken with the very different argument made by McKibben: we also need to recognize that some people’s interests are radically and directly in opposition to mitigation. Mckibben bases his argument on a simple set of numbers. First, it is estimated that we can keep the earth under 2° C of warming if we allow no more than 565 additional gigatrons C0₂ to be emitted. Second, it is estimated that 2,795 gigatrons C0₂ are already contained within the proven coal, oil, and gas reserves of fossil fuel companies. In other words, there are enough fossil fiels already being accounted for to warm the planet far beyond any acceptable scenario. These resources have an economic value of somewhere around $27 trillion.

Prof. Ben Brabson presentation added some additional context to this analysis. He points out that coal is the real 800 lb gorilla to be worried about. The planet’s coal resources are an order of magnitude greater than oil or natural gas. While oil and gas will burn out in the next 50 yrs or so, there exists enough coal to power the entire planet for another ~200 years. Since carbon persists in the atmosphere for so long, simply slowing down the rate of fossil fuel consumption accomplishes next to nothing. In order to actually prevent warming, these fuels can not ever be burned. Ever.

Reflecting on these facts has changed my perspective on mitigation. No amount of energy efficiency or innovation in renewables is going to prevent these fossil fuels from being burned. It doesn’t matter if fossil fuel execs personally deny or believe the science of climate change. There is no way that they will decide to voluntarily abandon $20 trillion in assets. Rather, they will try and are trying to do anything possible to prevent carbon regulation. And they are succeeding because their wealth allows them immense power to lobby congress and influence media discourse.

Mckibben argues that fossil fuel companies should be branded as “Public Enemy Number One to the survival of our planetary civilization”. His hope is that identifying a real enemy could inspire a stronger, more energetic climate movement. While I’m not interested in villainizing individuals, I agree 100% that we are naive to ignore these powerful and motivated adversaries to mitigation. Alongside optimism about efficiency and renewables, we need realism about the danger that they represent. Ultimately, strong economic regulation will be the only way to keep fossil fuels safely in the ground.

But the energy costs of wasting water are real. Roseland cites a study that suggests 13% of the total electricity produced in the United States is used to pump, treat and heat water (Griffiths-Sattenspiel & Wilson 2009). And so wasting water contributes directly to greenhouse gases: the same study reported that “38.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions could be avoided if every US household installed water-efficient fixtures and appliances”.

Flushing it away

Wastefulness is not only encouraged by pricing, its also built into our the design of infrastructure and the plumbing of our homes. For example, why is it that we go to such expense to treat water only to literally flush it down the toilet? According to the EPA, toilets can use 27% of total household water. This water obviously does not need to be potable and could by provided by reused greywater instead. The same goes for outdoor irrigation. To get a sense of easy this could work, check out this smart design for a toilet that uses greywater from washing your hands:

Also, read Errol’s informative post on improving toilet efficiency.

Put in perspective

Last December, I spent two weeks in India, and the experience provided some interesting contrasts to our water use in North America. The homes I stayed in had small hot water heaters mounted high on walls in the bathrooms. Showers were taken by first filling a bucket with hot water to pour over oneself. I was amazed to find that a 5 gallon bucket was more than enough hot water to bathe myself, and in fact I probably only used about 2-3 gallons each time. Compare that to the US, where the average shower head sprays that much water each minute. A ten minute shower is ten times less efficient and only marginally more enjoyable.

I also found myself drinking a lot of bottled water in India, something that I usually hate to do. Of course, I had good reason to do so while on the go, in order to avoid getting sick from bacteria in unpurified tap water. As much as I felt uncomfortable with the plastic waste I was generating, the real feeling of discomfort came from thinking about what exactly it means to drink bottled water in the US. Here we have the enormous luxury of safe, treated water flowing from our taps. And while its fine for flushing toilets, apparently its not good enough for drinking. Instead we decide to waste money and energy drinking water that has been bottled up in plastic and shipped around the world. I think bottled water may be the most wasteful and egregious use of water imaginable. Also, by taking a public utility and turning it into a commodity, we allow the rich an excuse to insulate themselves from the project of protecting the quality of our collective resources.

New World Water

While reading about water issues this week, I couldn’t help but think of a song by Mos Def from way back in 1999 called “New World Water”. Its a great track, and conspiracy paranoia aside, Mos makes some powerful observations about our most precious resource–– juxtaposing pollution, drought, and disease with the rise of bottled water:

“Tell your crew use the H2 in wise amounts
since it’s the New World Water; and every drop counts
You can laugh and take it as a joke if you wanna
But it don’t rain for four weeks some summers
And it’s about to get real wild ‘n a half
You be buying Evian just to take a f—in bath
…
Americans wastin it on some leisure sh–
And other nations be desperately seekin it
…
You should just have to go to your sink for it
The cash registers is goin “cha-chink!” for it
Fluorocarbons and monoxide
Got the fish lookin cockeyed
Used to be free now it cost you a fee
Cause it’s all about gettin that cash (Money)”

Now that I think of it, this may be the most explicitly sustainability-conscious hip hop song I’ve yet heard. Listen to the song below (warning explicit lyrics) and read the full lyrics here.

For years, I have wanted to start composting, but never understood exactly the practical tools and procedures needed to incorporate composting into one’s daily kitchen routine. I did not grow up in a composting household, and my home gardening ambitions have yet to exceed a few pots of herb. Composting may be a simple process, but the convenience of the garbage disposal has always overpowered my will to learn how to deal with food waste the natural way. However, since we moved into a new place sans disposal, the equation has changed. I have become increasingly determined to find a way to stop throwing organic waste in the trash can.

There is something really strange about taking scraps of vegetables––organic matter that is full of nutrients ready to be consumed by bacteria, bugs, and other life–and packing it into a plastic bag that will never biodegrade. Even stranger is lugging it onto a truck and driving it to a far away land-fill. And energy and environment aside, its just a really unpleasant practice to do in your home: the rotting food in the trash can stinks up the kitchen, the extra weight adds a lot of work in taking out the trash, and the outdoor can develops all sort maggots and flies that then need to be washed out. The thing is that food waste is not really waste––its food. Food that can be easily consumed by other creatures and processed into rich soil that can be used to grow more food. To help this process happen naturally is starting seem not only the more efficient, but also the more convenient and aesthetically pleasing option.

So my goals for the semester are to a) fully compost (either with worms or bacteria) 100% of our food waste and b) find a good use for the compost. In the process, I expect to learn a fair amount about decomposition, landfills, the nutrient cycle and worms. This should be fun.

Next step: choose a composting method