It's hard to know how much my lawn contributes to "red tide" algae blooms. I need to find out. Nutrient runoff is a problem and I am part of the problem.
My question: what can I do today to improve the conditions that reduce nutrient run-off/discharge?
I reached out to Congresswoman Val Demings Orlando Office to request a visit with Staff to discuss federal policy and legislation. I know most of what needs to be done needs to be done through the State of Florida and legislation and policy there, but still the Feds matter. It all matters. We all matter. We need a coordinated effort.
I'm just not comfortable anymore with reading about this and not trying to do something about it. I remember a couple of years back our Florida Legislature approving some $300 million to clean up the Indian River algae bloom mess. We like to think this is helpful. Well, yes, there is clean up needed. But how about changing regulations on septic tanks, how about spending that $300 to give homeowners cash to upgrade their septic tanks to ones that are decent, or spending for sewers that treat instead of septic tanks altogether? In other words, the science is there to tell us what the problem is but we won't do the political and economical sensible thing of prevention.
So, onward we go.
How is it going with your connection to the good earth today?

Hard to Hope

-->

There is a lot being written about climate change and environment even though it may be difficult to find in all the deluge of information that comes our way each day. Like anything else, you have to pay attention. And then, when you do find it, many times it’s hard to read because it’s hard to take because it can be depressing.  John Schwartz reviews William Vollmann’s new 2 volume work (No Immediate Danger, Vol. 1 of Carbon Ideologies and No Good Alternative, Vol. 2 of Carbon Ideologies) in Sunday, August 12^th’s New York Time Book Review. Here’s how Schwartz finishes:

“Reading these two books did have an effect on me; I became even more conscious of the resources I waste in my own life. I found myself wondering why I burn fossil fuels by driving two miles to a lovely park where I take my morning run, instead of trotting around my own neighborhood. It’s not that I stopped doing it, but I do feel worse about myself. Maybe that’s what the work was for”

There are two reasons people change: the pain is too great where they are or the promise is so wonderful where they want to be. So, maybe reading Carbon Ideologies brought Schwartz or is bringing Schwartz enough pain to bring about change in his life in carbon usage. Maybe.

I find that taking action, however small, helps me find hope. Here’s something for us: Sept. 8, 11am, Rise Up Orlando, at Lake Eola Park, to mark the Sept. 12-14 Global Climate Action Summit being held in San Francisco. Also this: check out your local Planning and Zoning Commission’s work. What is your local Comprehensive Plan and what, for example, is the plan for transportation that can and will reduce the carbon footprint? There is a lot to do my friends. When you find it hard to hope, get out there and do something.

Getting Back at It

I go through periods of ecological depression, that is to say, feeling numbed into inaction by the huge task of advocacy and action on behalf of climate change work. I'm thinking that in these days any environmental work, be it habitat preservation, species extermination, point and non-point discharge and run-off or whatever, is all about the climate change work.
I've been out of the loop, in that ecological depression, for some time, but I'm climbing back out. One significant boost has been, as hard as it is to read it and face the music, the NYTime Magazine of August 5, 2018 fully dedicated to climate work under this title: "Thirty years ago, we could have saved the planet." Oh my.
There is much to do, but knowing history (30 years ago et. al.) can help us not repeat doing what we did that did not help.
One thing that history can do is help engage conversation with those who do not see human activity as contributing to the climate's evolution.
Listen to this from the "30 Years Ago" feature piece (the year is 1982, the "Gore" is Al Gore, the setting is a Congressional Hearing on the "greenhouse effect."):
"There emerged, despite the general comity, a partisan divide. Unlike the Democrats, the Republicans demanded action. 'Today I have a sense of deja vu,' said Robert Walker, a Republican from Pennsylvania. In each of the last five years, he said, 'we have been told and told and told that there is a problem with the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We all accept that fact, and we realize that the potential consequences are certainly major in their impact on mankind" (sic). Yet they had failed to propose a single law. 'Now is the time,' he said. 'The research is clear. It is up to us now to summon the political will.'
Gore disagreed: a higher degree of certainty was required, he believed, in order to persuade a majority of Congress to restrict the use of fossil fuels. The reforms required were of such magnitude and sweep that they 'would challenge the political will of our civilization."
Here's what I see:
-the research has been "clear" since the early 1980's (actually, before that!)
-Republicans used to be the on the side of environmental law that opened access to markets and increased productivity and a vital economy. What happened?
-Democrats used to be savvy in bi-partisan consensus building. What happened?
-political will is the name of the game then, and now.
Just learned of a big September 8, 2018 action called "Rise for Climate, Jobs and Justice." I'm stepping into it. How about you?