6/04/2008
big picture environment studies
Long term readers (all two of you) will know that I tout my Dad on this blog from time to time. In that light I thought I would point out the recent initiative by the University of Washington , his employer, to create a College of the Environment. It would include the departments of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, Atmospheric Sciences, Earth and Space Sciences, Marine Affairs, Oceanography, and Forest Resources as well as members of other departments who might be particularly interested in environmental issues. This would foster a broader dialogue with voices from across disciplines, including scientists and policy experts. A Seattle Times op-ed says the effort “catches up with the seamless view students have of the world they are studying, experiencing, and preparing to manage.” Dad’s been a part of this push from the beginning, and I’m glad it’s moving forward. Addressing the environmental issues of today requires input from researchers, policy makers, economists, political scientists, historians, and many more. In a recent article on the ethics of climate change, Richard Somerville makes this point, suggesting scientists cannot and should not work alone at addressing climate change. Perhaps UW’s College of the Environment can widen the conversation just a bit more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
One thing I have noticed in academia is the way that turf wars keep people from appreciating and learning from other scholarly perspectives. This kind of reorganization can be a good remedy for that problem. Good for your dad for leading the charge!
I was pondering this concept of "environmentalism" as I hauled my trash can to the curb this morning, and then as I filled up Harriet with $4.00/gal petrol. I don't get it? What were you getting at?
Ok, Em. Let me see if I can give you a concrete example. We'll take global warming, since that's the one I've been hearing about around the family dinner table for ages. If we agree that human CO2 emissions are causing drastic warming and all the ill effects that come with it (ice cap melt, rising sea levels, higher frequency of severe storms, widespread drought, etc.), then the obvious solution is to cut our emissions. How do we do that? Someone might say, let's jack up the price of gas to $7/gal, then people will be motivated to find alternate sources of transportation, carpool, conserve, whatever. Ok, that sounds reasonable. Suddenly you have trucking companies that are going out of business because gas is too expensive for them to ship food around the country. Because the trucking company went under we can't get oranges shipped from Florida to Ohio in January, but we still want oranges in January so we build a gigantic green house to grow oranges. Our greenhouse takes twice the amount of energy that it took to drive an orange grown by the sun from Florida, so in the end we've actually caused more CO2 to be put in the atmosphere through our little plan.
The point is, to come up with creative good solutions to environmental problems you need experts from many fields. I think we can come up with alternative energy sources, or make the current alternatives (wind, solar, geothermal, etc.) more viable through technological development. I think we can turn around the consumption mindset in this country. And I think we can reduce our carbon footprint. But, it's going to take a lot of smart people sitting down together and talking through their ideas - something that doesn't happen nearly often enough.
I was sort of joking....
Of course I totally agree with you.
It makes me happy that we both have Thommy quotes on our blog homes. Right on.
Post a Comment