Why you should celebrate World Toilet Day

When was the last time you thought about your toilet? If you’re anything like me, it was probably the last time you didn't have one around when you needed it. My dad likes to tease my sister by saying, “Does a Jenny* poop in the woods?”, a reference to a time during her childhood when she couldn't make it back to a bathroom while we were on a hike. While it has the intended effect and she always gets a little ruffled, most of us have probably used a bush, a tree, or the ground as a toilet at some point in our lives.

What most of us probably don’t consider, however, is the fact that a lack of toilets and other adequate sanitation facilities is a problem that affects about 2.5 billion people, around 37 percent of the global population.

Achieving increased access to adequate sanitation facilities is part of one of the eight Millenium Development Goals (MDGs), goals formed by the UN to address issues such as poverty, health, and human rights in developing countries around the world. The deadline for these goals is this year, 2015, and the UN is now coming up with a new set of goals and targets moving forward called the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite the progress that has been made on the MDGs, there are still a variety of problems that have yet to be fixed in a variety of areas, including among many others, eradicating hunger and poverty, providing universal access to primary education, and preventing and treating many life-threatening diseases. Channeling resources into creating sustainable solutions to these issues is increasingly important in our globalized world, not only from a human rights standpoint but also in terms of creating agricultural and business practices that will allow the developing world to industrialize and grow their economies in a way that conserves existing resources and does not contribute to climate change. Going back to the toilets, then, addressing sanitation issues in developing countries is an issue I’d like to focus on, because it can not only contribute to achieving a variety of the SDGs, but it also was an MDG which lagged particularly behind.

I know sanitation isn’t really a sexy issue - it doesn’t have the appeal that feeding starving children or building schools seems to have for many of those with philanthropic tendencies. But here’s why it matters. Having adequate sanitation facilities prevents the spread of disease, which improves the overall well-being of the population. Also, estimates show that about forty billion working hours are spent each year collecting water in Africa – it is also estimated that every $1 spent on water and sanitation generates at least $4 of increased economic opportunity. Improving access to water for drinking and sanitation would save time and promote economic success, particularly for women, who are nearly always given responsibility for water acquisition and household hygiene maintenance and are therefore disproportionately affected by the issue and prevented from getting an education or entering the workforce.

Women also face challenges because of the need for private sanitation facilities, and many girls drop out of school once menstruation begins because of this problem – a school sanitation project in Bangladesh showed that access to separate facilities for girls increased their attendance by 11 percent. Being forced to resort to open defecation in many places such as India also leads to increased safety risks for women - all in all, if women around the world had the toilets that you or I likely take for granted, their would be significant improvements in women’s rights issues as well as overall economic success of developing countries.

In the end, having access to adequate sanitation facilities is a basic human need that many of us take for granted. I would encourage all of you to not only become more educated on this issue, but also consider donating to an organization that addresses this issue and contacting your representatives to get the U.S. to place an emphasis on this issue at the SDG talks when they gather for the UN Summit this coming September. While most of us may have pooped in the woods at some point in our life, no one should be left with no other option.

GET INVOLVED:

World Toilet Day is November 19, but you don't have to wait until then to make a difference for this cause! This is a great website to go to to get information on what you can do and who you can donate to - I'd encourage you to at least take a look and see what they have to offer!

References:

“UNICEF Water and Sanitation | Water, Sanitation and Hygiene.” UNICEF. http://www.unicef.org/wash/ (April 3, 2015).

UN Women. 2012. “The Future Women Want: A Vision of Sustainable Development for All.”http://www.unwomen.org/~/media/headquarters/media/publications/en/thefuturewomenwant.pdf.

Meatless Mondays

If someone had told me a year ago that I would be tasting something made of crickets, I would have gagged. Now, I have just placed an order for a pack of granola bars that are made, in fact, with cricket flour. Why would someone be possessed enough to eat the creepy crawlies that give us nightmares?

Climate Change.

You don’t get the connection? Let me explain.

Global hunger is a prevalent issue, and it is worsened by climate change and population growth. With the rate of population growth as high (and continuously growing) as it is to date, we cannot continue to use resources the same way that we always have. We have a lack of food security across the world, and more people also means more hungry people.  Climate change makes producing food even harder as it causes erratic weather patterns unsuitable for growing crops. It’s a never ending cycle because producing food leads to producing emissions which worsens climate change which then makes it harder to produce more food.

Confusing, right? Less harmful methods of producing food, such as eating crickets, could help break this cycle

Insects are sustainable and a good source of protein; in developing countries where meat is not readily available, insects make a good replacement. But don’t worry. I am not advocating that everyone should run outside right now with a net and go scoop up some crickets.

One thing that could also help break the cycle is cutting down on meat. As stated above, climate change makes the food problem harder to solve, but producing food worsens climate change. Approximately 40 calories of fossil fuel energy go into every calorie of beef produced, whereas 2.2 calories are needed to produce one calorie of plant-based protein. The energy measured here is every emission caused from farm to fork. This includes the energy used to slaughter the animals, cut the beef, package it in factories, and then transport it to grocery stores. That is a 37.8 calorie difference between plants and meat! Think about what saving that energy means for climate change. To really emphasize this difference, one-fifth of the man-made greenhouse gas emissions are generated by the meat industry.

In addition, it has been measured that about 1/3 of all food calories produced go into feeding livestock. If the demand for meat decreases, the amount of land necessary for cattle decreases, and the amount of land available for feeding more people increases. Raising livestock leads to soil erosion, along with overgrazed land that can never be reused for farming. Livestock also contribute to eutrophication, the excess of nutrients running into water causing algae blooms. Overall, meat productions not a sustainable practice, so cutting down even just a little can go a long way.

There is an interesting movement that has been started that can change the trajectory that we care on. As the individual people who make up the population of this globe, I urge each and every one of you to help in spreading the practice of Meatless Mondays.

Studies have indicated that if a majority of the population were to opt out of meat for one day a week year round, not only would this largely help with the food security problem, but it would help with global health, sustainable consumption, water shortages, and climate change as well. For example, it is estimated that somewhere between 1,800 and 2,500 gallons of water go into a single pound of beef (between raising the cattle, preparing the meat, and transportation) whereas tofu requires only 220 gallons of water per pound. Cutting down on the meat produced could save water along with energy and land. All of these environmental issues are tied into one another, so it is amazing that such a small and simple practice can actually make a significant difference.

What we eat and what we put into our bodies is one privilege we have in the developed world. So many people in developing countries eat only what they can scrounge up and often are lucky to find anything at all.

We don’t all have to start eating crickets, but just stop eating fish, beef, pork, or chicken, one day a week, only 52 days out of a 365 day year, and you can contribute to the change we so desperately need. 

Where There's a Woman, There's a Way

Hey guys! Just wanted to share a pervasive issue that has been very heavy on my heart lately: food insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa. My family hails from Ghana, a nation that has made significant strides in alleviating poverty, which is directly linked to food insecurity. Ghana was the first country in the region to meet the first Millennium Development Goal to “eradicate extreme hunger and poverty by 2015”¹ having drastically reduced its Global Hunger Index (GHI) from 21.4% in 1990 to 8.9% in 2012.² Malawi, whose inhabitants are simultaneously battling the ninth highest HIV/AIDS rate of 11%, has followed Ghana’s suit and reduced its GHI by 13.2% from 1990 levels. But there is still much to be done.

Poverty and infant mortality rates in the northern part of Ghana far exceed those of the south, while in Malawi, high susceptibility to extreme floods and drought annually has rendered the country’s communities at severe risk of food shortage and malnourishment. Worldwide, land used for agriculture has grown by more than 10 million hectares per year since the 1960’s, and inhabitants of the sub-Saharan region rely heavily on agriculture for food and a means of livelihood. Our changing climate, however, is affecting atmospheric weather patterns and resulting in extreme events that endanger agricultural production. 805 million people around the world are chronically hungry, of which 160 million children have stunted growth. Food insecurity not only affects an individual’s mental, physical and emotional capacity (e.g. a child’s cognitive ability) but also prevents civilians from contributing to their national economies.

More than half of those civilians are women, many of whom were and still are denied the rights to go to school, work, and plan their pregnancies around their ability to effectively raise their children. Studies have been done on understanding the roles of men and women in societies: developing nations tend to anchor the woman to the home to tend to the children and domestic duties while the men go out to work and seek knowledge. As a result, women have less access to resources and are more prone to diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. These women don’t have the tools they need to rise up out of poverty and constant childbearing (a sub-Saharan African woman has 5.4 children on average) in order to provide for their families and have representation during parliamentary discussions. There are currently 222 million women with “unmet need”, which is the desire to plan the timing and spacing of pregnancy but cannot – as a result there is no control over family size and child mortality rates increase.

If more women were granted family planning resources such as birth control, pressures to have children would decrease and population growth would be less of an environmental burden.  If more women were granted access to education, they could help run community water and sanitation projects and treat disease, as well as increase crop yield by 20-30%. Gender roles would shift and women would be able to make more well-informed decisions for themselves and for their families, which would in turn help communities work as a unit and prosper. $150 million people would be less hungry if women were empowered and allowed the resources to thrive. Let’s reach out to these women by volunteering our efforts to organizations such as Oxfam, USAID, Feed the Future and The Hunger Project, who are doing everything they can to bring women the resources they need. Let’s write letters to global leaders who are preparing for this year’s UN summit in New York. Let’s raise awareness within our own communities. Empowering women is empowering nations. And empowering nations is working towards a brighter, more wholesome future for mitigating climate change and eradicating poverty. So let’s empower! Together.

Endnotes

¹ Millennium Development Goal 1. (2015, January 1). Retrieved May 1, 2015, from

http://www.gh.undp.org/content/ghana/en/home/mdgoverview/overview/mdg1.html

² Country Global Hunger Index Scores by Rank. (2015, January 1). Retrieved May 1,

2015, from http://www.ifpri.org/node/8839

Pass the Pipeline!!

September 11, 2001: A day that cannot be erased from the biography of United States history. Almost 3,000 lives were lost that day. People, like you and me, went to work and never made it home. Families, friends, and all of the other lives touched by the nearly 3,000 men and women that perished were forever tainted. 

A young kindergartener at the time, I spent that ominous Tuesday afternoon beside my mom, her eyes glued to the television in an attempt to trace my dad’s whereabouts.  My dad, a Wall Street stockbroker, was just minutes away from the site of incomprehensible devastation that engulfed the World Trade Center - making his fate entirely unbeknownst to us.  I inquired desperately about what happened, grappling to wrap my 5-year-old mind around what a “terrorist attack” was as I watched my mom in hysterics. Hours that seemed to span whole days passed until we heard the familiar sound of footsteps ascending the garage stairs. My mom darted to the door and swung it open to reveal my dad on the other side, covered from head to toe in soot and debris.

My dad made it home that day, but thousands upon thousands of others did not have the same luck.

Though our relationship to the Middle East is far more complex than what I can boil down in a few sentences, an indirect factor contributing to the 9/11 attacks stems from the production and sale of oil.

After the Gulf War of the 1990s, President George H.W. Bush ordered troops to remain stationed in Saudi Arabia.  On the surface, Bush’s command was initiated to preclude further military engagement, but, in reality, motivation for stationing troops was rooted in the desire to secure our oil interests. Ultimately, Bush’s call to station troops in Iraq infuriated prominent leaders like Osama bin Laden, propelling him to create Al Qaeda, specifically designed to meddle with US interests in the Middle East and at home.

If Al Qaeda was formed as a result of our underlying oil interests and Al Qaeda has been deemed responsible for 9/11, why are we continuing to import oil from the Middle East in such large quantities? Also worthy of note, ISIS, an emerging terrorist group that splintered off of Al Qaeda in Iraq, funds their attacks predominantly through the sale of oil.  To reiterate, ISIS, a group that tortures children, broadcasts the gruesome murders of innocent hostages over social media, and pillages cities in an effort to usurp power, is driven by funds from the sale of oil.  Does the Middle East and the associated powers that be still sound like a worthy business partner?

Currently, the passage of the Keystone “XL” Pipeline, a pipeline transporting oil from Canada to the US, has encountered a lot of opposition from environmentalists who contest that the pipeline facilitates the production of an emissions-intensive oil and destroys too much of the Earth’s natural landscape.

Environmentalists neglect to acknowledge that the Keystone Pipeline already exists, with no reports of lasting damages inflicted by it, and the “XL” is merely a carefully routed addition that includes over 50 safety features. Environmentalists neglect to acknowledge that the “XL” is expected to contribute less than 3% of the US’ total greenhouse gas emissions and that Canadians will continue to look to cash out on this natural resource regardless of whether the “XL” gets approved. With emissions expected to contribute less than 3% of our annual total, it becomes apparent that the “XL” is not the cornerstone to solving climate change. Instead, the threat of climate change should be addressed by states passing the Clean Power Plan, a policy that will limit the most emissive industry in our country, coal-fired power plants, enforcing fuel economy standards authorized by the Clean Air Act, and encouraging reduced consumption on an individual level across the boards.  Further, environmentalists have become complacent and naïve in believing that passage of the pipeline symbolizes the end of our efforts to prevent climate change: can common ground not be achieved by employing renewable energy in the cultivation of the tar sands? And most importantly, environmentalists fail to recognize the symbolic importance of expanding trade with Canada.

Canada has been our strongest ally as we maintain one of the greatest trade relations in the world.  It is time for Secretary John Kerry to honor that relationship and give Canada, a trusted, respectable, and safe ally, the business it deserves.  Research has shown that the “XL” does not pose a formidable threat to the environment; research cannot prove, however, the threat oil tycoons and terrorist groups in the Middle East pose to us. If we step back and take a lesson from history, from the 3,000 lives that perhaps could have been saved had we not fought for our oil interests in the Middle East, an obvious answer presents itself: it is time for Kerry to approve the “XL”.  Approving the “XL” will ultimately amplify our oil trade relations with Canada and serve as a symbolic gesture confirming our severe opposition to Middle Eastern aggression.

My Decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline

As I walk to class, a large dump truck chugs by, its engine emitting a throaty roar. A shadow comes over me, and I notice that the thick black smoke pouring from its exhaust pipe has bellowed out in such a mass that it blocked out the sunlight shining down on me. I immediately speed up my pace in order to avoid breathing it in. Stepping into the sunlight, I watch the truck move down the street, slowly pumping out a thick dark cloud into the fresh spring air, a grim sight in the wonderful green that has begun to bloom on the surrounding trees. Thinking to myself, I wonder how long it will be until trucks and cars like that stop pumping out such harsh smoke into the air. I wonder how long until fossil fuels as a whole are obsolete. And as I think about this planets resources today, I can’t help but ask myself, “Why would anyone want to continue to use these harmful fuels?”

            Sadly, there are companies who want to extend our use of harmful fossil fuels, and have no regard for their effects on the environment. One of these projects is the Keystone XL pipeline. This pipeline is a 1,700 mile expansion of current pipelines from Canada into the United States. If this project is given the go ahead by the government, millions of gallons of dirty tar sands oil will be easily transported to refineries throughout America through an expansion pipeline from Canada to the US. This may seem like a boon for the economy, but in the long run it won’t do much besides cause people to rely on oil much more. As our country moves towards renewable energy, the last thing we need is for oil to become cheap and accessible. If this pipeline is approved and built, our country will suffer a setback in advances made in climate change and sustainable development by falling back to our old ways with the use of fossil fuels.

            One of the most important plans being made right now is the National Interest Determination, by Secretary of State John Kerry. His determination will guide President Obama’s final say on whether or not the Keystone XL pipeline will be approved and built. In his decision, Secretary Kerry needs to be sure to address all of the harmful impacts that this project has. Tar sands oil emits more greenhouse gas emissions than other types, and this pipeline will be transporting it across the country, through public and private land, and sometimes even over groundwater supplies. A spill or leak could spell disaster for hundreds of communities throughout the country. Aside from harmful environmental impacts, this pipeline is outdated in any promise of providing energy security for the USA. Fuel efficient, hybrid, and fully electric cars are big now, and will be in the future. We don’t need oil anymore, and we are actively straying away from it.

            If we want to reduce our carbon footprint, promote efficient energy development, and live in a sustainable and environmentally conscious country, this project must not be approved. And of course, the laundry list of negative impacts needs to be taken into account before we even consider its small monetary and negligible employment gains. As citizens of this country, we must look to the future of energy and the environment when we consider a project like this. The next time you pass a road, look at the dirty haze emitted from some car’s exhaust pipes as they drive by, then ask yourself, “Do I really want to continue polluting my air with that?”

            The answer should be no.

Spread the word about the harsh reality of the Keystone XL pipeline. There is no need for it to be built in this country. As a collective voice, we can influence Kerry’s decision, and educating ourselves on making this country and this world a better place to live should be our main goal. The Keystone XL pipeline must not be approved and should not be allowed to hinder our sustainability goals.

The Keystone Pipeline: A Huge Step in the Wrong Direction

It seems like every time I turn on the news there’s a new story being reported about ways in which we could reduce our carbon footprint.  However, it’s not uncommon for that sustainability story on the news to be followed by two or more stories about new efforts we’re making to pump as much oil out of the ground as possible.  I was thinking about this the other day while I was filling my car up at the gas station and a really striking question occurred to me.  Why is it that almost a quarter of the pollution in this country comes from the transportation sector but it’s still perfectly acceptable for me to pump gallons upon gallons of gasoline into my car on a regular basis? 

            Not only is it ok for us to pump gas into our car regularly but it’s also ok for us as a country to dedicate billions of dollars a year to locating and extracting oil from all over the country.  It seems that for every effort we make towards utilizing more clean forms of energy we make an even greater effort to pump more oil out of the ground.  This leads to huge problems to our countries future efforts towards sustainable development.

The decision on whether or not to give the developers of the Keystone XL pipeline the permits that they need is a decision that affects everyone around the country and even around the world regardless of race, gender, income level, or any other demographics.  An expansion of the Keystone XL pipeline only adds to the problem that future sustainable development has become.  According to Webster dictionary, sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.  At this point in time it is essentially universally accepted by scientists that the burning of fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas adds to the problem of global warming and climate change, and these changes in the atmosphere of the planet will certainly affect the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.  If the expansion to the Keystone XL pipeline is allowed then at first we would feel the positives that come with excess oil being fed into the global market, but down the road this initial positive impact could be greatly overshadowed by the negatives that would come with the progression of climate change. 

            Secretary Kerry will announce in the coming months his decision on whether or not he’s in favor of giving the pipeline the permits it needs.  After considering the effect its construction would have on the United States’ sustainable development effort I certainly hope he comes out against expanding the pipeline.  In reality the pipeline won’t singlehandedly destroy the environment and all of the government’s efforts to develop in a sustainable way, but it’s a huge step in the wrong direction.  For too long the United States has talked about making a change away from dirty sources of energy like petroleum; however, few changes to this system have materialized.  It’s time that we start making a change and I think that denying the Keystone XL Pipeline could be that first step as a country towards change.  Instead of just taking the easy way out, and passing the pipeline simply because that’s what we’ve always done in the past, we could use the denial of building this pipeline as something to build off of as a country.

It is our jobs as citizens to be aware of the issues affecting the world we live in and to let our representatives in our communities and in congress know our stance on these issues.  We need to continue to develop in a sustainable way as a country so that generations after us are able to meet their needs with the same ease that we meet ours.  If we join together and allow our voices to be heard then we can ensure that the Keystone XL pipeline is not built and that sustainable development in this country will continue to grow.  

Residential Solar Panels: Why not?

In today’s world, we are constantly connected to the grid using energy. From watching Netflix to your bedside lamp, our lives depend on a constant use of energy. When my father came to America from Eritrea, 30 years ago, he was amazed by the amount of energy used and wasted in our culture. As time passed, the reliance on energy became normal to him, but he still searched for ways to change how he used power. Last year, I told my dad about the idea of using residential solar panels as a way of doing our part to transition to renewable energy. I expected him to be shocked or a little resilient due to the cost, but instead he said “it makes sense” and within two months we had photovoltaic solar panels on our roof. For many people, renewable energy sources such as hydropower and solar sound like a futuristic endeavor, but these are modern solutions to an issue that needs to be solved now! By 2050, the world’s population is projected to be over 9 billion people. Although little of the population growth will happen in the U.S., Americans certainly are not helping the problem. We make up 5% of the world’s population, yet consume about 20% of its energy. At our current population growth, those consumption numbers simply are not sustainable! If we do not plan on cutting our reliance on electricity, we can at least retrieve it from the most naturally energy plentiful object in our solar system, the sun. Power plants are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions. In 2014, about 67% of electricity generation was rom coal, natural gas, and petroleum. Morally, we cannot keep allowing ourselves to live in such an unsustainable lifestyle. Climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions may not affect our daily lives often, but it can cause disasters for people relying on agriculture as their only source of income. When infrequent weather patterns do not allow a farmer to farm consistently, they lose their job and food supply at once. Their reliance on agriculture makes climate change an issue that they cannot ignore. Luckily, the problem of energy consumption is solvable, the solution is available, and you can help! The effectiveness of photovoltaic solar panels has increased sustainably in the last decade while their prices have dropped. By planting solar panels on your roof, you cut down on energy taken from power plants. Even if you do not care about the environment, you will save money through your energy bills. Summertime is the peak of energy consumption due to air conditioning, which is conveniently when there is the most energy to be gained through your solar panels. Most states, including Maryland, also incentivize residential solar panel by paying up to 50% of the installation price. Solar panels can last up to 25 years or longer, saving you thousands of dollars. The question is not why should you install solar panels on your house, it is why should you not?