MayesFinalExam


 * Sustainability Problems, Fall 2011 **
 * Meredith Mayes **
 * Word Count: 4917 **

Cumulative Exam (contributes 20% to your final grade)

Answer ten of the following questions in essay form, using 300-600 words for each response. A printed copy of your exam is due in class Friday, December 9.

2) Describe how science can be a sustainability problem; referencing at least four examples from films you watched this semester.

Science can be used in a variety of ways – to benefit mankind, or to benefit corporations. Sometimes these two objectives coincide, but in some cases, such as plastics, fuel, agriculture, and everyday life, the science steps over the line of beneficial to mankind by being unsustainable for the sole purpose of profit. Science has created things that inputs toxins into the blood, create unsafe environments to live in, things with poor degradability for long life and uses fuels throughout the whole process at an unsustainable rate.

One way that science is a sustainability issue is the chemicals that humans have learned to produce, as explained in the film Homo Toxicus. The film explores the effects that toxins and industry can have on even human beings. Some of the things found were that toxin counts in human blood are rising, and are causing global problems. These problems are most observed in in Inuit children, who have a very high disability rate and a very poor immune system, and the issues get worse every year. Companies try as hard as they can to protect themselves from regulations and thus hide the science behind their compounds.

Another way is the technologies developed in natural gas fracking. Our need for oil and gas has brought scientists to new ways to extract fuel from the ground. In Split Estate, some of the problems from these developments are highlighted by interviews with residents from around these fracking pads. The technology is supposedly safe, which is why its use is perpetuated, but this is sadly not the case.

For agriculture, science has developed many things, but the most important of these could be the patented genetically modified crop, as was the case with Monsanto’s soy bean. In Food, Inc., there was a lengthy segment on the impacts that genetic leeching has had on the soy bean farmers and the soy bean crop. Since it is illegal to save the seed from Monsanto due to patents, farmers must repurchase crops instead of reusing seeds. Additionally, the genetic contamination was uncontainable and spread to almost the entire original soy bean crop, forcing farmers into purchasing the Monsanto crop.

Finally, science has developed many wonderful technologies – that all run on oil. The fact is that science is developed by people, and without machines and products that do not rely on traditional energy sources, we will hit peak oil or use up the remaining supply even faster. The science that allows polymers and plastics is unsustainable from start to finish. For example, in Blue Vinyl, a woman discovers the problem with this plastic in every realm of its usage, including cancer, environmental pollution and an addiction to polymers that are unsustainable to produce.

3) Describe ways that mainstream media is a sustainability problem; referencing at least four examples from films you watched this semester.

In some cases, the media is compromised and thus makes it harder for people to get the information we need. In one film we watched this semester, in The Corporation, two ex-reporters discussed how they were prevented from running the segment on the Monsanto hormones and the impact that the compounds were having on Americans. In this case, the media is subject to the external pressures from corporations, which keeps us from gaining adequate knowledge about the issues around sustainability.

This is also addressed in The End of Suburbia, in this instance in relation to the big news of stock prices, rising gas prices and the war in Iraq. The primary problem with the news is that it gives the individual pieces in detail, which makes it easy to fixate on the small problems instead of the grand problems behind them. Another film, Food Inc., also addressed this. A specific example is the news coverage of E. coli outbreaks in the United States. The news often covers these outbreaks, but never address the true source of the problem – mechanized raising of cows using corn produces more bacteria in their feces, which is then spread into crops or potentially contaminates the meat. The cows are processed in one of thirteen slaughterhouses, which significantly increased the chances of mass contamination of beef.

The final and biggest issues were drawn out in the Persuaders, a film dedicated to how the advertising media works to convince you to consume things that you do not need. The film argues that humans can – and advertisers believe should be – convinced to buy just about anything. This applies to anything – even politics. This is incredibly damaging to the sustainability cause due to the ability to change public opinion away from sustainable options towards consumer culture, from people who want to draw attention to sustainability to seeing them as ignorant hippies. The world can, and is, painted and colored by the media describing and shaping the world as it sees fit with no system of checks and balances to keep the media monster from consuming the facts and hiding them with hype and drivel.

6) Identify key characteristics of the best environmental media (recognizing that few films or other media are likely to have more than a few of these characteristics). Reference examples from films we’ve seen this semester.

In terms of films, I feel as though there are several items that make some environmental media more successful than others. First and foremost is the data that the film presents must be both relevant and concrete. The film should try to avoid extrapolation. The film that had the most extrapolation was the Blind Spot, since the film was attempting to convey the severity of the up and coming oil peak. But the film provided little to back up their claims and thus made the film a little unbelievable. The graphs were also not displayed for significant periods of time, making them unmemorable. A film that demonstrated this well was //Homo Toxicus//, which presented the research on its topic well but not in a way that was too complex for those outside of the toxicology field.

Secondly, the film should contain a healthy balance of both the general population’s opinion and the scientific population’s opinions and research into the topic as well as presenting both sides of the argument. A film that did not do this was //the End of Suburbia//, although it would have made the film very impactful to have suburban residents and their responses to the facts presented in the film. It would also bring balance. Surprisingly, a film that did presented both sides well was //What’s on Your Plate?// This film covered both the bureaucratic issues with food distribution as well as farming issues and city living issues. This gave the film more weight than I expected from a documentary narrated by twelve-year-olds.

Next, the film should also show the human element and discuss the worst impacts and the mildest and how it will likely affect the target audience – Americans, Canadians, Frenchmen, etc. The film should have some emotional appeal or else it is unlikely that anyone besides highly rational people will be convinced. //Darwin’s Nightmare// really showed how awful the lives of the Tanzanian people were and really made each separate experience haunting, but it did little on the big picture. //Food, Inc.,// did an excellent job of showing how the issue of food production in the United States affected not just the farmers in the form of blackmail, contract costs and government subsidies, but the American consumer and the impacts it has on every person purchasing from a grocery store. The film also has emotional appeal dealing with the maltreatment of animals. This makes a film really successful and memorable.

Additionally, the film needs to make its point and then either make another point or conclude. The film should avoid being repetitive as it will cause the audience to lose interest and thus instead of convincing the public about the seriousness of the issue, will simply have caused them to tune out and important issues. //The Blind Spot// and //the End of Suburbia// both fell into this trap, which made watching the film to completion a little difficult and dull, and a film trying to spark a movement cannot afford to be boring

Finally, the film should be sure to provide both large and small solutions. The small solutions will provide viewers with a feeling of power and knowledge that the problem can be solved in part by their actions. The large solutions can arm them with which issues should be brought up to their local legislation in order to create the necessary movement within the law making regions. A film that did this well was //The Yes Men Change the World//, since they want the individual to turn away from greediness and look for progress and knowledge while pushing the government towards more regulation, removing influences on the policy making process from lobbying inspired think tanks and holding corporations responsible for their actions and abuses.

7) In a 2010 NY Magazine article, Jon Stewart describes his media team as "Soil enrichers. Maybe we can add a little fertilizer to the soil so that real people can come along and grow things.” What does Stewart mean, and how persuaded are you by the metaphor? The NY Magazine article is "[|America is a Joke]"

The way I interpret the metaphor would be to say that as the enricher, he is getting people prepared to actually be interested in and receptive to news stories that are designed to inform rather than to mock. But the metaphor also runs deeper. The first part of the quote is “But I know the difference between real social change and what we do.” So in a way, Jon Stewart is also fertilizing the idea that American politics and our culture doesn’t have to be the joke that it is. In order for the monumental changes in who we elect and how we perceive what our nation needs to really focus on, we are going to need a serious figurehead who can play on some of the doors into issues raised by these comedians, most notably Jon Stewart. The metaphor also addresses the fact that Jon Stewart touches on some sensitive issues and calls people out – in effect calling attention to issues that otherwise would have floated under the radar. By bringing these issues into the open, it then causes people to question what they are told and consider the underlying issues that could have prompted the issues mocked on these parody news shows. And if people begin to question, and then force the government to answer the questions and account for their actions, then the possibility for social change becomes huge.

I do agree with this statement. While some people blame the mocking of the political system as a contribution to the lack of respect of the administration, I wonder what these administrations have really done to deserve this respect. I was always taught that such respect was earned and you should never assume you have unconditional respect. Furthermore, abuse of that respect should have consequences. If these consequences come about as a result of Jon Stewart’s “fertilization,” then so be it. There is a lot of room for change in the world, and if change in the United States comes in the form of people watching Jon Stewart and thinking that something needs to change, so be it. And with all of his viewers, it is entirely possible this will be the case. There are limits to how much Jon Stewart fertilizes, after all, he is a comedian and not necessarily enriching the great political minds of today, although that does not speak for the politicians of tomorrow. The only problem is that we need to affect and change the politicians of today.

9). Many Americans are skeptical about climate change, and climate science. What do you think explains the skepticism? What do you think scientists should do to further enroll the public in concern about climate change? The articles listed below will provide material for your argument. Reference both articles in your answer.

*The Perception Factor: Climate Change Gets Personal. (Environmental Health Perspectives, 11/1/2010)

[]

*Heroes wanted in climate science story (USA Today, 11/20/2010)

[]

Part of the skepticism possibly stems from our own government’s lack of prioritizing legislation that would create stricter measures. For example, in California, a new piece of legislation is looking to suspend air contaminant controls in favor of employment. This year, Obama abandoned stricter ozone control levels in order to avoid affecting the job market in the swinging Mid-west. Part of this mistrust comes with the way information is often communicated. Sensational stories do little to inform the public on the real underlying causes of global warming and hard facts, as proven by a study done by Michael Jones, are less often retained and sympathized with. Some of the skepticism on the right is likely generated by the political involvement and agenda of the left, since the two seem to disagree on principle. Matson acknowledges that there is enough research to make a difference, but the communication of risk needs to change in order to impact American decision making. A big part of the researchers agree on the key problems with American decision making are that they distrust many sources, have incomplete and oversimplified information, believe that only collective actions will make an impact and don’t believe they will be affected by the impacts of global climate change. If cities that are highly responsible but less vulnerable to climate change could be equalized to work with the rest of the nation to protect those more vulnerable, the issues related to viewing their burden compared to the rest of the country may decrease. In order to increase concern, scientists need to steer climate change away from the political debate that it has become, especially since the involvement of Al Gore. This article also argues that a positive outlook advocating individual control can be the most inspiring to the average American. I feel that in order to really inspire the population about climate change, real scientific documentaries need to be shown on television networks, perhaps instead of a repeat of mindless show, have a showing of Peak Oil. I also feel that bringing the science into homes via these “trusted” news sources would also be useful under the assumption that they report the news instead of passing judgment on the science, a position they are not qualified for. I feel that in order for scientists to engage the public, they need to step off their podium and present the information in a way geared towards the average person, and not necessarily the way they would sway their peers. It would also help if this knowledge was easily spreadable and accessible.

11). Describe the key message of // Six Degrees Could Change the World //, providing illustrative examples from the film, then evaluate its strategy and effectiveness as environmental media.

One degree of overall global climate change is bad, but six degrees would be devastating. Today, the world is creeping up on one degree warmer overall, and this is seen with increasing number of bush fires in Australia. The film addresses the current changes that are already occurring, such as the climate change in the Midwest, such as Nebraska and the recurring droughts that are affecting crops. One farmer was trying to survive through the seventh year of draught in an extremely parched and dry Nebraska. The water hasn’t disappeared though, as new areas become inundated, such as England, which is enjoying prosperous vineyards. Then the film starts to move into speculation of what could happen at 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 degrees. Another instance was the analysis of the delicacy of coral reefs and how the slight temperature change has caused about 20% of coral reefs to die off and the small animals suffering from the acidification of oceans can change the ability of the oceans to absorb CO2. The film also addresses the potential for the chain reaction of global warming, where the warming pushes more warming. The film also addressed legitimate flood simulation techniques, including the 100-year event, which I was very pleased to see, having written a paper on the 100 year event and its application, so it made every bit of sense and is a common tool.

I feel as though it was very effective in conveying its message. The film made the information readily understandable while really bringing facts and strong information to the table. For example, the film brought the issue of cheeseburger consumption to the table. It started with the average number of cheeseburgers consumed by an American, and then analyzed the methane outputs from cows and explained the magnitude of the methane produced by those cows. It was a logical extension of this is happening and then the actual impacts behind the issue. It also appeals to the humanitarians by talking about the Aleutian sled dogs, which are starving and dying. Although the film moves into extreme speculation at three degrees, it does draw on real world experiences of heat waves in Paris, which I found an interesting way to demonstrate their points. I also found it very interesting how the analysis went beyond the basic facts and really explained factors behind everything. I would say the film was very convincing and effective.

12) Identify ten developments (in education, law, media, etc) that you think would help mobilize greater public awareness of and commitment to environmental sustainability.

Education – One of the biggest problems with this nation is the insistence on coddling our children to the point of ineptitude and end up sheltering them from the rest of the world and its problems. More education on the actual world rather than wasting time on things such as literature analysis, perhaps mandate the need to take a current event class. If necessary, less of an emphasis on obscure words could be made for standardized testing and a new section on current event knowledge could be introduced. Cultural – The American culture of happiness through consumption is obviously a huge sustainability problem and needs to be shifted to enjoying community activities with neighbors and family, rather than shopping, owning, and establishing our worth with what we own. Law – laws holding corporations accountable for their environmental impacts and disasters would hopefully create more responsible companies, which, while not totally eliminating sustainability problems associated with global trade, would restrict them to less damaging processes. Media – the media needs to start presenting scientific facts as facts and not opinions of the crazies on the other political party. One example of this is global climate change, as it is a controversial issue and many are ill informed as to what actually factors into the problems. Media – the media needs to focus on issues at home that will directly affect them, such as the vinyl companies in Louisiana or local farmers struggling and how we should support them. Media – the media also needs to reduce the aggressive hyping of stories to get ratings and address the actual problems behind them. For example, in Food, Inc., the media reported on the E. coli outbreaks and never addressed the slaughterhouse contamination from 1 of 13 slaughterhouses in the entire nation increasing the odds of contamination. Education – need to work on students’ sense of community and stop turning schools into a competition so that they have strong ties to their area and creates a strong, positive atmosphere for people to live and stay in, encouraging people to stay and help their neighbor. Technological – stop looking for purely technical patches and start analyzing if something with the whole system is wrong, which is what tends to happen in the food industry every time an outbreak of problems occurs, instead of thinking about reducing the high efficiency, high production method in exchange for quality. Law – stop allowing corporations to sue citizens for not being able to talk about their product negatively in public or keep people from discussing their product and the actual effects of it, such as Monsanto being able to buy the silence of news agencies wanting to run segments on the dangers of their products. Economic – finally, the world needs to change from an economic model that relies on infinite growth to one that encourages a sustainable plateau, encouraging money made in a community to stay in a community and responsible business practices with craftsmanship instead of constant high volume production to sell to people already owning an earlier version of the product, such as the constant updating of iPods, computers, shoes, etc.

13) Imagine that you are teaching high school seniors about environmental controversies. How would you advise them to make sense of the controversy around hydrofraking for natural gas? What questions would you encourage them to ask in analyzing all environmental controversies they encounter? In answering this question, you can draw on news accessible here: [].

To begin with, I wouldn’t advise them how to make sense of this complex issue themselves; I would work with actively teaching them about the issue. I would begin with explaining the basic process of hydrofracking and why people are so intent on using natural gas and why it makes a good fuel source. Then, I would move on to the localized effects reported in areas such as Colorado. I would likely show a film on hydrofracking such as Split Estate to really communicate the human element behind the issue. I would also ask that they do some research, but frankly, I don’t think I would give them an excessive amount of work on the topic. One of the things that I remember in high school and now college is that teachers and professors often assign large, grandiose projects and neglect the fact that many students have a lot of work in other classes, and overloading them often causes resentment towards the offending topic. I would want my students to respond positively and really want to learn about it outside of the classroom, and the forced structure in today’s school environment leaves no time for that. I would also consider the potential that this subject might not be their favorite and work to find exactly how they feel about issues before even beginning discussion on the subject.

In order to force analytical considerations, I would try and challenge their thoughts with questions such as “If you lived in a region affected by the hydrofracking, what steps would you take to bring people to your cause?” or “Imagine you are a resident in the region of the New York Watershed. What information would you most want to know about the potential impacts to your life?” “How would you explain your position to someone on the far left? The far right?” “Do you feel as through the priority on energy should supersede the negative effects on the environment that these gas pads have?” “Why do natural gas companies feel the need to hide exactly what is in their evaporation pools and hydrofracking fluid?” “How would you propose legislators analyze the long term effects of this fluid on both soil and people?” I also would have to make sure they were engaged, and if the conversation started to evolve, I would allow them to run their own discussion.

15) Assess how each of these videos about problems with our food system would likely impact viewers. What message is delivered by each film? What does each accomplish, and not? Which audiences would be most responsive?

Transport: Food Miles

[]

The Pig Picture

[]

The Meatrix

[]

Food Miles was a highly factual presentation that outlined both historical agriculture and current agriculture. The message was that the way we treat food is incredibly inefficient in the grand scheme of things, and there is a better way to grow food. It really showed the positives of interacting with your community and it helped prove the emotional and health benefits of local farming. I feel it would have a positive impact on its viewers because it was an overall positively oriented documentary without being totally overwhelming. With an upbeat soundtrack, it made the whole transition to organic local food seem easy and rational. In this case, I would say it is very much geared towards those with farms in their community, and I think if more people were to watch this film, they may be more inspired to go to the farmers market. It doesn’t really convey the true problems with the food industry that we use, just touts the benefits of the local movement.

The Pig Picture is a film about pigs and their lives in both small scale farms and pig factories. The small farms were so picturesque and then cuts to the horrible lives of pigs in a factory. The film takes a rather disturbing turn as it analyzes the behaviors of pigs and how they display the same behaviors as trapped and disturbed humans, including stereotypies and learned helplessness. The message behind this film is to expose the cruelties experienced by the animals and the problems that are occurring due to our need to farm them. I think that it accomplishes this well by not just showing how bad their lives are, but how the pigs function in farms and the natural habitats show just how wrong the mechanized raising of pigs is. This film is definitely meant for people who are not already vegetarians and do not plan on giving up meat to wake up to the meat they are eating. I think it would really shock people who were oblivious to the food farming industry of today.

Finally, in the Meatrix, cartoon pigs are made aware of the fantasy of the happiness of the meat industry in a plot similar to the matrix. It is really geared towards those absolutely uninterested in the typical documentary. The information is really entertaining in the composition while being very unsettling in the information presented. It is incredibly brief, and I also viewed the Meatrix II. I think internet nerds who tend to be apathetic about these issues are the target audience. The shorts are highly informative in the usage of antibiotics, unsanitary conditions and hormones used in the meat industry.

16) Write two exam questions that creatively test students’ analytic sophistication about environmental sustainability. Answer one of these questions.

1) Which film this semester was the most effective at conveying its message? Why? Was this film viewed in class or out of class? If it was shown out of class, which film should it replace?

2) Find a website dedicated to a specific environmental issue. Analyze the presentation of the content, whether or not the information is effectively conveyed, what improvements could be made to the site, and how you would increase the site’s hits to spread the message through the public interest.

I will be answering question 1. I really feel that the film that made the biggest impact on me this semester was Food, Inc. I viewed the film outside of class, but really feel as though it could have been brought to the course to spark good discussion. The film was well organized in addressing several different aspects of the food industry to convey the problems that we will have to answer to very soon. I feel that it covered the right range of people, too. It did this by addressing people at both ends of the production process, both farmers and plant operators. Thus there were people both defending and attacking the current system of food processing, which I feel brings balance to the film. Additionally, the hidden camera footage and the prohibition of filming were very convincing, since it proved that the film industry had something to hide. I had never really thought of where my food came from before. My family tries to buy local, but we still go to the grocery store for some things. Part of this ignorance came from the fact that my father was raised on the farm, and he was unaware of the significant changes in the farming community, so when I learned about food, it was based on his model of understanding. Additionally, the film did an excellent job of drawing out the matrix behind all of the issues behind this food crisis.

I feel as though the least convincing film we watched this semester was actually The Blind Spot, and thus should be replaced by Food, Inc. This is because unlike Food, Inc., The Blind Spot became repetitious after half an hour and had little real world facts to back the film’s claims up. Much of that film was extrapolation, and it contained little “new” information, as many people in the class were likely aware that oil supplies are not infinite, there will be an oil crisis soon, and that we need new alternatives. The film Food, Inc. actually gave concrete numbers in an easily understood schematic and context. The downside to Food, Inc., is that it is rather intense and a little disturbing, especially in the slaughterhouse portion of the expose, but overall, I feel it was the best documentary I have watched all semester.