Book Review: Plenty

I started reading Plenty on Sunday and finished it up this morning over breakfast. It has been touted as a variety of things, but it is the autobiographical work of a literary couple as they embark on a food experiment -- discovering what grows within 100 miles of Vancouver B.C.. It is a story of food, but more than that it is a story of the people who make food and the people who consume it.

I was worried by the attribution to two authors, by the order of "One Man, One Woman, and a Raucous Year of Eating Locally" in the sub-title. Was this another exercise where a man gets a wild hair and his long-suffering partner goes along for the ride? Was this another book where two writers attempt to subsume their voices into a whole? Whose voice would be dominant? Who would I really be reading? I breathed an audible sigh of relief at the start of the second chapter. This is the work of two authors who each bring their own voice to the project... each taking a month/chapter by turns and talking about what he or she experienced in that month and where she or he was observing radical underground shifts in thinking about the world.

The book is written with the kind of intensely personal detail that makes it fascinating reading, whether or not you ever intend to eat locally. It is not a how-to manual... which makes sense because folks living in Vancouver, B.C. do have different foods available than folks living in Des Moines, Iowa; or Charlotte, North Carolina; or Boulder, Colorado... but a delightful, intimate look into lives on a journey.

New book!

Usually when I post an interesting book I haven't read, I put it under a links heading. But Sarah Susanka's new book, the not so big life, is getting a post.

One reason is that her very first book -- The Not So Big House -- inspired me over a decade ago to put how I am living under a microscope. It challenged me to focus on the things about homes that increase comfort and to see houses as places for people and not as status symbols. So there's the tribute factor.

A second reason is that there is an excellent blog by Susanka which links to resources to be used while reading the book and to a Community section which allows the reader to discuss the book, real time, with other readers. And I do think exploring new ways of making reading materials part of a larger conversation is worth observing.

The third reason is that I am excited about reading this. I have gotten frustrated with the Not So Big line, and in a larger sense Taunton, because they produce lucious books of homes you could have if you have the resources to get an architect and a flock of workers to build or remake your property. Early indications are that this book is a break from that (interview and excerpt here), and is more about taking the idea of breaking down your life -- including your house -- and figuring out what works.

I have the book on my library list and I'll let you know what I think when I get to it.

Forbes: It's not so bad

Since I read about the International Report on Climate Change is last week -- the one that summarized our options as Mitigation, Adaptation, and Suffering -- I've been thinking about Vice President's Cheney's comment on global warming last February:

You can't shut down the world economy in the name of trying to eliminate greenhouse gases.
--Vice President Richard Cheney, Feb. 23, 2007

Today, Forbes is running an article from Oxford Analytica which summarizes the conclusion of Working Group 3 (WG3):

The report finds that overall costs will be relatively modest.

Now, I believe that the article today is on the same report as last weeks, and I believe today's conclusions come from a sub-group of the group that released the previous report, so the interesting point is that Forbes ran this. Perhaps with the business media beginning to pay attention to the costs and required changes in practices, we can get some traction.

Also interesting was today's New York Times article on how some Native American tribes are producing income from tribal lands by re-planting the forests that historically grew there.

Barbara Kingsolver Follow-up

I mentioned an essay by Barbara Kingsolver last week and now that it's May, she seems to be busting out all over.

Here's the Mother Jones essay (about tomatoes, mostly).
Here's an interview with her about local eating on Powells.com
Here's an interview at Salon
And it becomes obvious that she's not just a local eating convert, she has a new book out.

And as long as I'm linking to local eating writers, let's add:
No Impact Man's food guru
and Alice Waters

Links

I have an odd space in my bedroom that I've been thinking about turning into something useful... and in searching for loft construction ideas and platform bed ideas, I ran across this article by Joseph Schwartz (note: That link is in .doc format. For a Google html cache of it, try this). It's titled:

“Reduce, Reuse and Recycle": Prolegomena on Breakage and Repair in Ancient Jewish Society: Broken Beds and Chairs in Mishnah Kelim

And is an academic paper presented at Bar Ilan University in Israel.

I haven't gotten very far into its 34 pages, but it seems to be a study of how one ancient culture avoided making trash, at least in regard to furniture.

-------------------------

A New York Times article on how 9 ft ceilings are the new 8 ft ceilings. Says the article:

"eight-foot ceilings are acceptable for secondary living spaces like bathrooms and vestibules but not for living spaces."

Since I spent some time reading in Shay Solomon's Little House for a Small Planet this weekend, I have a bit of an inoculation to the pitch here -- people who are cool want higher ceilings, they're cheap, everybody is doing it. And my response: "No they're not. They're hiring Sarah Susanka to create niches and nooks they feel safe in. They may cost less than other options, but you still have to heat them. And 6 ft ceilings used to be standard." Still, I felt the sting when it went in.

Quote of the day

Yes, there are eaters who think it in their interest that food just be as cheap as possible, no matter how poor the quality. But there are many more who recognize the real cost of artificially cheap food — to their health, to the land, to the animals, to the public purse.

Michael Pollan
"You Are What You Grow"
New York Times, April 22, 2007

(Mr. Pollan is also the author of The Omnivore's Dilemma)

My Day at the Farm

So, on the 14th I did go to the work day at the learning farm for Compass Montessori School in Golden. They have a lot of information about what the school and the farm are about on their website, so I don't really want to get into that. I do want to talk about why I went and what I observed.

The big picture of why I went is that it makes sense to me that if we are going to address global warming, reduce our dependence on petroleum, reduce our carbon footprints, and fight obesity to boot, we need to go back to serious gardening. I mean Victory Garden-type gardening. I think that global warming has the kind of potential impact that deserves a WWII response from the US. However, I'm a wimp. I've never done much gardening and don't trust myself to have the stamina to keep at it. So, I went to practice, to see, and to build up my endurance.

We spent about 4 hours working. The first part of the time I worked on raking and seeding a new pasture for the goats and llamas.
The second part of the time I worked on a fence for keeping the llamas out of the high school area.
The day started off in the low 50's and ended up in the mid 60's which made it a darn fine day for labor. I got a little sunburned and I was pretty tired at the end of the day but not totally beaten up.

A few things I observed. First, I have a long way to go before being physically able to do a day's work on the farm. Let alone week after week. That being said, it seems to be easier in a way. Not that there isn't as much to know as there is in my industry (cable). And not that there aren't deadlines and all that. But it was really delightful to be able to pause at my rake, feel the breeze, and look off into the distance. It was so much more refreshing than a coffee break. Still, let's not get all romantical.

Second, the woman who is running the farm seems to have found something that works for her in a deeply satisfying way. She speaks with care and affection for the teens that come work with her and for all the plants and animals growing there. She has a sense of that physically-grounded at-home-ness you see in people who are building their own homes.

Third, guessing based on the amount of self-expression in the halls at the school, the kids are getting a world-class education in the power of making choices and following through on them. It seems like these kids have the wherewithal to stand up in the world and be known. Which is my way of contrasting them with people who go out into the world as young adults and then as adults who look to their sports team, their car brand, their favorite talking head, their church for their sense of self instead of it arising from some place deep inside.

I have been working on this post, but also procrastinating for a week. We have the May issue of Mother Jones on the table at the house and Barbara Kingsolver has a beautiful, rambling essay about locally grown food in it. I have been hoping it would be up before I posted this, but it isn't yet. Check there in a week or two. I especially like the call to know your farmer. Not as an exhibit, but as someone who is your partner... every bit as much as your doctor or dentist. We have an obligation to those men and women to not just shop around for the lowest price, but to understand that what we're willing to pay for our food is connected to what we're willing to invest in keeping the Earth green and working for all.

We Eat Oil

I felt tempted to pull out the old skills and do a standard book review post about The Omnivore's Dilemma but I really can't. I mean I could talk about the cleverness of his devices and the solidness of the writing and the way he makes facts accessible through personal stories... but that would be faking an objectivity I don't really feel. This book frightened and inspired me. And I only got through the first section.

The Omnivore's dilemma is an extension of the organism's basic problem -- "What can I eat?" At this point in our evolution, humans are omnivores. We've figured out that we can eat pretty much everything. Not only that, we've figured out how to get other humans to bring our favorite foods to us. So, given that, are there things which are better for us to eat? And how do we measure better? This is the dilemma.

Up until the 1950's, hunger was a major problem even in the US. The Great Depression was only partly an economic slowdown after the collapse of Wall Street. It was also a drought that threatened famine. As a nation, we did what starving animals do. We became obsessed with food quantity... perhaps at the expense of quality.

Three technologies were developed for increasing food production: irrigation techniques, pesticides, and fertilizers. Introducing these elements to farming became known as The Green Revolution, increasing food production wherever they went.

Pollan argues that corn is the engine of this food production. He makes the case that corn is more efficient than other grains at turning energy inputs into stored energy. Because of this efficiency, we can produce more calories of corn than we can actually consume. So corn has increasingly elbowed its way into our food system by replacing other calorie sources. For example, corn syrup sweeteners instead of cane or beet sugar. Corn-fed cattle instead of grass-fed cattle. Bit-by-bit corn has become the staple food of the US.

The problem with this model is that corn cannot maintain itself year after year in the same land. The traditional method of growing corn was to rotate or co-plant it with crops like squash and beans. But squash and beans aren't as efficient and aren't consumed at the same levels. The Green Revolution allows us to skip the rotation by feeding the corn through fertilizer.

The problem with this is that corn produces fewer usable calories than the fertilizer contains. Fertilizers are a petroleum product. So in other words, our diet is in direct competition with our cars. And the ethanol-as-renewable-resource meme looks to compound the problem again: use petroleum to make fertilizer, grow corn with the fertilizer, use the corn to power cars or to eat...

Fortunately, Pollan ends the section on corn on a positive note. He tells us of a visit to Polyface farm, an intensive agriculture farm where after the corn is cut down, the chickens are turned loose to finish up the grain and eat bugs. Then grass is allowed to grow, thriving in the chicken litter. Then cows are grazed on the grass, aerating the soil and providing fertilizer. Then the corn is grown again. This high-care, high intensity agriculture seems to produce far more calories per acre than the corn-based industrial agriculture we have now... but it is incredibly labor intensive.

This leads me to suspect that when we get serious about global warming, we will have to return, in some way, to being a nation of farmers and ranchers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The story of Pollan's visit to Polyface is also included in Best Food Writing 2006, along with an excerpt from Julie and Julia, and a thoughtful article from Bill McKibbin written for Gourmet. Which is to say, I think the book is worth it for just those three pieces, but it's stuffed full (no pun intended) of good reading.

Pronoia

A wonderful book I've been reading while exploring these changes in my life is Rob Brezsney's Pronoia. Or, as the full title says: "Pronoia Is the Antidote for Paranoia: How the Whole World Is Conspiring to Shower You with Blessings".

In the book, Rob tells the story of having been challenged at Burning Man one year. Like so many voices, Vox Feminista is one I'm familiar with, Rob was on the "the world is going to hell in a handbasket and we really need to change" bandwagon. He's basically a funny, community-oriented, good-natured guy, so these new friends challenged him to bring that to his message of change.

The resulting book is one of crazed, rejuvenating playfulness. Exercises about looking at things backwards and inside out; turning expectations and paradigms on their heads; connecting with people in surprising, loving, intimate ways.

I am finding this book a great leavening agent for my perspective and life as I go through this project of thinking deeply about my life and its impacts. I will be using the Pronoia tag for posts on observations about what's working, what's fun, and what's positive in this process of change.

More stories of transformation

A Nevada City woman transformed her life by trading in her SUV for a motorcycle, replacing all the lightbulbs in her house with energy-efficient bulbs, taking in a roommate, cutting down on meat consumption and saying goodbye to her cell phone.

"These are really easy, manageable changes that make a difference. That's all we ask of people," Reinette Senum said as she talked from the steps of Nevada City's United Methodist Church at the top of Broad Street.

The Nevada City Union (registration required)

Her group's website is www.apple-nc.org, not the address given in the article.

----------------------
A Wyoming couple tells the story of their efforts in 2007

carbonneutraljournal.com

-----------------------
The Carbon Coach

A Vancouver journalist's family meet with a carbon coach about their goal of cutting their carbon by 33%.

Part one, Part two

Changing with others

The New York Times last week ran an article on this guy. The hook for their article was "The Year Without Toilet Paper", which did what good headlines do... got a lot of people worked up and interested. The toilet paper issue aside, I think the article's main point is what it looks like when a couple of New Yorkers try to hang on to what's essential about their lives and put the rest up for re-evaluation.

One of the things that's obviously essential to this couple is their relationship. But in the article, and more so in the blog, we hear the voice of one part of that couple. I wonder how you create such radical change without everyone having exactly the same values.

I've been wondering about this in my own home. There are three adults living here and I am dating. We all come to this place on the planet for different reasons, but there's something in each of us that makes this place a good place to be. Saturday morning we decided to go out for breakfast, and spontaneously decided we should take the recycling too. We got into a conversation about why we recycle. I'm motivated by global warming and reducing the impact of humans on the other species of the planet. Roommate #1 is motivated by a sense of duty. This is just what you do. Roommate #2 is new to recycling, but she knows it's important to us, so she participates as well. So we have different values that lead to the same end result. We all sort and look for times to take the recycling over to the recycling yard.

I have been changing the incandescents for CFLs unilaterally. This is not a value we all share, so in fixtures that take multiple bulbs, I've only changed half the bulbs for CFLs. This means there are still 8 high-use bulbs that could be changed out... and I could go there, but it is a higher value to me to have the house full of people than to use the minimum amount of electricity.

Similarly, Roommate #1 uses an electric blanket and Roommate #2 uses a space heater. Are these the most efficient ways to heat the areas that are most essential for comfort? Perhaps so. But I guess that's another of the areas where I'm not going to make decisions for others.

I'm also seriously researching my garden options, and both roommates have been very upfront in saying that I can't rely on them to help. That's good to know.

So the thing that intrigues me most about No Impact Man is this: how do they communicate about these things? What values do they each bring to the project?

Driving Journal: Week Three

Miles driven this week: 131
Total miles: 418
(8000 miles/52 weeks = 153 mi/week)
(3 x 153 = 459)

Commuting: 61 (40% - 4 full days, two days the return trip was combined with errands)
Fun: 27 (18%)
Church: 0
Classes: 5 (3%)
Errands: 22 (14%)
Health: 16 (11%)
Other: 0

Observations:
Kind of a blah week this week. I didn't try to avoid driving, but I also didn't skip surprise activities that added more miles. I did go for a bike ride last weekend instead of driving to ice cream. I am intrigued by the idea of blending my travel options so that I exceed an average of 40 miles per gallon of gas while keeping my current 22 mpg car.

Update: I filled my tank on Sunday and I got 23.8 mpg over this two-week period. My changes were to look for places to avoid idling, like approaching red lights slowly so they'd change; to drive modestly (my mantra on my commute has been "no need to speed"); and to be aware of taking excess weight out of the car as soon as possible (like that bag of compost). That's all inspired by this article in Mother Jones. I'm considering removing the cross-braces on my roof rack and taking out my spare tire when I'm driving less than 30 miles from home... since that's how far my auto club will tow me. ;-)

Related Post: Driving Journal Week 2, Driving Journal Week 1, Driving Journal Intro

Efficiency & Renewable Energy

I commented earlier this week that I didn't know what it was going to take -- really -- for us to put the brakes on global warming. Turns out the American Solar Energy Society has been asking that same question. In this report (pdf) from their 2006 SOLAR conference, they conclude that it will take a combination of energy efficiency in transportation and buildings, plus renewable energy to avoid the next 1 degree centigrade rise in global temperatures.