CHARLOTTE CHAN

LED lights are honestly such an amazing, ingenious invention. It gives me a lot of hope for future human innovation which can make large strides against the climate crisis.

LED lights work by converting electrons into photons. It uses far less energy than incandescent bulbs because it converts energy into light (rather than heat) far more efficiently. LED bulbs also last way longer.

The problem with LED lights for many people, is the upfront price. It requires an initial investment but will save the consumer a lot of money during its lifetime in terms of energy costs and replacement costs. I think an important next step for governing powers is to incentivize selecting more sustainable options through subsidies, for example. This will encourage sustainable innovation, and it will help consumers make better choices.

The EcoChallenge Drawdown site predicts that LED lamps will completely replace other lighting options by 2050. "10.2-10.8 GIGATONS of carbon dioxide emissions could be avoided in residences and 5.9-6.7 GIGATONS in commercial buildings." This is a huge reduction. It's an amazing benefit for such a small change to make.

Furthermore, LED lights are not made up of toxic chemicals. For example, the fluorescent alternative contains many toxic chemicals including PCB and mercury. Fluorescent lighting therefore requires special disposal. LED lights can avoid these problems and lead to better human health and climate health.

In my research, I discovered another interesting benefit to LED lights. Incandescent lights give off a warm-tone light, which gives off a lot of heat as well. This kind of lighting tends to make people feel cozy and tired. However! LED lights give off a cooler-tone light without the heat. People have found that using LED light has increased their productivity. Here's another reason for students to use LED lamps!
 
After doing the research, I decided to replace my light bulbs with LED ones, and it was actually amazingly affordable. It was only $2.99 for three light bulbs, and each of them apparently lasts 27 years. It's crazy to think that a package of three lightbulbs might last longer than my lifetime...

It's also amazingly cost-saving!

Please see the post I made earlier on transportation. I'm not sure why that post wasn't posted as an answer to this question. 

Recently, I ordered a bunch of menstrual pads for my club (we distribute them to students) from Amazon. I received 6 gigantic boxes, each with 3 smaller cardboard boxes within it. In each of the boxes, there was a long string of those plastic cushion airbags. I just thought it was so ridiculous that a package of pads needs THAT much protection. After I unpackaged everything, I found that everything I ordered fits into one big box.
I was telling my friend and she had a similar story. She ordered a tiny piece of glass protector for her new watch. It arrived in a giant padded manila envelope with more plastic wrapped around it. We just laughed at how ridiculous it was. 

What is green gentrification?
Green gentrification refers to the justification of inequalities with an environmental ethic. Specifically, as the urban rich become more aware of climate change and environmental health, the property values of green spaces goes up. This process forces already disenfranchised residents into the most unhealthy, lowest value areas. This is one aspect of environmental injustice.

Isabelle Anguelovski in the WIRED article wraps it up pretty nicely:
"In order to construct a green, resilient park or shoreline, we get rid of lower-income housing... and behind it or next to it, you have higher-income housing being built."

The problem with green gentrification is that no one is sure what to do. There are problems on all sides. On one hand, building new infrastructure, amenities, and developments will push out all the middle-class and low-income workers who can no longer afford to live in those areas. On the other hand, new infrastructure is needed for these areas. People need storm drains and defenses against climate change. If we expect people to act on climate awareness, they'll need bike lanes and green spaces.
 
Anguelovski proposes that the solution is city regulations. This means disenfranchised people need political representation, and here we have yet another reason why it's important to vote and make our voices heard to support the most disenfranchised members of our community.

Green gentrification is happening in Brooklyn, New Orleans, and even in Chile.
 
I decided to look into our very own city: Los Angeles.

There are many examples of green gentrification, which I never realized or noticed before.

1) Private yoga lessons for wealthy white women are encouraged in parks, but Latinx park vendors are ticketed
2) Public seating areas are made intentionally to be very uncomfortable so that homeless people are unable to sleep there. I guess that's our bandaid solution to homelessness?
3) Newly developed areas with wealthy residents often have renovated parks with limited access to the rest of the community

In my experience, regardless of whether it is considered "green gentrification," in my years in LA,  I've just noticed a lot of inequality. I remember going to The Last Bookstore (not sure what the area is called). While there's these really nice looking luxury apartment buildings, there's just so much homelessness at the same time. And I remember passing this "public park" area. It wasn't much of a park. Just a couple patches of green. But it was completely fenced off.

A more recent relevant concern is the Los Angeles River. A couple of years ago, the US Army Corps of Engineers committed to making the river greener, more natural, more welcoming, and just, more like a river. Many are now concerned about whether the surrounding areas will become gentrified as a consequence. There's fears that the LA River will become like Central Park, a little green haven for the wealthiest of New York.

How can we advocate for a greener, more just tomorrow?

Read more about LA River here:
 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-20/reviving-the-l-a-river-without-green-gentrification

What is regenerative cropping?
Regenerative cropping is agriculture with the goal of making soil healthy again. The idea is that healthy soil is productive soil.

Modern industrial agriculture has a lot of problems. It causes large tracks of land to become arid and inhospitable to agriculture. It causes loss of diversity and habitats for other plants and animals. It wrecks the earth, but it also wrecks human health. The herbicide glyphosate kills the gut microbiome and inhibits our immune function (I wonder if COVID is related in anyway?) Furthermore, I found it particularly interesting how Charles Massy, in his TedTalk, explained how unhealthy soil void of microorganisms and unhealthy plants with "drug addictions" to industrialized fertilizers have been correlated with poor human health.

Many of us, including myself, have misconceptions that supporting the world population REQUIRES farmers to utilize harmful practices like chemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. New evidence tends to go against this.

When farmers use alternative methods like crop diversification, crop rotating, and in-farm nutrients (allowing cow poop to become fertilizer), they're able to create healthier soil that sequesters carbon from the atmosphere and supports productive growth.

Jacob Shea writes in Solutions U, that these practices are really effective in counteracting destructive practices and "regenerating" soil and land. But an important question for a lot of farmers is whether the methods can prove "scaleable and profitable."

I think that's a really important point because we can't expect OTHER people to make changes in their work at the expense of their own livelihoods. It would be unfair to expect farmers to switch to regenerative agriculture if they lose their profits. I believe that agriculture should be regulated, to support farmers using healthy practices (eg. subsidies). Additionally, consumers can purchase from regenerative farms to reward farmers and incentivize regenerative agriculture (similar to how a seafood consumer should purchase fish that is sustainably farmed/caught).

Here's an interesting regenerative farm I found near LA:
Radical Family Farm: they specialize in Asian heritage veggies, which is really cool!

Also for milk drinkers: Alexandre Family Farm produces regenerative organic dairy. I feel like out of all the farms I searched, this one was somewhat recognizable in mainstream supermarkets (eg. Whole Foods).

Steamed fish was a staple in my childhood diet. My dad would always tell me to eat more fish when I was young. He said it was because there would be no more fish left when I'm old. I didn't take him very seriously back then. I thought he was just trying to get me to finish my food.

But, there are serious things to consider when it comes to seafood. There's no denying that seafood is an important part of our diet and our world economy-- it feeds 3 billion people and employs 60 million at the cost of 171 MILLION TONS of fish every year. These numbers continue to  increase as our population grows.

But there are many problems as well. Overfishing threatens fish populations, fish farming can throw off the delicate balance of the ecosystem, and fishing practices exploit many of the workers employed in this industry. The changing climate has also exacerbated all of these problems causing infestations of bacteria and parasites that threaten fish. For example, the salmon industry was greatly impacted by sea lice infestation just last year.

Seafood Watch recommends that we shop for seafood sustainably. This way we are rewarding farmers and fishermen who are using sustainable practices. For fisherman, this means that they avoid catching unwanted species (eg. trawling), and avoid destroying natural habitats. For farmers, this means that they try to conserve water and prevent infection from spreading. As consumers, we must be aware. When we, as consumers and businesses, "demand sustainable seafood, it is profitable for the fisherman and farmers that produce seafood in environmentally and socially responsible ways." 

In my research, I decided to focus in on one of my favorite dishes: sushi. 
We should select fish that is caught and farmed sustainably. Some of these fish include:
- (California) Squid
- Salmon roe
- (New Zealand) Salmon
- (Mexico and US) Yellowtail
- (pole and line) Albacore tuna
We should avoid fish that is overcaught or produced in harmful manners:
- Atlantic salmon
- Eel 
- Sea urchin
- (imported) shrimp, tuna, tilapia

I was surprised to find eel on the "Avoid list," because it is a personal favorite. I found that eels are actually endangered in many parts of East Asia. Wild eel are caught and farmed, which leads to discharge of chemicals and disease back to the wild population, which further damage the natural habitat of eels. A good alternative to Asian eel is American eel which is farmed more responsibly. 

The second thing I noticed is that eating seafood sustainably is NOT EASY. The country of origin matters. It also matters whether the fish is farmed or caught. There are a lot of things we need to consider as consumers. Therefore, I personally will choose to minimize seafood consumption as a general rule until seafood is more sustainably regulated and labeled in restaurants and supermarkets. 

I chose this challenge because I was totally unaware of the carbon footprint of concrete.

It's one of those strange things that are so ubiquitous in everyday life that nobody ever really thinks about it. I've grown so adapted that I cannot imagine a world without concrete smoothing out roads and sidewalks, making the windy highways of Los Angeles possible.

Little did I know that this important asset of modern life is a major "source of emissions, generating 5 to 6 percent annually." The carbon emission comes from the energy that needs to be burned in the production process and from the limestone reaction itself.

The concrete problem of emission is a little challenging. It is such an important part of infrastructure that we can't simply stop using concrete. It is a problem that demands creative solutions.

One solution was to use fly ash alternative rather than limestone. Fly ash is produced as a byproduct of burning coal. When used in concrete, it can create equally strong concrete at low cost, and relatively lower carbon footprint. It is also a good use for fly ash which would otherwise end up in landfill. We should prioritize this kind of innovation to address the needs of society while considering sustainability.

Another solution is photocatalytic cement. This is the cement that can catalyze a reaction with pollutants and turn them into harmless molecules which are subsequently washed away by rain. Although this is very innovative and promising, I have my doubts about this kind of technology. This kind of technology does not address the real problems. I think it is far more efficient to consider ways to reduce toxic emissions in the first place, rather than do "damage control" after the harm has been done. Thoughts? 

Once you notice, you can't unnotice: concrete is everywhere! Researching concrete reminds me that my life has a lasting imprint on the world around me. This means that I need to be more cognizant of the different choices I must make to reduce negative contributions.

I've lived in Alameda my whole life. It's a small suburban area with a beautiful shoreline right across the bay from San Francisco. Having lived there my whole life, I always kind of took the coastal shoreline for granted. I remember as a kid, I would complain about the terrible smell of rotting seaweed when driving past the beach.

It wasn't until I accidentally ended up taking marine biology (in high school), that I began to appreciate the ecosystem for what it was. We would trudge out to the shoreline behind our school, binoculars around our necks, just admiring the diverse life in the sand and on the rocks. It was also that class that made me fall in love with biology, ultimately leading me to major in biology. I still remember looking at seawater under the microscope for the first time, and being so taken aback by the intricacies of the all the microbes.
 (Check out this really cool article I found about the animals that live there! :
https://alamedapointenviro.com/2016/07/14/marine-ecosystem-thrives-at-alameda-point/)

Now, it's come to my attention that these ecosystems are being severely threatened by climate change. This is important not only because we're losing something so beautiful, but also because these ecosystems "sequester huge amounts of carbon in plants aboveground and in roots and soils below." If we lose coastal life, we lose the first line of defense we have against major carbon emissions. We will also lose components of marine life that keep the delicate balance of our ecosystems. And before we know it, we'll find ourselves in a positive feedback loop leading straight to climate crisis.

I think everyone should go out and check out the nature around them so we can all wake up and realize what we're losing as we lose to climate change.

"Plant-based options must be available, visible, and enticing..."
 
Today, I'm doing a meatless Monday (but on a Thursday). I think a big part of eating a diet with more fruits and veggies, is knowing how to make them taste great!
 
I was honestly not very good at eating my daily vegetables, but discovering new recipes helped so much. Now, it's pretty much effortless. I used to only eat broccoli raw or boiled with salt-- not super enticing. But roasted broccoli totally elevates the whole experience, it almost tastes like it should be a guilty snack.
 
Here's how to make it:
1. Preheat oven to 425 degrees
2. Cut broccoli into small pieces and toss it in oil
3. Add seasoning of your choice! I like adding Trader Joe's premixed seasonings (the citrusy garlic one is great), then toss it around
4. Put the broccoli on a baking sheet
5. Toss it in the oven for 7 minutes, take it out to flip the broccoli around, then back into the oven for 7 more minutes
Voila!
Good stuff.

Eating lots of vegetables feels way better than eating a lot of heavy carbs and meat. It also makes me feel way more energized and "light" throughout the day, something that I did not expect because everyone keeps telling me that eating meat is necessary for a balanced diet. I don't know if I believe that so much now..
Not to mention, it feels great that I'm not supporting the gassy cattle industry today!