Climate Change – we hear about it a lot these days. Whether it is your neighbor talking about how the weather has become more extreme over the past decade or news reports about how we need to pass climate policy to avoid catastrophic disasters, the information and chatter on the topic can be overwhelming. From violent storms in the south, extensive wildfires in the west, severe flooding in the east, to melting ice caps in the north, as individuals we can feel quite helpless at times and resort to blocking it all out. Maybe if we wait long enough the problems will resolve themselves. After all, what kind of impact could we really have as individuals? 

As it turns out, there is a lot we can do! It is often easy to see all the destruction happening around us and forget or ignore the amazing resilient nature of human beings. Despite the delays and controversy, there have been many efforts to address the major threat of Climate Change, and now New York State is in the process of developing a climate action plan that will shape the fate of our state and the nation as a whole. 

After the passage of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act in 2019, a Climate Action Council was appointed with the mission of drafting a plan to meet the goals of the Act to reach 100% zero-emission electricity by 2040, and a reduction of at least 85% below 1990-level GHG emissions by 2050 all while centering equity and climate justice. The draft scoping plan was released on January 1, 2022 and the people of NYS have until June 10 to share their comments on the plan. While the 341-page draft plan might seem daunting and lengthy, the overall objective is simple: to make New York a better and more sustainable place to live. 

Most of the plan’s chapters focus on individual sectors such as transportation, buildings, or agriculture, but several look at overarching topics such as Climate Adaptation and Resilience. In this chapter, the Council calls for creation of a risk reduction and adaptation plan that is equitable and makes wise connections around solving multiple problems at once. For example, investing in good insulation and air sealing in lower-income homes will reduce emissions while also reducing health risks during power outages by retaining heat in winter and keeping a house cooler during heat waves. Similarly, investing in ditch management and agricultural practices that reduce runoff and flooding can also reduce the risk of prolonged harmful algae blooms in our lakes.

One area of concern I have is that the targets and initiatives are not ambitious enough to prepare and protect us from the effects of climate change. According to the Army Corps of Engineers, the United States received an overall grade of a C- for the condition of the nation’s infrastructure for 2021.                                                                        

New York is not much better off. From our buckling bridges to eroding roads, the infrastructure in our communities is in no condition to withstand climate change. While the Climate Action Plan seeks to address some of the concerns around infrastructure improvements in our communities, the overall strategy is somewhat vague, and it is unclear how necessary resources will be allocated to disadvantaged and rural communities across the state. 

Additionally, the plan seeks to address many of the emerging concerns with preexisting ideas such as technical tools and policies that have had limited effect in the past. It is therefore an opportune moment to provide your input on what you want for your community. What is it your community needs? How do you think the resources should be allocated to communities? Many times, communities know exactly what they need but lack the financial resources to execute the projects and are unable to fulfill the stringent requirements set forth by the state. 

In defense of the Climate Action Council, it is difficult to create a plan without the participation of New York’s residents. It can thus be beneficial for you to submit your concerns and ideas around what you think is needed to make your community a safer, healthier, and more sustainable place to live by submitting a public comment online or via email to scopingplan@nyserda.ny.gov. 

One thing is for certain though – if we do not aggressively take action on climate disruption, the overall costs to us will far exceed the investments in clean energy that would head off the severe health impacts and physical damage of radical climate change. At a minimum, we should let the Council know that inaction because change is inconvenient is absolutely not what the people of New York want. I plan to let them know that, along with my suggestions on how to do a better job of preparing our rural infrastructure.

On May 25^th, we will host our second Finger Lakes Forecast webinar which will explore ways residents of the Finger Lakes can reduce flood risk for their homes. Additional topics to be covered in the webinar series include Policies to Reduce Harmful Algae Blooms in the Finger Lakes, Land Use and Renewable Energy, Public Health in a Hotter Finger Lakes, and FLX Demographic and Economic Trends.

Sustainable Tompkins is a citizen-based coalition working towards a more sustainable regional community. We advocate a systems approach to build the infrastructure and social capacity for more sustainable ways of living and working. Our projects and programs have focused on energy efficiency, climate protection, green purchasing, sustainable community development, green collar jobs, sustainable enterprise, and economic/ecological justice. Our office is open by appointment at 309 N. Aurora Street in Ithaca.

To learn more, email our Outreach Coordinator at sarah@sustainabletompkins.org.

With a shared goal to assure a future landscape in which all of us can thrive despite the many changes underway, community members are invited to help build this map of the sustainability and democracy movement in the Finger Lakes Region. Residents can add what they are working on, plug in where they can make a difference, and spread the word to share with others. Visit the Map to discover the creative and the compassionate, the solidarity builders and the self-reliant, the pioneers and the protectors of a sustainable future.

Recent additions to the Map include Lev Kitchen, Central New York Labor Federation, Food Policy Council of Tompkins County, and Oxbow Farm. Located downtown on the Ithaca Commons, Lev Kitchen is one of Ithaca’s newest restaurants and features Yemeni flatbread called Malawach and the amalgamation of distinctive cuisines and cultures from countries such as Israel, Lebanon and Syria. Opened in March 2022, they aim to embrace business transparency, explore what it means to be a “sustainable” food service operator, and support food security by donating 1% of all revenues to the World Food Program and their relief efforts around the world.

The Central New York Area Labor Federation represents over 100,000 members of 200 local unions in eleven central New York counties: Broome, Cayuga, Chenango, Cortland, Delaware, Madison, Onondaga, Oswego, Otsego, Tioga, and Tompkins. Their mission is to improve the lives of working families — to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to New York and the nation. They work to build a broad movement of New York workers by helping them join and form unions, support workers as they bargain with employers to improve their living conditions and workplaces, and strengthen the voice of working families at all levels of government in a changing global economy.

The Food Policy Council of Tompkins County is a non-governmental citizen advocacy council working for a more sustainable, equitable, healthy and affordable food system for Tompkins County, NY. Their first initiative, Tompkins Food Future, is a two-year collaborative community project aiming to develop a county-wide food system plan.

Oxbow Farm is a family-run produce farm located in Erin, New York, which is committed to growing a diverse array of crops with zero chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides. They have been selling their produce at the Ithaca Farmers Market since 2010. They also breed and sell pedigreed American Nubian goats.

To learn more, contact our Outreach Coordinator via email at sarah@sustainabletompkins.org.

Finger Lakes Forecast Webinar Series: Climate Disruption & Food Security

Sustainable Tompkins will be hosting a new webinar series this spring and fall. Finger Lakes Forecast will focus on how climate change will impact life in the Finger Lakes Region and what people can do for themselves and their communities to prepare. The first Finger Lakes Forecast webinar, Climate Disruption and Food Security, will take place online at 12pm EST on April 27 and include a screening of Uplifted Ithaca’s short documentary, Our Farmers in Flux: Adapting to Climate Change, followed by a panel discussion with Graham Savio, CCE-TC; Katie Hallas, Tompkins Food Future; Klaas Martens, Lakeview Organic Grain; and Chaw Chang, Stick and Stone Farm.

Five additional Finger Lakes Forecast webinars are planned in May, June, September, October, and November of this year, on the last Wednesday of each month. Planned topics include Reducing Flood Risk for Your Home, Policies to Reduce Harmful Algae Blooms in the Finger Lakes, Land Use and Renewable Energy, Public Health in a Hotter Finger Lakes, and FLX Demographic and Economic Trends. More details will be shared soon!

If you have questions about the Finger Lakes Forecast Webinar Series, email Sarah at sarah@sustainabletompkins.org . Follow us on Facebook and Instagram or visit our website to learn more about Sustainable Tompkins’ programs and our Sustainable Finger Lakes Calendar to learn about upcoming events in our region focused on sustainability and climate change.

Extreme income inequality, persistent racism, and increasing climate disruption are undeniable plagues of our time. We are fortunate that many people in Tompkins County are working on these issues. Some are advocates for racial and economic justice, such as creating living-wage jobs, removing barriers to reentry from the prison system, and ensuring affordable housing for all. Many others are involved in initiatives to reduce carbon emissions, such as, stopping gas infrastructure development, switching from fossil fuels to renewable sources, and conserving energy in housing, transportation, food, water, and waste.

As social justice and environmental advocates, we are often driven by a sense of urgency about our own particular issues and are not as well informed about each other’s efforts. If we are white and middle class we may tend to see climate change as the most urgent priority. If we are people of color or of low-income, we may tend to see poverty and racism as the urgent priority. In addition, persistent historic patterns keep us segregated from each other by place, race and class, perpetuating a gap in our empathy for each other’s concerns.

One Underlying Cause: Our Wasteful System

This separation is unnecessary and harms all of our work for our community. Social and economic injustice and extreme climate disruption are outcomes of the same inequitable and wasteful economic system, which treats people, especially people of color and those with limited material resources, and our living environment, as disposable. When advocates for environmental protection and champions for the elimination of poverty and racism work together to change the system that is trashing poor people and the planet, we will be able to create a strong, community-oriented local economy that works for all.

How are Energy and Equity critically related to each other?

1. Gross inequality and social segregation undermine the healthy, trusting relationships and community solidarity essential for creating the changes we need. When clean energy advocates place equity as a high priority, we contribute to a well-connected community that can solve common challenges faster and smarter.
2. Extreme climate disruption hurts people with limited incomes the most. Even in our relatively benign region, our colder winters or warmer summers are creating higher energy bills and greater health risks for those of us with less access to resources. Increased flooding can bring even more catastrophic impacts.
3. By creating livable wage work and reducing barriers to employment, more people can afford healthier and more locally sourced, earth-friendly options. The increased demand for these options can lower their prices, generate jobs, reduce emissions and crime, and create a self-reinforcing positive effect for all. We’ll never get to a healthy community with low carbon emissions if everyone can’t come along, so we need to see poverty and racism as huge barriers we must dismantle—together.
4. We need everyone’s voices, ideas and leadership, included at the outset, to solve our pressing community and environmental problems. Those of us from economically disadvantaged communities have valuable, often unappreciated, skills of collaboration and resource conservation, as we are used to making-do, sharing, reusing, helping neighbors in need, opening up our lives and homes to others in our community, and taking care of each other’s children. We need to be respected as partners and leaders, whose experience and perspectives are essential for shifting towards a more community-oriented economy and culture.
5. Investing in a clean energy future leads to better paying local jobs.

• Local businesses working on energy efficiency and renewables are substantially expanding their workforce with living wage jobs, many of them entry level, to meet the growing demand for energy retrofits, and solar, wind, wood pellet, geothermal and heat pump systems. One local solar installer hired over 40 employees last year and is planning on hiring at a similar rate this year. We can create hundreds more good-paying local jobs by boldly reducing our fossil fuel dependency.
• However, for these jobs to provide a living wage for people with barriers to employment, not just for people in the employer’s familiar networks, we need to expand appropriate trainings and apprenticeships, and help businesses adopt inclusive hiring policies and systems to support diverse staff.

6. An energy efficient community fueled by renewable energy results in reduced utility bills for everyone.

• An energy efficient home can save a family hundreds or thousands of dollars a year, leaving everyone with more money for food, housing, transportation, and other costs. There are existing energy programs, for example through TC Action, that specifically serve renters and homeowners with limited incomes. Rural homes can save the most, as they tend to heat with more expensive fuels.
• Green technologies like solar energy or heating with wood and wood pellets, reduce our energy use, reduce the amount of carbon pollution that contributes to climate change, make our homes more comfortable, and save money. We need to build on and go beyond existing rebates and financing options to make sure that those of us with limited incomes have access to these money-saving technologies.

7. Policies that expand transportation options and support more compact, mixed income, mixed use neighborhoods help reduce transportation distances, emissions and costs; reduce social and economic segregation; and increase access to resources.

• Living near amenities, with options for walking, biking, carpooling, car-sharing, or riding the bus, provides a lifeline for youth, people with disabilities, older adults, and households with limited incomes, who, unlike middle class, middle aged people, often don’t have access to a reliable car or can’t drive. Shorter commutes are directly linked to reducing poverty.
• Almost all of the $300 million households spend on transportation a year leaves Tompkins County immediately, as neither cars nor fuel are produced locally. With more transportation options available, more people can shift their spending from cars to goods and services that strengthen the local economy.

8. Reducing waste reduces the number of people who are treated like waste.

• Our local reuse economy is growing. The Reuse Center has hired over 15 people in the last five years, raising many folks from welfare to living wage standards. Many more have been trained in electronics repair and salvage.
• There are over 40 stores that specialize in selling used items, keeping tons of resources out of the landfill, providing hundreds of people with sustaining jobs, and helping thousands of people to shop within a budget.

9. Growing our own food, hunting and fishing, and buying local food further reduces our emissions, helps families save money, and supports local jobs. For instance, it takes about 100 CSA subscribers to support a full-time local farmer that is helping regenerate the environment.

What We Can Do Differently: 10 Examples

1. Discuss our differences in order to build understanding and empathy. Attend forums and create or participate in conversations about our differences and our common ground. Replace stereotypes with curiosity.
2. Consciously reach out beyond our cultural comfort zone. Ask for a few members of our energy or our equity groups to attend each other’s forums, rallies and cultural events to increase understanding, show support, and build relationships.

Clean energy advocates:

3. Educate ourselves about structural racism and poverty and how they perpetuate inequality today in our own community.
4. If you enjoy the privileges of an identity such as white, male, middle-class, or heterosexual, choose to use these advantages to create a thriving, community-oriented economy that works for all.
5. Learn about and support policies and programs, such as the Living Wage campaign and Black Lives Matter, that address systemic injustice.
6. Use an equity-conscious lens when developing programs and plans about energy, food and transportation systems. Ask: What voices are missing and why? Do we have secure job options for those who will lose their work when we dismantle polluting energy sources? Will we require contractors to hire local labor at a living wage and be proactive in hiring and retaining people who have had barriers to employment, including a conviction record?
7. Make sure traditionally underrepresented people are at the table early on. Provide dinner & child care for public meetings. Ask people about their experiences. Become enriched by diversity.

Justice advocates:

8. Develop an ecologically conscious lens that sees clean energy and environmental protection as human rights and community health priorities, not elite luxuries. Include this perspective when we try to solve unemployment and poverty issues.
9. Support or create campaigns that join energy and equity goals, such as requiring developers seeking tax abatements to practice inclusive hiring and use environmentally-friendly options, or advocating for institutional divestment from both the fossil fuel and the private prison industries.
10. Promote earth-friendly behavior changes on a personal and organizational level. Recognize we have more to gain, even in the economic short term, from restoring our damaged life support systems. We all benefit from eliminating waste, having clean air in our lungs and clean water to drink and bathe in.

We can no longer treat people or the natural systems upon which we all depend as disposable. Let us find common ground in the civil rights vision of “Beloved Community” and the indigenous wisdom that All Life is Sacred. As justice and environmental advocate Van Jones put it, “We don’t have a throwaway planet, and we don’t have throwaway children — it’s all precious.” It’s time to bring our causes together.

Written by Anne Rhodes, Elan Shapiro, Gay Nicholson, and Karim Beers,

members of the Energy-Equity Collective Impact Working Group of the Building Bridges Initiative

The vote was pretty much split along geographic lines with those representing the urban/suburban core of the county (Chock, Shinagawa, McBean-Clairborne, Burbank, Kiefer) backing the project that had widespread neighborhood support (along with Klein from Caroline/Danby). Those supporting the large 63-unit apartment complex came from the more rural parts of the county (Dryden, Groton, Lansing, Ulysses, Enfield/Newfield). These rural reps stressed the need for adding housing to try and relieve the incessant demand that has driven up the price of shelter. Residents of the historic DeWitt neighborhood around the old library spoke strongly about the importance of adding density appropriate to the scale and character of the location, and pointed to other
building sites in planned growth areas where the TravisHyde or other projects would be less problematic.

Our community needs to have a thorough discussion about densification, the treadmill of constant growth, carrying capacity, and how to distribute costs and benefits as we add people to our community. But first we should take a look at the question of who decides.

Legislator Shinagawa brought up the need for elected representatives to balance the role of Delegate (do what your constituents ask) vs. Trustee (be guided by your own knowledge, experience, and values). Legislator Robertson emphasized the trustee role, believing many of the citizens speaking out were misinformed on the merits of the projects, and that the county legislature had a responsibility for the greater good of adding 63 vs. 28 housing units on the site. Others like Legislator Klein spoke to the overwhelming preference of the people who would be most affected by the project – the neighbors.

This raises another realm ripe for public dialogue. When Dryden led the county in the push for a ban on fracking, the principle of home rule was core to their case. Gas drilling advocates accused anti-fracking activists of being NIMBYs (Not In My BackYard) and selfishly preventing economic gain for the greater good of the Southern Tier. Activists responded that they would prefer to keep the risks of fracking out of everyone’s backyard and vigorously pursue a clean energy future for the greater good – but that at the very least the concept of local control should allow them to choose their own future.

Few people like the idea of their neighborhood being made a sacrifice zone for the economic benefit of others. Robertson mentioned the ongoing and projected growth rate for Cornell, which will require finding housing for about 200 people every year. But people in the DeWitt Park historic district don’t see why their neighborhood should make sacrifices to address Cornell’s or other employers’ expansion plans. They are willing to accept more density, but want a voice in how much and what kind and to whose benefit.

We need to have a deeper discussion about rates of growth and limits to growth and what endpoint we have in mind for ourselves. We are in an era where many people are demanding more transparency and democratic control of the public realm. The trustee form of government is often seen as easily corrupted by special interests and as a source of the “business-as-usual” mindset that continues to exacerbate our twin problems of inequality and climate disruption. The trustee role doesn’t work without trust.

But the delegate role doesn’t work without an informed and engaged populace. Right now, it is clear that the Ithaca area has relatively high rates of engagement on local issues. And it was telling that our county’s most experienced and knowledgeable urban planners and smart growth advocates came out to speak in support of the Franklin project.

We urge the county reps from our rural towns to think about this issue of home rule vs. the “greater good.” Americans of all political persuasions are often suspicious when officials cite the Common Good when they face grassroots opposition. It’s a tricky topic because of our nation’s history of oppression or exploitation by local majorities. And NIMBYism does occur. That’s why we have to work together to define the greater good and agree on the specifics of how to work toward it.  We have a housing problem, and we need to think about rates and densities and endpoints if we are to avoid degrading the quality of life so many have worked to create.

The path to a more sustainable community is going to be very hard work and it must be done together collaboratively, with humility, and through much trust building. Listening to the people on the Franklin project will be a very good place for the county legislature to build trust for the conversations ahead on equity, energy, and the economy.

By Miranda Phillips

With artic ice melting at great speed, and climate disruption happening a hundred years sooner than expected, climate change is promising to be the biggest challenge of the 21^st century.  Not often talked about, at least in mainstream media, are the psychological and spiritual aspects of this challenge – among them, fear, guilt, and grief that make it difficult for us to act and act fast.

 At a recent local conference (www.climatesmartclimateready.org), a panel of practitioners from various psycho-spiritual disciplines — religion, philosophy and group therapy — shared wisdom as to how we might deal wisely with such difficult mind states, and move past these to action.  As the panel moderator, I’d like to summarize that discussion, and (as requested by conference participants) continue it in several ways: share thoughts about my own field, mindfulness practice, as a support to climate action; offer take-home points from all of the above disciplines; and invite dialogue on any aspect of this topic.

To start, I’d like to try to identify — what are these psychological and spiritual challenges surrounding climate change? 

Last month, I read a thoughtful exploration of this in Technology Review — a synopsis of several recent books asking: why has our response to climate change been so weak here in the US?  These authors agreed that one reason, if not the main reason, for our inaction is that climate change involves tough moral issues that no one wants to address.  One such moral issue is “climate injustice”: the fact that we in the Western world, with our heavy use of cars and our large houses, are responsible for the bulk of climate change; ironically, the parties most hurt by this are the groups least responsible — people in the developing world, other animal species, and future generations. 

Clearly we must stop this terrible harm we are causing.  But we are getting stuck in various ways. 

Firstly, say these authors, we resist change because it requires sacrifice on our part.  To be sure, some change will be pleasant. (For example, eating locally — which is better for the planet — can be an improvement for us, too: a local tomato certainly tastes better than one commercially grown, and keeps money local, too).  But slowing climate change is necessarily also going to involve some sacrifice: at the very least in the form of changing routine which is always uncomfortable, though in the long run we will likely find the new routines to be equally satisfying if not more so.  In the short run it will be hard to accept less driving, less convenience; less money in our pockets, perhaps (that local tomato, if we don’t grow it ourselves, may cost us a good bit more).  We may also find less time for certain things, if we’re to carve out a chunk of our time instead for staying informed, learning to change the way we live and to advocate wisely for policy change.

Another impediment to change is distraction: we all have busy lives and urgent projects to attend to. It’s hard to remember in the midst of other pressing issues that climate change, which can feel a ways off, is actually urgent and requires our attention now.   (As I heard it put recently: “Americans are good at dealing with the wolf at the door, not the termites in the basement”).

A third impediment to action is emotional pain:  if we acknowledge the enormity of the harm we are causing – to the planet and its inhabitants – we may feel grief, guilt, fear.   We may find ourselves paralyzed by these and unable to take necessary action.  I am particularly interested in this issue since my field, mindfulness practice, is concerned with exactly this: how to attend to difficult mind states and move through them to wise action?

And so the article left me wondering: What can motivate people to act, even knowing it will involve sacrifice?  What can help us to remember to act, even in the midst of so much distraction?  And how might we tend to grief and other uncomfortable feelings along the way?

A week later, I got to explore these questions as the moderator of a panel of professionals from various psycho-spiritual disciplines: religion, philosophy and group therapy.  These included Reverend Kenneth Clarke (of Cornell’s United Religious Works); Dr. Jalaja Bonheim, of the Institute for Circlework; and Dr. Andrew Fitz-Gibbon (Chair of the Philosophy Department at SUNY Cortland). 

Reverend Clarke spoke to my question of motivation. What might move people to act even at cost to themselves?  He argued that a trusted leader could be a powerful force to convince people that action, however difficult, is necessary.  He told of an emerging leader, Katherine Hayhoe — an evangelical and a climate scientist — who has become such a trusted motivational speaker for her evangelical community.

The minister also spoke of hope as a key motivator.  He quoted Martin Luther King saying, “the arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice”.  The power of this quote, I think, is that it does two things: acknowledges the great difficulty of the road ahead, but in the same breath offers hope that in the end, hardship will be for the good.  He offered as an example the role that faith played in sustaining the civil rights movement.  This speaks also to my own experience: at the climate conference (Climate Smart & Climate Ready), of which this panel discussion was a part, participants were motivated and reassured by a message of hope from its keynote speaker, Mark Hertzgaard, an environmental journalist who has covered climate change for the last 15 years: “I don’t know if we will win the climate fight, but I know that we can.”  We can!  Action would not be in vain.  What a relief to hear — wind for our sails.

The philosopher on the panel argued that feelings – compassion and love in particular — are perhaps the most effective motivators of action.  He suggested that when we feel love for something or someone being harmed, we cannot help but act to protect it, even at cost to ourselves.  The conference keynote made this same point: though he had been reporting on climate change for 15 years, it was only after becoming a parent that he took action — to protect the daughter that he cares about more than anything else.  This relates to my own experience as well: after the conference, I came home with a list of steps I intended to take in the coming weeks and months.  But it was when I woke up the next morning with this realization, “My God, I live in a flood plain!” that I viscerally felt the urgency of acting, protecting my family, my neighborhood, and the house and garden I’ve worked so lovingly to develop.  “I must call the town planning board tonight,” I thought, to see what plans they might have (levees around the creek perhaps?) in my own neighborhood.  I felt prepared to pay handsomely for such construction.

The group therapist, Dr. Jalaja Bonheim, spoke to my question of emotional pain: how to address feelings like grief and fear that might be stopping us from action?  She spoke of a format she uses called Circlework in which participants are safely able to become aware of and resolve feelings around tough issues.  She works with Jewish and Palestinian women, for example, to help heal wounds and enable these women to move forward and become agents of peace in their communities.  The therapist didn’t explain exactly how she’s able to help people discover and share their emotional truths, but she spoke of the healing power of this process and its ability to give new energy to activists.  She shared an anecdote about one such activist who said, “All these years I thought I was fighting the good fight; turns out I was just fighting my own fear.  No wonder I’m exhausted”. By acknowledging her fear in a Circlework context, she was able to stop fighting it and get her energy back instead for action.

To recap – my colleagues in other fields offered valuable answers to my questions: trusted leaders, hope and compassion all have great power to motivate us, even at cost to ourselves.  Therapy can enable action, too, helping us learn to recognize and share difficult emotions, and in sharing, become newly energized to act.

Here, I’d like to add my own thoughts as a teacher of another psycho-spiritual discipline, mindfulness practice, also a powerful tool to enable action.  Like group therapy, it is a process of learning to recognize difficult emotional truths and move through these to action.  It begins with learning to notice.  Just notice.  In formal meditation sessions, we practice becoming aware of some aspect of experience — say, sensations in the body.  In a typical exercise, one might scan the body, registering any sensation in toes, ankles, and so on.  Focus inevitably strays.  But, we learn, this too is something simply to notice and accept: Distraction.  (Fine, natural).  Now what?  Come back to focus: calves, knees…

As one gets better at focusing on bodily sensations, one can progress to harder things: emotions.  The practice is to notice in each moment, what am I feeling? and to sit with that feeling, without judging it.  Noticing something like fear, for instance, and simply accepting it:  Not good, not bad, just true.

From here, we advance to a yet harder task: noticing and accepting such feelings throughout the day.  Formal practice continues (maybe half an hour daily).  But the bulk of the practice happens informally – that is to say, while going about one’s life.  For me as a mother of a baby, this has meant learning to notice and deal wisely under various kinds of stress.  I think particularly of one vivid instance of this: when my five-month-old son grabs a fistful of my hair.   Half the time, I must admit, I react from instinct: “No, Will, NO!”  And I grab his little hand.  But more and more often my mindful mind gets there first.  “Notice,” it says. “Pain, anger.” Often times, this noticing is enough to make the pain and anger go away.  It also interrupts the process before anger leads to something yet more upsetting.  It puts space between the match and the fuse.  In that space there is instead room to choose: how will I respond? What would be wise?  And I gently unhook his hand, and find a rubber band for my hair. 

In retrospect, it may seem obvious that this was the right course of action.  But the same process has helped me notice and work through larger and more complicated fears:  “Get active on climate?  I know it’s needed, but… What exactly will I have to do?  How much time will it take?  I’m already overextended.  Also, why me?  I don’t know enough to be of help!  And anyway how could I possibly succeed, if the government (the biggest player in the game) isn’t doing anything?” 

How do we get ourselves to overcome such resistance?  By learning to notice and name what is happening: finger pointing, catastrophizing.  Fear.  Naming this way opens up the possibility for something else to happen.  For in naming, we wake up the part of the brain that likes understand, investigate, inquire:  Why this fear?  What exactly am I afraid of? Overstretch.  Government inaction.  Climate change.   Do these things deserve further attention?  Yes.  When?  Urgently.  Who should address them?  Me.  Me?  (Here the arguing may resume):  But GOVERNMENT must do something!  But they’re not, the mindful mind gently reminds me.  But they must!  But they’re not.  They’re not.  And so therefore, I must.  In the face of this bare truth, fear loses its reign over me, and there is space instead to consider: What might I do?  What is already being done? Who might I work with?  And how can we avoid doing further harm in the process?  Freed from the grip of strong emotion it becomes possible and instinctive to reflect so.  In this way, mindfulness can enable us not only to act, but to do so deliberately, wisely. 

In sum, in my experience, the benefits of mindfulness are many and key:

1. As I just described, mindfulness gives practice with truth telling – in particular, acknowledging and accepting the unpleasant.  This speaks to the question, how are we to take climate action even though we fear that it will mean sacrifices we can’t handle?  The practice is to notice: fear, OK.  When we name and accept difficult feelings this way, we loosen their grip on us and can instead consider and choose: what would be a wise next step?  

2. Mindfulness also cultivates compassion: in learning to notice our own suffering (fear, grief), we get better at noticing others’.  As discussed earlier, when we do notice suffering (say, of earth and its most vulnerable inhabitants) this can be a powerful motivator to act on their behalf.  Additionally and vitally, developing the muscle of compassion can be an aid to climate action also insofar as it may help us to learn to work with others — those in the federal government, for example — who we’ve been seeing as part of the problem.  By recognizing our own suffering, we learn to recognize and accept it as human.  This opens up the possibility for seeing that our “foes” are feeling stuck in their own ways; that this is natural.  It can allow for the possibility of working together, or at the very least, getting free from our antagonism and putting that energy instead into serving the larger intention: climate action. 

3. Here, mindfulness is again key, for it is the practice of remembering one’s intentions.  This speaks to my question as to how we might keep focused on climate in the midst of many competing demands on our attention. We must tend to other needs (going to work, feeding ourselves) but keep climate action, too, as an urgent priority.

I love that mindfulness does all these things.  I’m amazed, frankly.  And, as it is a practice that one can do alone, anywhere, anytime, I see mindfulness as a complement to the kinds of support one finds at a conference, ethics class, religious prayer service or therapy session.  It provides support for when you’ve returned from these, all juiced for action, and find that the devil is in the details, and here you are stuck again.  It helps one find patience when progress is slower expected; helps one be patient, kind, and collaborative, when working with others to decide just what action everyone can agree to take together.  It is also a powerful tool for remaining active: working through the unpleasant, returning to intention and to action.

In learning about climate change people often ask, what can I do to help?  Given the above learnings, from my own and other disciplines, as to what we can do to motivate and sustain climate action, I’d like to suggest:

1. Find a trusted source and stay informed:  For me, 350.org has been a wonderful resource, not just for information but also action suggestions.  Many of these actions are quick and easy, but also key; in my experience, the organizers of 350.org are knowledgeable and thoughtful, and I trust it is worth my five minutes to act as they suggest.  And, as 350.org represents a worldwide community of people concerned about climate change, it’s very empowering and heartening to be involved with them: when the organizers encouraged their members to march on Washington last February and ask Obama to nix the Keystone XL pipeline, 40,000 people showed up.
2. Find a positive montra to keep you hopeful and put it somewhere prominent: “I don’t know if we will rise to the challenge of climate change, but I know we can” (Mark Hertzgaard).
3. Find out what your state and region need to do to adapt to climate change:  Here in New York, a report (called ClimAID) explains this well, region by region.  Find out whether your state has such information, and if not, ask for it to be studied.  Then get active in your city, your neighborhood, your own garden — in whatever ways you can best contribute.
4. Get active also at the most local level – internally:  Develop a spiritual practice. Do this to motivate and sustain you.  (As the philosopher panelist remarked, “I have known many activists, the only ones who did not burn out are the ones who had a practice of some kind”).  Do it also to guide you to act thoughtfully.  I have found mindfulness to be invaluable in both these ways.  If mindfulness is not for you, find another practice.  That is to say: develop touchstones to remind you what constitutes wise action: serving earth, but humans, too, and among them, the most vulnerable.  Such principles abound in religious tradition.  In secular traditions, too.  Permaculture, for example, a practice of sustainable design for landscapes, offers this montra: “Earth care, fair share, self care”, to make sure that each design meets a variety of equally important needs.  Such principles are key if we are to avoid doing each other yet more damage as we get to work, under stressful circumstances.
5. Find a community (or at least a few friends) to support your practice: It is very difficult to hold to our principles alone.  Religious or secular, we need others to help us keep our intentions. 

In sum, regular spiritual and communal support is key if, as we must, we are to act – quickly, sustainably and wisely.

]]> https://sustainabletompkins.org/sustainability-blog/how-to-get-active-on-climate-even-more-locally/feed/ 1 https://sustainabletompkins.org/sustainability-blog/fracking-what-are-we-for/ https://sustainabletompkins.org/sustainability-blog/fracking-what-are-we-for/#comments Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:50:57 +0000 http://sustainabletompkins.org/?p=4188  Fracking: We Know What We’re Against. What Are We FOR?
by Maura Stephens

As antifracktivists, we are often accused of being against fracking but not offering any alternatives to “natural” gas. That’s completely wrong. Our NO message is adamant and comprehensive, to be sure:

We say NO to fracking, you bet we do. We say NO to the heavy industrialization of bucolic and wild places. NO to poisoning our air, water, and our children’s health and future. NO to poisoning our croplands, and thus our food supply. NO to permanently withdrawing water from our precious rivers, aquifers, lakes, and streams — water that will never again return to the water-life cycle of the planet. NO to diminished (and in some cases completely negated) property values. NO to increased traffic, fumes, smog, and accidents. NO to dangerous pipelines running through our villages and countryside. NO to job promises that always — always — fall short. We say NO to toxins and fossil-fuel byproducts in our food, personal care products, and items we need for daily living. We say NO to the corporate-government collusion that is hastening catastrophic climate disruption and the kinds of weather calamities we are seeing all over the country, and the globe. We say NO to the corporate-government cabal that would force our communities to do their bidding to the detriment of our health, personal finances, and very way of life. And we say NO to municipal, state, and national elected officials who do not represent the best long-tern interests of the people and the natural world on which we all depend for survival.

But this does not mean we simply say NO. 

There are many things to which we say YES. Because we believe we can do better, as individuals, as neighbors, as communities, as a society, as a nation, as a species.

We say YES to government spending for energy conservation, creating jobs that will remain local. We say YES to community-based renewable energy options, which will create a whole new sector of learning and job opportunities. We say YES to rebuilding our crumbling infrastructures — another job-creating initiative. We say YES to transforming fossil-fuel-extracting and -producing and -delivering corporations into energy-conservation and renewable-energy-producing and -delivering models. We say YES to job-creating energy efficient transportation options for rural, suburban, and urban populations. We say YES to 90 MPG automobile fuel standards.

We say YES to organic farming without genetically deformed seeds (and outrageous use of hormones, antibiotics, and toxic pesticides and herbicides). We say YES to national and state agriculture policies that help rather than hurt family farms and discourage CAFOs (“consolidated animal feeding operations,” a gross misnomer), a.k.a. factory farms. We say YES to policies and practices that help farmers and other large landholders engage in sustainable forestry and woodlot management. We say YES to policies and programs that enable farmers and other large landowners to lease their land for wind farms, solar farms, and other renewable-energy operations to directly benefit their communities.

We say YES to cutting all use of fossil fuels in this country. If small countries like Germany, Sweden, and Denmark have already turned to solar, wind, and hydro power, why shouldn’t the “greatest country on earth” be able to do so?

We say YES to community-owned and -operated wind farms and solar farms. (We say NO to corporate-run wind and solar farms that simply add endless more energy to the current grid.) We say YES to removing fossil-fuel and nuclear energy at the same rate we add renewable energy.)

We say YES to government and community welcome of clean manufacturing in New York State and other states, restoring all those jobs exported by corporations to foreign countries back to U.S. workers.

We say YES to accelerated research and development of plant-based alternatives to the mountains of plastic and mining-based products we are now forced to employ against our wishes.

We say YES to representation by governing officials who truly care about our communities and the individuals within them, over a long term and without personal prejudice or conflict of interest.

We say YES to halting climate disruption by making the choices WE THE PEOPLE demand — we the informed, caring, forward-thinking people, not the selfish, greedy, or hoodwinked people who still believe that the corporate state might have their best interests at heart.

We say YES to healthy environments for our children, grandchildren, and future generations.

And as we work toward all these positive goals, we will continue to say NO FRACKING WAY with all our collective might.

Maura Stephens lives in Tioga County. She is a cofounder of Coalition to Protect New York, Frackbusters, RAFT (Residents Against Fracking Tioga) and SAVE S-VE (Spencer-Van Etten), among other groups. She was an early member of Sustainable Tompkins and is happy to now be working with the Sustainability Center in Ithaca.

http://www.coalitiontoprotectnewyork.org

http://www.frackbustersny.org

http://www.raft-ny.org

http://www.savesve.org

What is the Crisis?

My colleagues and I surveyed the faculty of Cornell University to identify how scientists from different disciplines thought about the most pressing crises facing humanity^[1]. Respondents brainstormed 116 diverse crises, sorted, and ranked them in terms of importance and solvability. We applied multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis to their answers to the simple question, “What is the crisis?”

“Climate change and its effect on ecosystems” was ranked #1 in importance whereas the crisis ranked most solvable was, “loss of civil liberties in the US under the guise of fighting terrorism”. The only crisis ranked in the top ten for both importance and solvability was “shortage of potable and clean water”. Interestingly, the most important and pressing problems on the list were also the least solvable and the most solvable were also the least important.

The Root Crisis

At the conclusion of the study, I found myself wondering: Is there a “meta-crisis” that lay at the root of all of these varied crises? Was there a single “root crisis”?

The field of research called “systems thinking” was born of a similar question. Problems are not divorced from the way we think about them. As a research scientist and systems theorist, I have  made both a passion and a career out of taking a machete to the tangled undergrowth of the often convoluted field of systems thinking. The best abridgment I have found comes from one of its early theorists, Gregory Bateson.

The major problems in the world are the result of the difference between how nature works and the way people think.

The term “systems thinking” gives us the clue that it is a crucial relationship between systems (the basic unit of how the natural world works) and thinking (the way we construct mental models of this world). Therefore, systems thinking must fundamentally be a cognitive-epistemological act to understand ontological-systems.

In over a decade of research, I asked the question, “What is Systems Thinking?”. I attempted to answer it in a simple, but not too simple kind of way (as Einstein advised).  At the time, systems thinking “experts” propagated the belief, through impregnated discourse, that systems thinking was far too pluralistic and complicated to be succinctly explained. Others suggested that, rather than a cognitive ability, it was a “practice” (or worse, a praxis?) comprised of long lists of methods, each one comprising tomes of convoluted readings that might take years or decades to master.  At the same time that systems thinking scholars were confusing us with a Tower of Babel, they were telling us that systems thinking was useful for everyone. They seemed to miss the irony of their contradiction: systems thinking needed to be everywhere and understood by everyone, but could not be easily captured, explained, or taught. I was convinced that the power of systems thinking was in its egalitarianism and I simply refused to believe that systems thinking was inherently impenetrable or difficult to understand. I wanted to get to the core of the distinction: what is systems thinking?  I didn’t want to merely describe the field. I wanted to understand the universal properties, the fundamental patterns and elemental structures of this imperative style of thinking.

The Systems Thinking Solution

Seeking that answer, in that way, changed my life in two ways. First, the increasing popularity of my research gave me many opportunities worldwide to tell people about the importance of systems thinking and its underlying structure.  The second way it changed my life is far more profound. It changed my thinking (and my thinking about thinking). To change one’s thinking in a transformative way is to strike at the root of the crisis.

The root crisis we face is a Crisis of Thinking.  In other words, the root of all 116 crises above and many more, is not only how we think about an existing crisis itself but also how our individual and/or collective thinking, over time, actually creates the crisis in the first place.

Einstein said, “without changing our patterns of thought we will not be able to solve the problems we created with our current pattern of thought.” The 116 crises identified are important but we must think more deeply about the thinking (or lack of it) that leads to these crises in the first place and perpetuates their existence later on. Solutions will likely come from the creativity, innovation, and invention(s) of individual systems thinkers but more importantly without support and understanding from a populace of systems thinkers, available solutions will not be recognized as such and therefore will not be implemented. This is why we must reject a “lazy” definition of systems thinking that cannot be understood or is impenetrable. Systems thinking must not be allowed to remain a rarefied construct available only to the scholarly class, it must be an idea that is accessible to the masses. Without both individual systems-thinking problem solvers and the support of a collective systems-thinking populace, the Crisis of Thinking will persist and the many subsequent crises will fester.

Systems thinking can be understood by everyone. In fact, the same four universal patterns of systems thinking that I taught to graduate students at Cornell are now taught around the country and the world to preschoolers and PhDs alike and are used by teachers, parents, students, CEOs, and organizations as well as scientists, inventors, and leaders of all stripes. The four  interconnected patterns of systems thinking are called, DSRP, an acronym for Distinctions, Systems, Relationships, and Perspectives. Systems thinking is cognitive pattern and the metacognitive awareness of the following four processes:

DISTINCTIONS: How we draw or define the boundaries of a system is an essential aspect of understanding it. Whenever we draw a boundary to define a system’s identity, that same boundary defines what is not the system. Any boundary we make is a distinction between two fundamentally important elements: the identity of the system, and the other stuff that is not the system.

SYSTEMS: Any collection of things (objects, organisms, ideas, processes, people, organizations, processes, etc) can be thought of as a system. It is important to understand that “any thing” can be thought of as a system–any object or idea. If we think of what it takes to make any system, we can reduce it to two simple elements: the relationship among parts and whole.

RELATIONSHIPS: The relationships amongst the parts of systems are part and parcel of understanding systems. Indeed, we cannot understand much about any thing without understanding how that thing relates to other things. As we explore relationships we will find that there are many types: causal, correlate, feedback, inputs/outputs, influence, direct/indirect, etc. Fundamentally speaking, whether we seek to analyze a single relationship between two things or many relationships amongst many things, we must consider two underlying elements: action and reaction, or the co-relating effects of two or more things.

PERSPECTIVES: When we draw the boundaries of a system, or distinguish one relationship from another, we are doing so from a particular perspective. Sometimes these perspectives are so basic and so unconscious we don’t even see them, but they are always there. If we think about perspectives in a fundamental way, we can see that they are made up of two related elements: a point (the subjective viewer) and a view (the thing or things the subject is viewing). That’s why perspectives are synonymous with a “point-of-view”.

D, S, R, P  vs. DSRP: You might think of these four “universal patterns” as a useful list of four things to keep in mind to help you be more aware of how we think and build knowledge. But, they are not merely a list of four things. Each pattern relates with the others to create a dynamic set of interactions that are akin to the game of chess. Even though the underlying rules are very simple, the complexity that can result is immense. For example, a perspective is something that must be distinguished in order to be understood and it can be made up of numerous parts that form the whole and each of these parts can be related. Likewise, a distinction, because it is a relationship between an identity and an other, is itself a system of parts. A relationship might seem merely like a connecting line between two things, but it may also be a complicated system made up of many parts that could be understood from numerous perspectives. These four patterns of systems thinking and their two elements and interactions are given by the equation below which states that Knowledge (K) which can be thought of as any mental model is the complex product of Information (I, or all forms of sensory data) and (T, or DSRP). The various other symbols simply spell out the interactions that are possible between the patterns, their elements, and the information:

Why Application Must Be in Schools & Organizations?

The application of the theoretical structures of systems thinking must be two-fold. First, it must be educational. Charles Darwin wrote in his journals that those who understood the gravity of his ideas should, “pay great attention to Education”. This may be the most profound statement ever made about education, made by the most profound thinker in human history. The primacy of education to civilization is not mere hyperbole. Education drives civilization upward, or downward. Second, our application of systems thinking must be organizational. Why? Because the fundamental reason we create organizations is because the work that needs to get done cannot get done by us alone. We humans have always banded together to survive and organizations of all kinds (broadly defined as families, teams, book clubs, formal and informal groups, corporations, nonprofits, NGOs, government, nations, etc) are the basic unit of social society. My theoretical work in systems thinking has manifested in two ways in practice. Both practical applications are founded on the simple idea that systems thinking should be democratized, accessible, and useful to any person. The diagram below clarifies the two most important practical applications of systems thinking using a diagramming technique for systems thinking that I developed called DSRP Diagrams.

What the diagram says is that Systems Thinking is made up of four universal and interconnected patterns of thinking called, DSRP which structures any kind of information. At the individual-psychological level, systems thinking (aka, “DSRP”) is the engine that drives individual learning and is therefore the basis for all educational activities which in turn builds a generation of systems thinkers for a sustainable society. At the organizational-sociological level, DSRP drives organizational learning which is the basis for a systems-based organizational model called VMS² (the ²stands for systems thinking/DSRP). In turn, organizations are the basic unit of a sustainable society. The relationship between these two practices is learning but in two forms, individual and organizational learning. Systems thinking drives both types of learning.

The diagram above simplifies the theoretical structures. A slightly more complex diagram (below) utilizes more sophisticated equations to describe these relationships. That’s more than this short article is intended to relay, but I add it here to show that even though the ideas are quite simple, they are also capable of great precision and insight if one takes some time to learn about them. Remember, we are teaching preschoolers the same systems thinking skills that can be scaled for scientists and organizational leaders.

One Vision

The root crisis is a Crisis of Thinking. Systems thinking provides us with a solution to this problem. Schools and organizations play a pivotal role in creating a sustainable society of systems thinkers as does a clear, egalitarian, curriculum for systems thinking. Eight years ago, I founded an organization that would spawn a movement. Our audacious vision is: 7 Billion Thinkers. I’m pleased to report that we are making great strides and seeing the positive impacts in schools, organizations and society. But then again, 7 Billion is a big number. Will you be one of them?

*********

Derek Cabrera, an author and internationally recognized expert in systems thinking and metacognition, lives in Ithaca, New York.

********

Further resources:

1. Facebook site for 7 Billion thinkers movement: https://www.facebook.com/iDSRP
2. Website for movement to get thinking in schools: http://www.iDSRP.org
3. Website for movement to get thinking in organizations: http://www.iVMCL.org
4. Cabrera, D., How Thinking Works. TEDx Talk 2011
5. Cabrera, D., & Colosi, L. – Thinking at Every Desk. W.W. Norton, 2012.
6. Cabrera, D., & Colosi, L. – “The World At Our Fingertips: The Sense of Touch Helps Children to Ground Abstract Ideas in Concrete Experiences.” Scientific American Mind Volume 21, No. 4, September/October 2010, p36-41.
7. Cabrera, D. – Systems Thinking: Four Universal Patterns of Thinking. VDM, October 2009.
8. Cabrera, D., & Colosi, L. – Thinking at Every Desk. The Research Institute for Thinking in Education, 2009.
9. Cabrera, D., & Colosi, L. – “The Library is the Place: Knowledge and Thinking, Thinking and Knowledge.” Teacher Librarian 36, no. 5 June, 2009.
10. Cabrera, D., & Colosi, L. – “Distinctions, Systems, Relationships, and Perspectives (DSRP): A Theory of Thinking and of Things.” Journal of Evaluation Program Planning 31, no. 3 (2008): 311-17.
11. Cabrera, D., Colosi, L., & Lobdell, C. – “Systems Thinking.” Journal of Evaluation and Program Planning 31, no. 3 (2008): 299-310. (Special issue dedicated to DSRP theory of systems thinking and discussion among nine top systems scientists.)
12. Cabrera, D., Mandel, J., Andras, J., & Nydam, M. – “What is the Crisis? Defining and Prioritizing the World’s Most Pressing Problems.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6, no. 9 (2008): 469-75.
13. Cabrera, D., et al., – “Systems Thinking: The Potential to Revolutionize Tobacco Control.” Monograph 20: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007.
14. Cabrera, D., et al., – “How We Organize: Purposeful Adaptive Organizations.” Monograph 20: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007.

If you sit by and wait for others to stop the industrialization of New York State, we’ve already lost.

by Maura Stephens
17 August, 2012

A recent thread on a sustainability list-serve ended with the words: “Gratitude to those in direct actions to keep attention on fracking issues.”

I think it’s safe to speak for antifracktivists collectively when I say they don’t want to be thanked.

Don’t thank them. Join them. It’s not enough to do the positive work of protecting our environment, creating a strong local economy, and building a better society. Because those efforts are all endangered by fracking.

In places like Tompkins County, where many individuals and organizations are engaged in extraordinary projects and enterprises for the long-term common good, perhaps people have been too busy to have noticed just how quickly we are about to lose much of what we love. And that’s understandable. The work so many of us are engaged in to positively affect change, from our basements’ insulation to national policy, is hard, often frustrating, and time consuming. Besides, mainstream media is little more than corporate flak, and if we’re too busy to pay close attention, we could easily buy into the line that “natural” gas is “safe, clean, and good for the economy.”

The fossil-fuel industry and the politicians in its pocket recognize this and have counted on our being too engaged elsewhere — whether we’re just Joe Shmos desperately trying to keep a roof over our heads and food in our bellies or we’re actively engaged sustainability advocates and teachers — to fight back.

But make no mistake: This industry is an insidious, soulless, stealthy and fast-moving enemy who cares nothing for our well being or longevity.

Mad Scramble

This multitrillion-dollar-corporate invasion is coming at us so quickly it’s impossible to keep up, let alone keep a step ahead. The fracking companies have been laying the groundwork for this industrial onslaught for many years, but only recently has the public become aware of their plans.

In the Marcellus shale region — Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, and much of New York including Tompkins County — the geology and geography are different from other shale regions such as the Barnett in Texas. So Pennsylvania was taken unawares. We in New York have the advantage of having observed what is going on in our neighboring state to the south. We have been fortunate here to have abundant fresh water (one of the reasons, in fact, I chose to live here).

But people have been waking up, and they’re from a wide variety of backgrounds, experience, and personal philosophies (and political persuasions). In the last three or four years, longtime conservationists, environmentalists, economic justice advocates, and democracy-builders have taken their activism to a new level as they have added antifracktivism to their “prosustainability-ism.” And newcomers to these issues, terrified by the scientific and social evidence about fracking’s harms, have become activists for the first time in their lives.

The mix of experience and perspective makes for interesting and challenging work. But there still are not enough dedicated sustainability-minded people engaged in the fight to keep fracking from destroying everything we work so hard to accomplish.

I believe we must all be antifracktivists.

We cannot survive with all the things we cherish about living in this beautiful state unless everyone “takes direct actions on fracking issues.” If more people don’t engage to resist this one overarching threat, all the terrific sustainability work — permaculture, conservation, forest foraging, recycling, reducing impact, walking, biking, building solar heaters, installing geothermal systems, efficient mass transportation, starting community wind farms, community agriculture, organic farming, reclaiming and reusing fabric and building supplies, maple sugaring, vineyard tending, orchard planting, green building, guaranteeing a living wage, you name it — will be for naught.

If people in all these movements would devote just a quarter of the time they now spend on sustainability and related issues to fighting fracking, I am convinced we will beat this juggernaut.

Many in the antifracking fight have spent the last several years disengaged from the positive and joyful work of gardening, embracing community, making art and building sustainable, conservation-oriented systems. Instead, we have been studying fracking from all angles.

This heavy industry touches every aspect of our lives: the water and air we need to survive; the croplands that feed us; the finances that sustain us (jobs or lack thereof, community taxes and wealth, property values, housing affordability, liabilities); our physical health and longevity; the governing systems that remove decision making from the informed public and grant them to rich and powerful corporations, the politicians in their pockets and the hoodwinked whose information comes from those very untrustworthy corporations and politicians; our relationships with our neighbors; the way of life we have chosen; and, of course, our mental and emotional health — often already precarious from stress, terror, sleeplessness and, in the case of many who leased their lands before realizing the dangers, guilt and remorse.

Millions of us recognize that this industry will destroy most of the things we need to live fulfilling lives, while it contributes massive amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, further hastening catastrophic global climate disruption.

Nowhere to Hide

Finger Lakes and Hudson Valley residents should not think they’re going to escape the harms of fracking. We all know that water and air pollution know no political boundaries, and the destruction of a few bodies of water can have far-reaching detrimental effects. Besides, should fracking begin anywhere in New York State, the door is open. Industry will stop at nothing to get every molecule of methane in the Marcellus and Utica shales.

If the precedent is set and fracking begins in the Southern Tier counties, it is only a matter of time before it moves into Tompkins and the rest of the shale regions.

Our nearby town of Reading, on the southwestern corner of the biggest (by volume) Finger Lake, Seneca, is poised to allow Missouri-based Inergy, Inc., to store liquid petroleum gas and liquid “natural” gas in an empty salt mine. There are more than 60 such empty salt mines around Seneca Lake, and several hundred around Cayuga and the other Finger Lakes.

One would have to be dangerously naïve to not realize the first such cavern storage that’s permitted will lead to scores more — with the compressor stations, noise, fumes, and transportation snarls (and likely eventually some refineries) that go along with such “storage facilities.”

Tompkins County residents have witnessed and documented “spills” from frack-waste trucks coming north from Pennsylvania, and we’re seeing increasing numbers of refugees from Ohio and Pennsylvania moving to New York in hopes of finding a more sensible policy toward fracking.

And this is much more than a regional problem. The industrial raping (word chosen deliberately) of lands for fracking and for distribution of the methane that will be shipped abroad (it is not intended for domestic consumption but will go to the highest bidders, primarily China, Japan, and India in the short term) is going on all over the country now — in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. (Alaska and Hawaii were already being mined heavily for oil and gas, but as far as I know that’s conventional drilling, not fracking.)

Where fracking isn’t happening, pipelines are or will likely be going in. The ports of northern California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington, as well as Gulf of Mexico states, are becoming or likely to become home to new export facilities, which means more pipelines crisscrossing the entire country — and more accidents. And peripheral industries are popping up. Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are being mined for sand to be used in fracking; this causes tremendous air congestion and health problems from cancer-causing silica dust, as well as the truck diesel fumes.

We can’t all move to Maine or one of the few other states that is not being fracked or under threat of fracking. Nor can we all go camp out in a state or national forest, either; many of them have been opened up to fracking.

In times past, many of us thought that if things got too bad in this country, we might escape to Canada. But Canada, under ultraconservative prime minister Stephen Harper (whose idol is George W. Bush), has become a vast environmental dump as well, pushing a fully fossil-fuel economy and weakening environmental protections that were once considered excellent but are now a joke.

Not that anyone is laughing . . . except for the fossil fuel executives and the politicians in their pockets.

Besides Canada, there may have been some other places you thought you’d end up someday. But if you want to avoid fracking or coal-seam gas mining, it will be pretty tough.

Shale-gas countries currently being fracked or threatened include Ireland, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Australia, New Zealand, Algeria, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria (where there’s a fragile ban), Chile, China, Colombia, Denmark, France (where there’s a more solid ban), Germany, India, Libya, Lithuania, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Paraguay, Poland, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, Tasmania, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela and Western Sahara. There are probably others I haven’t yet heard about.

What To Do?

The options are not too many:

1. You could check into France’s immigration policy toward people from the USA.
2. You could resign yourself to the inevitability of fracking everywhere you love, and try to learn to live with 24/7 traffic, noise, light, clogged roads, smoggy air, higher crime rates, lower property values, expensive water brought in from who knows where, and a greatly diminished quality of life—at best.
3. Or you can get involved in the antifracking fight. It’s not quite too late. If everyone reading this who has not previously been involved in fighting fracking gets and remains engaged until fracking is outlawed in New York State — we may yet have a sustainable future. As an added bonus, many of the people you’ll meet in this movement will restore or reinforce your faith in humanity and its future. And meeting you will do them wonders, too.

Whatever you do, please don’t thank an antifracktivist unless you’re prepared to join in the effort.

Write info@coalitiontoprotectnewyork.org to be put in touch with the antifracking group in your area. Please do it now. We need your renewing, renewable energy to be part of the fight for our shared positive future.

Lifelong sustainability advocate Maura Stephens lives in Spencer. She was an active early member of Sustainable Tompkins but has been sidetracked these last several years by fighting fracking. She is a cofounder of Coalition to Protect New York, FrackBustersNY, RAFT (Residents Against Fracking Tioga) and SAVE S-VE (Spencer-Van Etten). She has spent the last several years researching, writing, rewriting and rewriting a book titled Frack Attack: Fighting Back.