Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Veganism: Summation
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Day 9 of Veganism
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Day 8 of Veganism
Monday, December 7, 2009
Day 7 of Veganism
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Day 6 of Veganism
Friday, December 4, 2009
Day 4 of Veganism
Last night, after my last post, I went to dinner at Kona Bistro. I used to work in the kitchen there, so I knew exactly what I was going to order: the adobo tofu salad.
For $9.50, I was much more appreciative of this delicious dish that I used to make for myself (with chicken) several times a week.
In addition to sautéed tofu, the salad is topped with black beans, roasted corn, sundried tomatoes, red onion, scallions, shredded Monterrey jack (which I begrudgingly declined), croutons, and spicy avocado dressing.
Without meat, my appetite has declined. Not in a drastic, leading-to-intervention type of way, just enough that I can eat a large salad for dinner and be content.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Day 3 of Veganism
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Day 2 of Veganism
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Veganism Realized
Miami likes to be green, when it's convenient
Miami received a C+ award for its sustainability initiatives last month, the same grade they received last year. The university’s sustainability task force has essentially accomplished nothing in the past year. That might seem a bit harsh, but it becomes clear when you look into where the focus has been.
First off, with the exact same grade, you can’t really make a case that the university has done anything to improve their green initiatives. Even if they did small things to make the campus more green, this has been akin to rearranging deck chairs rather than actually making a net contribution to environmental sustainability.
The university got A’s in categories such as recycling, in other words, the stuff that is easy. This summer, I went to the Lollapalooza music festival in Chicago’s Grant Park. There were swarms of people rushing to pick up beer cans so that they could exchange filled trash bags for t-shirts. Getting people to recycle is easy and cheap, and it gets things off the ground so that the campus at least looks cleaner.
But the last I checked, the failure to recycle cans and bottles is not being cited by anyone as the root cause of rising global temperatures. Recycling is great, but in this situation it’s really serving as nothing more than a veneer for the university to avoid going after what really matters: carbon emissions.
Last spring, a student proposed that the university purchase a biodiesel converter so that cooking oil could from dining halls could be used to create fuel for the buses or even potentially sold. I don’t remember the exact price, but the converter was going to cost something in the $20,000 range, and the money saved by not having to buy fuel would eventually pay off the investment.
Call me crazy, but is $20,000 such a huge expense for the university that they need to know in advance how it will be reciprocated? Aren’t we building new facilities that are estimated to cost millions? Even if it was going to take 20 years for the money saved on fuel to show a return on the converter investment, couldn’t the university absorb a loss here for the sake of doing something good for the environment?
Well as it turns out, the university did need assurance that they would be saving money in the long run, and the plan fell through because it was unclear when the money saving would begin. The initial estimates of how much biodiesel could be produced turned out to be wrong, so it was going to take longer than expected for the alternative fuel to offset the price of the converter.
The university received low grades in categories such as transportation and administration. I would reckon that these grades were well deserved. They won’t even spend as much on alternative energy as they do on a single athletic scholarship.
When I reported on this, the plan was not off the table and university officials said they were still discussing the possibility of buying the converter to make biodiesel for maintenance vehicles rather than the buses. I don’t mean to criticize the university too much because it is clear that alternative energy remains an interest and this proposal could still go through with some tweaking.
However, it remains to be seen when alternative energy will actually become a priority (i.e. enough to spend $20,000). It would be lovely if every green initiative saved the university (not to mention the rest of us) money as soon as it was implemented. If sustainability is a priority, the university shouldn’t act so indignant about their responsibility to invest.
Sure, this proposal would have cost the university money, probably even more than current or past estimates. The point is that the university should be prepared to lose money in order to accomplish their own stated goals, especially when that expenses are so comparatively meager.