IRIS has plenty of volunteer opportunities this fall! Check out our 
brochure of Student Opportunities to find out more.
News
Announcing the SM4RT LIVING Plan!
"SM4RT LIVING is about making changes for our future"
The Regional Municipality of York has launched the SM4RT LIVING Plan, an Integrated Waste Management Master Plan that will guide waste management in York Region for the next 25 years.
The SM4RT LIVING Plan has another vital purpose: to explore a new way of living in the future that ensures that both people and our natural habitats thrive. This plan will focus on the need for lifestyle changes around the way we buy goods and materials, how we generate and dispose of waste and will encourage us to think and act in sustainable ways. This plan will also uncover how the transition from “Where We Are” to SM4RT LIVING will provide new economic, social, and environmental possibilities and opportunities for York Region.
The development of the SM4RT LIVING Plan will run until December 2012
There are a number of ways for you to be involved in the development of this ground breaking plan, which include:
- Visiting the SM4RT LIVING website www.SM4RTLIVING.ca and providing your ideas and comments
- Visiting the SM4RT LIVING booth at the many community events, festivals, sporting events and malls where someone will always be in attendance (full listing of events is on the website)
- Attending sessions to generate ideas, set the vision, and/or develop the strategy
The success of the project depends on participation from everyone in York Region, including families, students and business owners. Be a part of the development of the SM4RT LIVING Plan; an initiative that will ensure a more sustainable future for York Region residents.
If you would like to be involved, please contact SM4RTLIVING@york.ca or 1-855-692-4066. For more information, please visit the website www.SM4RTLIVING.ca
Welcome to IRIS’ new Director for 2011-12, Prof. Stepan Wood: Dawn’s last post as Director
In the first six months of 2011, the time absolutely whizzed by. In fact, in the 5 years, since I took on the assignment of being Director of IRIS, time has accelerated ever more rapidly. I began my third 12-month sabbatical on July 1st 2011 - they happen every 7 years - but it was not until the end of July that I have finally cleared off the last of several administrative obligations. When I tell friends and family that I am on sabbatical, they generally look on with envy and quite a few sarcastic comments. This is not surprising, because not many careers have the built in idea of a sabbatical. BUT, just to give an idea of how hectic my life was in June, just before the sabbatical began: I squeezed in field work in Iceland and business meetings in Oxford University during a 10-day family vacation to see aged relatives! Here's some shots of grass collecting in Iceland!
I am very excited about two things for this sabbatical:
1. Getting up and working a nice 10-15 hour day in which I work on my own top priority projects, rather than having to prioritize the administrative tasks required to support other people.
2. Getting to be a student again, and learning a lot of new stuff.
During my last sabbatical in 2004-05, I wrote an article for University Affairs about being a harassed, overworked working parent of young children and trying to have a successful sabbatical. On rereading it, I found that my advice to readers, was actually helpful to me six years on!
I started planning for my current sabbatical two years ago. I will be spending 6 months at Harvard Forest on a Charles Bullard Fellowship finishing a book that I started writing 10 years ago. After that, I will be going back to the Zoology Department in Oxford University, where I did my doctorate. I will be a Visiting Scholar in the group of Prof. Kathy Willis, at the Long-Term Ecology Lab., where I will write another book. But before this blog reader goes all misty-eyed, yes, that IS Oxford's picturesque Radcliffe Camera, with my daughters standing infront, a few weeks ago, but to right, is a shot of the very 70's concrete Zoology building. Squeezed in between my time at Harvard and Oxford, I will be attending conferences and workshops, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science 2012 AGM, where the symposium that I proposed and am organizing with former York U student, Dr. Andrew Tanentzap, "Making Progress on Wicked Problems Through Interdisciplinary Collaborations" was successful in the peer-reviewed adjudication competition!
This sabbatical will be quite different from my previous one, when I did three separate one month trips to Sweden, and hung out in the basement at the Massey College Library at the University of Toronto, for the rest of the time. Together, with the Librarian, P J MacDougall, I wrote a cool article for Trellis, the Toronto Botanical Garden newsletter, about the Victorian gardening writer, James Shirley Hibberd, "A Victorian Google".
During the next year, IRIS will be very ably led by Prof. Stepan Wood of Osgoode Hall Law School, whom I am delighted to welcome back from a very successful Sabbatical Year in Italy. I hope that he will find time to blog, but he will probably find himself in the same mega-time-crunch boat that I did. On the other hand, I hope to be blogging more in the next year about my travels, and posting in the regular blog part of IRIS. The work that I will be doing, relates to sustainability, and specifically, habitat conservation and restoration, as well as to oil and gas and energy security.
I wish Stepan and the IRIS community, the very best for a productive year, and I hope to see some of you in Harvard and Oxford.
Dawn Bazely
Local community Good Food Market Opens!
The following is from the Wednesday July 13, 2011 edition of YFile
Healthy, affordable and culturally diverse food is on the menu at the Shoreham Food Market opening Thursday, July 14 and serving the York University and Black Creek communities.
The market will operate at the Shoreham Public School, 31 Shoreham Dr. in North York, every Thursday until Oct. 28, from 3 to 7pm.
In addition to food, there will be local vendors selling everything from jewelry to clothing, as well as activities for children and health nutrition education. There are plenty of opportunities for more vendors, so anyone who is interested in selling goods at the market should contact Kidist at yorkcec@yorku.ca.
The York University-TD Community Engagement Centre is one of the organizers of the market and this is one of its many outreach initiatives.
“Accessing fresh, healthy, low-cost food can be a challenge for residents in the Jane-Finch area. This market initiative is a collaboration that brings a new asset into the neighbourhood to help address that challenge,” says Sue Levesque, executive director of the York University-TD Community Engagement Centre. “It also provides a venue for people from York and from the local area to mingle – all kinds of interesting outcomes stem from the dozens of casual conversations that start up between people shopping at the market. Come join us.”
Whenever possible, the food is brought in from local sources through FoodShare from the farmers who grow it. Each week, the proceeds from the fresh food are used to buy food for sale the following week, while local vendors keep their own proceeds.
York University students, faculty and staff, local community residents, community agencies and City of Toronto Councillor Anthony Peruzza's office, who are involved with the Black Creek Food Justice Action Network, all have a hand in making the market a reality.
The Good Food Market was established to bring healthy, affordable and culturally appropriate food within walking distance of the University and Black Creek communities.
To learn more, visit the FoodShare website.
Professor Dawn Bazely Awarded a Charles Bullard Fellowship by Harvard University
IRIS Core Faculty Member Awarded Molson Prize
The following is from the Wednesday, June 22, 2011 edition of the YFile
York environmental studies Professor Peter Victor has been named the recipient of this year’s prestigious Canada Council Molson Prize in the social sciences for outstanding lifetime achievement.
Victor, a renowned research professor in York University’s Faculty of Environmental Studies, is being recognized for his trailblazing research which has led to the emergence of a new discipline named ecological economics. The $50,000 Molson Prize is presented by the Canada Council for the Arts in collaboration with the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council.
Two awards are bestowed upon Canadian scholars annually to honour their lifetime achievements and ongoing contributions to Canada’s cultural and intellectual life. Prizes are awarded in the social sciences and humanities category, or in the arts, with one prize offered in each category.
“A distinguished environmental economist, Peter is a most commendable choice for the Molson Prize,” said Stan Shapson, York’s vice-president research & innovation. “Peter has earned international recognition for his important contribution to the field of environmental studies and his commitment to research excellence. His recent book – Managing Without Growth – has received international attention. His work is a prime example of the leadership York University’s research-intensive faculty members continue to provide in order to advance knowledge and develop solutions to the many challenges we face in our everyday lives.”
A top expert in his field, Victor has examined environmental issues as an academic, consultant and public servant for more than four decades. His pioneering research explores the many ways in which the economy is embedded in and dependent on the environment.
“Professor Victor has demonstrated that we, as a society, can explore novel approaches to managing without economic growth while sustaining our environment and improving our lives,” said Barbara Rahder, dean of York's Faculty of Environmental Studies. “His groundbreaking research can have a far-reaching impact on how people all over the world can develop healthy communities for generations to come.”
Victor has written Managing Without Growth: Slower by Design, not Disaster, among several other publications. His extensive portfolio currently includes serving as a member of the advisory committee on the National Accounts for Statistics Canada, the academic advisory panel of TruCost, the board of the David Suzuki Foundation, the board of the New Economics Institute, and the editorial advisory boards of several academic journals. He was also recently appointed chair of the Greenbelt Council of Ontario (see YFile, June 2).
Sustainability Job Growth Only Tied to Other Pertinent Skills
The following appeared on the San Tan Valley Today website Wednesday June 15th 2011
June 15, 2011 — Many people think the next big job boom will happen in the area of sustainability. Research from the W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University shows a huge percentage of employers are already giving positive weight to job candidates with sustainability skills. However, the same research indicates these job applicants also need professional training in existing fields, to push them over the top in the hiring process.
“Right now, sustainability jobs in business are linked to existing organizational structures,” says W. P. Carey School of Business Professor Kevin Dooley, who authored the research. “You’re probably not going to find a sustainability department in many companies, but employees with skills and interest in sustainability will get assigned to related projects and move up the ladder. Job candidates with both sustainability skills and a solid professional background in a field like business or engineering are receiving job offers that far exceed what’s warranted in the current market, and that’s because there aren’t many of them.”
Dooley analyzed about 100 job postings related to sustainability, interviewed several corporate sustainability managers, and surveyed about 200 managers and executives from small, medium and large companies. Across the board, companies valued sustainability training. In the surveys, 65 percent of small-company respondents said they would consider a sustainability concentration when making a hiring decision, 87 percent of the large-firm respondents agreed, and a whopping 97.5 percent of the large-firm executives, in particular, said they would value the concentration.
The survey participants also said certain sustainability-related topics should be taught to all managers and executives. These areas include corporate social responsibility, sustainability strategy, measuring sustainability, sustainability-related product and process improvement, and environmental and health policy and business.
“There is an indication that companies are beginning to hire executives in sustainability-related positions, and it won’t be too long before these executives fill out their staffs with lower-level positions,” says Dooley, who is also academic director of The Sustainability Consortium, a group working to drive innovation to improve consumer-product sustainability. “Also, more ‘green’ companies and non-governmental organizations are emerging, and they need all types of professionals in management, marketing, accounting, purchasing and other fields, who also have knowledge of sustainability.”
Dooley says job applicants who receive “golden opportunities” are those with dual degrees in sustainability and another professional field, or those with an undergraduate degree in one area and a graduate degree in the other.
“Sustainability is solutions-focused,” explains Christopher Boone, associate dean for education and professor in ASU’s School of Sustainability. “Our students want to tackle real-world problems, and we want our students to demonstrate to future employers why a sustainability approach adds value to organizations. As such, students in the School of Sustainability are required to have a meaningful internship or participate in a client-driven workshop. As our alumni network grows and sustainability becomes mainstream, I see fantastic opportunities for students with a sustainability education.”
Is nuclear power necessary for a carbon-free future?
The recent devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan have confirmed the worst fears of nuclear power critics. Governments everywhere are re-evaluating their nuclear plans. But are fears of nukes misplaced? Chris Goodall and Jose Etcheverry are both environmentalists – but stand divided on the nuclear debate.
Every issue we invite two experts to debate a hot button issue in The Argument, and then invite you to join the conversation online - we’ll read all your comments and select the best to print next issue. (We’d prefer you to use your real name, but would love to hear what our readers have to say either way.) If you can’t comment, then you can simply vote in our poll, which you’ll find partway down the debate.
Looking for a previous Argument? See the full list of debates.
Chris
I am looking at a website that tells me how much electricity is coming from various sources around Britain. After a decade of financial incentives, wind turbines are currently producing about two per cent of our electricity. Excluding a small amount of hydro, all our electricity is coming from fossil fuels and nuclear. Britain’s 10 nuclear power stations are now producing 10 times as much energy as comes from 3,000 turbines.
I would love it if we powered our entire economy from renewables but I see no political will to achieve this aim. We would need to invest billions now in renewable technologies. Without nuclear, reducing carbon emissions at high speed is impossible. We might end up keeping old coal power stations open for the next 30 years.
People say that we simply need to work harder to persuade a largely indifferent public to accept huge numbers of turbines and to invest billions in other renewable technologies. Such idealism is irresponsible: if we truly believe that climate change is the greatest threat the world has ever faced, we cannot risk failing to achieve the growth in low-carbon energy sources. However much we may regret this, nuclear is the only technology capable of delivering large amounts of power within the next decade. We in the environmental movement have failed to get the UK to invest in renewables and we now have no alternative but to welcome nuclear power.
Jose
Nuclear plants need to be phased out because they are dangerous, toxic and impede the adoption of the three key options needed to build a carbon-free energy future: conservation, efficiency and renewable energy. Conservation and efficiency (i.e. doing more with less) represent two of the three most profitable opportunities to create new jobs and address climate change. To visualize the potential: Canada and the US use electricity at embarrassingly greater per capita rates compared to leading industrialized nations like Denmark and Germany.
Those two nations have not only minimized the way their citizens use power, they’re also constantly innovating efficient design and they’ve become world leaders in the development of renewable energy sources.
Their success is based on developing pragmatic renewable-energy policies, such as feed-in tariffs, which quickly enable entrepreneurs to innovate in vibrant markets that guarantee easy interconnection, fair long-term prices for all types of renewable energy and investment stability.
Germany’s renewable-energy policies in the last 10 years have become the most important climate-mitigation strategy in Europe and are a strong engine of industrial innovation and employment creation.
Germans and Danes have understood that nuclear plants cannot complement renewable- energy sources, as they cannot be turned on or off easily. Furthermore, they also understand that building nukes forces you to sell vast amounts of electricity, which acts as a clear contradiction to efforts at conservation and efficiency.
These lessons are starting to be understood by 148 other nations that have formed the International Renewable Energy Agency to develop rapidly a new paradigm of energy security and climate protection.
Chris
If we believe that climate change is the world’s greatest threat, we cannot risk failing to achieve the growth in low-carbon energy sources. Nuclear is the only technology capable of delivering large amounts of power within the next decade
Almost all of us welcome the rapid growth in renewables but even in Germany only 17 per cent of electricity comes from these sources. The key question is whether renewables have any prospect of growing fast enough to replace fossil fuel sources completely. In the UK and almost everywhere else, I don’t think anybody pretends that low-carbon sources are increasing at anywhere close to a fast enough rate. That is why nuclear is vital – not because we don’t want renewables.
The second illusion is to believe that energy-efficiency measures can significantly reduce demand for electricity. All independent sources predict a rise in electricity use because of home heating and the need to switch to electric vehicles. Conservation efforts are barely denting the demand for power. Environmentalists can bemoan the lack of interest in efficiency. But we need to deal with the world as it is, not how we want it to be. We may not like today’s consumerist, high-energy use lifestyles but we cannot change the world’s priorities overnight. Nuclear power is necessary to meet people’s demands for electricity.
Jose
I’d like to set the record straight on nukes:
- Nukes are toxic and pose great dangers to present and future generations (Fukushima is now a level 7 catastrophe, the same as Chernobyl).
- Nukes take at least a decade to build and are highly context-dependent design projects (i.e. a nuke design from Canada cannot be cut and pasted in seismically active places without major design modifications, which by definition involve higher costs, longer timelines, and trial/error experimentation).
- Nukes are not cheap and uranium is a finite, non-renewable toxic mineral.
- Nukes can easily be diverted for atomic weapons – one reason the technology has ‘strong’ fans.
Renewable sources on the other hand:
- Are much safer, have vastly smaller ecological footprints, and represent strategic assets for current and future generations.
- Most renewable energy systems are manufactured today in assembly lines and can therefore be deployed and implemented very quickly anywhere suitable.
- Most renewable energy systems benefit from economies of scale; therefore the more money we invest in them the cheaper they become. Plus they use fuels that are plentiful and cheap (e.g. sun and wind) or can be locally produced at stable prices (e.g. biogas/biofuels).
- Renewables can promote local resilience and energy autonomy, so diffusing sources of conflict instead of becoming weapons.
Chris
Carry on regardless: China is pushing ahead with its nuclear power programme, with 13 reactors in operation and 35 more, including this one in southeast Fujian province, under construction. Zhang bin fj / AP / Press Association Images
Fukushima is a horrible disaster but we can reasonably expect that no-one will die as a result of the radiation leaks. Yes, nuclear power is very expensive but so are all low-carbon technologies. Most studies show nuclear costing less than offshore wind. What is more, nuclear will deliver power reliably and throughout the year.
People who live and work near nuclear reactors seem happy to have them as neighbours. By contrast, in Britain at least, onshore wind is widely detested.
I cannot accept that other technologies have ‘vastly smaller ecological footprints’. A new nuclear station will generate the same amount of electricity as about 3,000 wind turbines covering hundreds of square kilometres and requiring far more steel, concrete and disruption to wildlife.
We come back to the core argument. There is no political will anywhere in the world to make renewable electricity happen in sufficient amounts. I deeply regret this. Environmentalists watching the world sleepwalk into multiple ecological disasters have to act responsibly and accept that nuclear power is one of the few ways we have of maintaining standards of living while reducing the CO2 production from electricity generation.
Jose
Nuclear plants need to be phased out because they are dangerous, toxic and impede the adoption of the three key options needed to build a carbon-free energy future: conservation, efficiency and renewable energy
So what do we need to globalize a sustainable energy path?
Massive creativity, courage and political will – plus we need to design global deployment strategies for renewable energy that have tangible local social benefits.
For example, farmers who can own or at least benefit directly from wind turbines see them as a desirable cash crop. Schools with solar roofs see them as versatile teaching tools. Hospitals that can have lower fuel bills and cheap hot water via district energy see biomass CHP technology (combined heat and power) as a smart investment.
Our biggest obstacle to solving climate change with renewable energy, conservation and efficiency is the limited experience that most people have with these options. For all of us the most crucial strategy is to get directly involved in ‘learning by doing’ – and to fully use our creativity, which is itself a renewable and unlimited resource.
Goodall, Chris, and Jose Etcheverry. "Is nuclear power necessary for a carbon-free future?." New Internationalist Magazine 1 June 2011: n. pag. www.newint.org. Web. 14 June 2011.
York’s ZeroWaste Program enjoys a stellar first year
The following is from the Friday June 10, 2011 edition of the YFile
As far as garbage goes, it has been a pretty good year for York University's ZeroWaste Program.
The numbers show that since it launched on June 8, 2010 by Campus Services & Business Operations (CSBO), ZeroWaste has diverted the equivalent weight of more than 11 subway cars of trash, or 716 metric tonnes of garbage, from area landfills.
The figure, which equates to a 23 per cent reduction in waste, shows that with the help of the University community, York is well on its way to reaching its initial ZeroWaste target of diverting 65 per cent of its total institutional waste by 2013.
“What the figures show is that the ZeroWaste message that we have to change the way we think about our garbage has been taken to heart by the community,” says York environmental studies grad and waste management supervisor Meagan Heath (MES '10).
Specific figures for the first year of ZeroWaste show that York community members have decreased the amount of paper they put in the trash by 46 per cent, or 257 metric tonnes, and there was a 13 per cent decrease in garbage, or the equivalent of 222 metric tonnes.
"Mixed paper products sent for recycling declined because of the increased emphasis on double-sided printing and paperless practices. During the first seven months of the program, bottles and cans going into the garbage decreased by 23 per cent because people are now bringing their own mugs and water bottles to work," says Heath.
Rather than resting on the success of ZeroWaste, CSBO waste management staff continue to develop new and inventive ways to increase what can be diverted from landfills. Over the past few months, they've expanded ZeroWaste to include recycling of batteries, small electronics, appliances, ink cartridges and more. Paper towel dispensers are gradually being removed from the University washrooms in high use areas and are being replaced with hand dryers, which was likely the largest contributor to the drop in paper consumption. Heath says that several studies show that "hand dryers are more energy efficient than using paper."
There are now handy chilled water stations situated throughout the Keele campus specifically for refilling reusable personal water bottles. Add to these measures the increased signage, recycling bins and a continual encouragement through messaging and ZeroWaste is hitting home with York faculty and staff.
Heath says that students are also being encouraged to embrace ZeroWaste. "For the first time this year during residence move-out we did a formal e-waste drive," says Heath. "We placed big bins in every residence and asked students to put any electronics or small appliances they were throwing out into the bins. We also included a bin to collect batteries."
Students were receptive to recycling their e-waste and Heath says a lot was learned from the e-waste drive. "We learned that students need to be able to recycle their e-waste throughout the year and when something is broken, they need to be able to recycle it right away," she says.
You can help the program by doing the following:
- Dispose of your organics into the organic bin located in all kitchenettes.
- Do not put organics in your office waste bin (unless you like fruit flies).
- Keep in mind that your office garbage is not collected, and empty your office recycling and waste bins into centrally located tri-bins.
You can also help the University be successful by making sure that all of your waste is placed in the appropriate tri-bin section:
- newspaper and office paper (not including used paper coffee cups or plates) should go into the paper products section of the tri-bin;
- cans, bottles, juice boxes and milk cartons that have been emptied of any liquid, should go into the bottles and cans section of the tri-bin;
- plastic or metal wrappers and packaging, such as coffee cups and take-out foam clamshells, should go into the garbage section of the tri-bin;
- all organic waste, including soiled napkins and coffee grinds should go into a separate kitchenette bin or digester.
When ZeroWaste was first conceived more than a year ago, CSBO staff knew the secret to the program's success would be in how the community viewed their own trash. By making it necessary to walk to these communal trash and recycling centres, Heath says that people are really paying attention and thinking about what they are throwing away.
While there are many successes, Heath says there is still much to be done. "York doesn't sort its trash, so if someone throws a water bottle that can be recycled into the garbage, it goes to the landfill," she says. "Any garbage that ends up in a recycling bin goes into the recycling stream. We are just not equipped for sorting.
"Until now, there has been a big focus on creating an awareness of recycling and how it is important to put the materials into the right bins," says Heath. "Going forward we will be shifting our efforts towards getting everyone to reduce the amount of trash we produce."
For more on ZeroWaste, visit the ZeroWaste website.
Acadian artistic icon Herménégilde Chiasson and renowned environmental economist Peter Victor win Canada Council for the Arts Molson Prizes
Ottawa, June 8, 2011 – Winners of this year’s Canada Council for the Arts Molson Prizes Herménégilde Chiasson and Peter Victor have forever changed their respective fields through their innovative and important artistic and scholarly contributions.
Mr. Chiasson, winner of the Molson Prize in the arts, has had exceptional achievements in many disciplines including literature, theatre, film and visual arts and is the first Acadian to win this award. Through his research, Peter Victor, winner of the Molson Prize in the social sciences, paved the way for a new discipline called ecological economies. He continues to find new ways to manage economic growth that are easier on the planet and the population.
Read the complete news release here or by copying and pasting the following URL into your web browser’s address bar: www.canadacouncil.ca/news/releases/2011/un129519436996714950.htm
