By: Brittany Lince
JUDITH GAP, MT -- Where I grew up we had a building that everyone called the cloud factory. In reality it was a coal burning power plant. This was the only energy production I had ever seen. That's why the wind plant was a shock to me. Not only were the turbines impressive to look at, the energy produced was renewable. Climate change is both human and natural caused. However one of the main human factors is from the combustion of fossil fuels, such as coal (Montana Climate Assessment, pg 13). So why aren't there more forms of wind renewable energy? One reason is due to cost. Wind turbines are incredibly expensive, one turbine can cost almost $2 million, not including the installation fee. In order to start up, companies rely on Production Tax Credit (PTC), however this only lasts for the first 10 years. Mike Prater, an employee at Invenergy, said he had never heard of a wind company starting without PTCs. When we talked to a district representative, he said he was against subsidizing renewable energy, claiming it would actually harm the expansion of the plants. I disagree with his claim. Cash crops such as corn, are seen as a necessity, and are subsidized by the Government. I believe renewable energy sources should also be considered a necessity and subsidized. I’m okay with seeing towering turbines when I’m driving, and only with aid can this become reality. It’s a better option than clouds filled with global warming.
0 Comments
By: Brittany Lince
Ulm, MT -- As my favorite hat says, I’m a “purebred cheese head”. Despite my lactose intolerance, I’ve always been proud of my cheesy state. Bacteria is the key component to making good cheese. Most people think bacteria is something harmful that destroys crops and makes people sick. In reality, there are endless possibilities brought by beneficial bacteria. Already in the past two weeks, three speakers have mentioned the usefulness of bacteria in agriculture. Bacteria is cultivated from fish fecal matter and used as nutrients in aquaponics. Cover crops such as legumes have bacteria added and form a symbiotic relationship with the plant. According to the Montana Climate assessment, pulse crops, such as legumes, are beneficial to climate change. By providing diversity, farmers are “providing resilience in the face of climate change.” (pg 215). The plant provides carbohydrates to the bacteria, and in return bacteria gives nitrates back to the plant. This is essential since the number one contribution to plant growth is water, the second is nitrates. Only 1% of all bacteria have been classified. Imagine all the positive ways bacteria could be used if only we invest the resources to study and know more about this amazing natural microorganism. We’ve gone from a nation of strip farming and store bought nutrients, to using cover crops and sustainable agricultural. Let’s now transform agriculture by using bacteria benefit crops and enrich our earth. Even though bacteria is micro, it brings a major hope for our future agriculture, and my beloved cheese curds. By Grace Beck HELENA, MONTANA-- It truly amazes me how commissioners Bob Lake and Roger Koopman managed to read all 200+ pages of the MCA without learning anything. The MCA provided high evidence that the future would contain warmer temperatures, more severe storms, larger fires, more drought, and many further hardships. According to the commissioners, there’s still far more unknown than what is known, which is very true. No one can predict the future climate with absolute certainty, but we can use models to come up with the most accurate predictions possible. For example, in regards to future temperature changes, the MCA states “Regardless of uncertainties, the GCMs show full agreement regarding the direction of change: temperatures will be increasing” (chapter 2, page 54- summary). It seems like a lot of people, the commissioners included, use the unknown and uncertainty as an excuse to ignore the known. In fact, they used that uncertainty to justify the use of coal as one of the main energy providers in Montana. Even if all the models are completely wrong and humans have no effect on the climate, what’s wrong with shifting to clean energy? Is it really that awful to have to breath clean air that hasn’t been polluted with the ash and carbon dioxide of burning coal? Reading the MCA made me fear the future of Montana and I want to do everything I can to stop carbon dioxide emissions to prevent climate change, but apparently the MCA doesn’t have that effect on everyone. By Joshua H. Phillips TWO DOT, Montana – #Climateclass wrapped up the final week with a tour of Two Dot Land and Livestock Company. After Sam asked where all the cow crap was, Ranch Manager Kathleen McConkey explained to us how the lack of cow crap was a sign of healthy soil. At the mention of soils, Tony’s head perked up and everyone else began begging for mercy. Although none of us wanted to discuss soils for another hour in 90 degree heat, soil is nonetheless incredibly important.
As David Oien of Timeless Seeds explained to us earlier, there had been years and years of “soil abuse” throughout the era of industrial farming, reducing soil organic matter from 7% to a staggering 1% or less. An increase of only 10% in soil carbon worldwide would offset approximately the last 30 years of human-related greenhouse gases (source). The MCA was a little undecided in terms of what would happen to the soil, so it is up to the farmers and ranchers today and tomorrow (pg. 157, 171). Popular methods today will not be effective enough, so it is a matter of convincing farmers and ranchers today, as well as the next generation of farmers and ranchers, to change their methods. For example, David Oien’s Timeless Seeds buys lentils, a cover crop, from farmers, increasing carbon sequestration when the farmers when they are not growing a cash crop. Sandy Arrow Ranch does not till the land, leaving soil carbon virtually untouched. Two Dot Land and Livestock uses specialized grazing methods to increase vegetable litter, which increases soil carbon. With an overhaul in soil management, maybe we can begin to undo the legacy of industrial farming, and maybe, with a bit of luck, save the world. By Bradley Harvey “Compromise is the best and cheapest lawyer”- Robert Louis Stevenson. HARLOWTON, Montana -- When it comes to the way we make and use energy and other such practices that are directly contributing to or are affected by climate change, why are we too stubborn to all take a blow to our ego and just face the inevitable compromises? In climate change, there are no lawyers, more there are severe consequences that are rarely taken as seriously as any court case. Clearly not everyone is going to have their way, and the most fair option for all is to leave all unsatisfied, but at what point do we call a compromise enough? As we learned from our meeting with Jessica Sena, we are not getting rid of coal or oil, but contrary to what she represents and believes, we cannot use all of the oil and coal that we have right now; we have to be careful and resourceful with these limited assets. The unwillingness of ranchers and farmers to trade their traditional practices for sustainable options will remain; nobody wants to dive head-first into new practices of grazing and farming, but someone has to. Neither can we expect to rid ourselves of plastic bottles or go completely vegan to save our planet. So what can you and I, the average person, contribute? Start by holding on to your beliefs, but remain mindful and respectful for the other side. Be willing to change and remain open-minded, but keep unique and informed ideals. By Malcolm Martelon
HARLOWTON, MT -- “People say we’re crazy because we’re more like grass farmers than cattle ranchers”, says Kathleen, the manager of Twodot Land & Livestock. With her husband Stuart, they manage Twodot Land & Livestock full time with something they call Wholistic Agriculture. For them, Wholistic Agriculture means finding a balance. A balance between grass and cow that benefits both. They look at ranching from many different aspects and are very focused on the soils and plants on their ranch. One of their biggest focuses is overgrazing. Overgrazing has many effects, including killing off beneficial soil microorganisms which makes the land less fertile and eventually leads to desertification and the release of CO2 by the soils. While many other ranchers will just set their cattle on a single large pasture, Kathleen and Stuart take a different approach to achieve a balance. One of the main practices they use is rotating the cows daily. They will split their pasture into many smaller 6 acre sections, and move their cattle from section to section. By moving the cattle every day it gives time for the other sections to rest and regrow, allowing plants to use less energy than if they had to struggle against overgrazing constantly. By using more of a holistic ranching approach and paying equal attention to the grass and the cows, we could stop the effects of overgrazing and start to heal the land that we have been harming for decades. By Malcolm Martelon
GREAT FALLS, MT -- I love tea. Green, black, peppermint, and chamomile tea are the best for me, but my new favorite is Compost Tea. Now, this isn’t a tea you can drink. Well, you could, but it would taste awful. I was introduced to Compost Tea on a recent visit to Sandy Arrow Ranch. Sandy Arrow Ranch’s mission is multifaceted, but it breaks down to this: create food that is nutritious, better than organic, and environmentally sustainable. To do this they use Compost Tea, a mixture of different biology from fish to wheat to worm in order to enrich the biodiversity of the soils on the ranch. Joe Barta, the sustainability manager, walks us through the process starting with the making of compost, then compost tea, and finally spraying the tea with the use of a machine once used to spray chemicals the ranch now avoids. Sandy Arrow Ranch also uses other techniques such as no-till. By tilling the land you release the stored carbon out of the soil and into the atmosphere, removing the good biomatter plants need to grow. Eric Dillion, the owner of the ranch, believes that organic farming isn't enough. He says, “If you till, you kill. What you kill is the micro-organisms in the soil which kills the nutritional value of the food, and nature’s balance.” By using the methods used by this ranch, we could make more nutritious, sustainable foods for centuries to come, without having to worry about killing our soils. And it all starts with a nice batch of tea. By Joshua H. Phillips HELENA, Montana – #Climateclass began our last week by speaking with Republicans responsible for the mangled policies concerning climate change in Montana. Republicans are known for being short-term thinkers. Therefore, it makes sense that several of the Republicans we spoke with were more interested in saving jobs than saving the planet.
In our talks with Mr. Lake and Mr. Koopman, it was clear that those on the Public Service Commission were not entirely thrilled about admitting climate change existed, and even less thrilled that humans were responsible for a significant portion of that change. In fact, Mr. Koopman began going off in what-about-isms. What about cloud cover? What about solar activity? Later, Joshua Sizemore, Senator Daines’ Legislative Assistant, explained to us how Senator Daines has and continues to work and vote with climate change in mind. In previous talks, however, I know that Senator Daines himself is not completely on-board with the concept of anthropogenic climate change. Senator Daines continues to support the continuation of the Colstrip coal-fired power plant as well as research into “clean coal”. How can we continue to create valid policies concerning climate change when not all policy makers are on the same page about it? As the MCA pointed out, climate change will have effects on many aspects of forestry, water, and agriculture (pg. 10, 72, 150, 198). While not all Republicans are as stubborn as those mentioned above and not all Republicans are to be blamed, our politicians need to gain a better understanding of climate change before it’s too late or else the jobs that they value so much will be in danger sooner rather than later. PC: Dawson
By: Reilly Teigen ULM, Mt – Another day, another lecture. Today’s speaker, David, went into tremendous detail into his family history, but I was distracted by a bug on his left shoulder. I couldn’t quite make out the type of insect. The lecture continued, and the insect stayed on his shoulder. I looked around our group multiple times, but no one else seemed aware of its presence. However, it is entirely possible everyone in the group saw it, and didn’t warn David of the insect (possibly with a dangerous stinger!) because we didn’t want to interrupt. A parallel can be drawn between this situation and stigma surrounding the climate change debate (stingma, if I may). With a country polarized between left and right politics, addressing climate change when working on something like a company decision can seem as taboo as talking politics during a first date. The company, like our class, chooses to ignore their impact on the climate (in our case, we ignored the insect) in fear of speaking out. Our social fears in both situations are dangerous. The longer we waited to warn David, the more likely the insect was to sting him. Likewise, ignoring climate change in daily discussion and labeling it as a controversial political issue increases the likelihood of a “sting”, or irreversible climate disaster, like a record drought or flood. Should climate change be dealt with using preventative, reactionary, or hybrid solutions? Let’s be the people who aren’t afraid to ask this question, no matter the situation. By Dawson Bancroft JOLIET, MONTANA -- I’m going to be 100% honest that before this trip, I did not have much of a belief for climate change especially if we, as humans, were changing it. I did not really see the changes here in small town Joliet. Right when I got back I decided to go talk to a person who I thought would be the most against climate change (I’m not going to say a name for confidentiality). As it turns out they 100% believed that it was happening. They just are not sure if humans are the cause of it. And I am not too sure if we are a major cause of it. I know we are definitely the major cause of carbon dioxide pollutants and all the other pollutants. I would think this would mean “Yes we are the major cause.” But a lot of the people we talked to on this trip tell us that water vapor in the sky is the worst greenhouse gas. What I think is that we set off a chain reaction. We produced way too much carbon dioxide in the past century than our planet could deal with. This lead to a miniscule increase in temperature which lead to more water evaporating. This meant high temperatures and lead to more and more water evaporating. It might be a long shot but if I had more time in this class that is what I would research. |
ArchivesCategories |