Country is about to meet city. Motor City that is. It’s no secret that the American automobile industry has been in trouble for over a decade, with a significant decline in the past two years as a part of the global economic crisis. Detroit, the original heart of vehicle production and home to the “Big Three” automakers, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, was once a booming metropolis with over 2 million residents. The financial woes in the city’s main industry has resulted in the loss of thousands upon thousands of jobs, forcing over a million residents to move in search of work.

The mass migration of people has led to more than 40 square miles of abandoned land within the 139 square mile footprint of the city. To turn it into parks and recreation facilities would tax an overburdened government that struggles to provide quality educational facilities, have sufficient police and fire services and maintain the existing infrastructure. The crime rate has skyrocketed as criminals move into abandoned neighbourhoods and set up shop, so leaving things as they are isn’t really an option either. Many neighbourhoods are without proper grocery stores and the city of Detroit is aptly named a ‘food desert’ as a result. The people who remain in the city need jobs, security, food and hope. Detroit is in need of a boost in a big way and that’s where the Hantz Farming Corporation is hoping to provide the answer.

The Hantz Farming Corporation’s vision is to revitalize Detroit by developing the world’s largest urban farming system. The creation of farming “pods” or a number of 300 acre farms would provide not only a valuable economic use for the desolate land in the area but also valuable frontage that they hope will attract new communities of people who will return to the area. John Hantz, a Detroit native who is supplying $30 million of his own funds to get the project started, hopes that the farms will serve a number of important purposes for the community. These include:

• The creation of hundreds of jobs. The unemployment rate in Detroit is among the highest in the US. These jobs would diversify the employment field while supporting a mixed economy that Detroit desperately needs.
• A supply of fresh and local produce. As previously noted, Detroit neighbourhoods suffer from a lack of proper grocery stores. The creation of these farm pods will provide families with direct access to healthy, local produce. Whatever is not sold to the local community will be exported. Hantz Farms plans on being a year-round facility that provides spring vegetables, summer produce, and pumpkins in the fall and Christmas trees in the winter.
• Creating a cleaner, greener urban environment. By repurposing abandoned land, Hantz Farms will bring nature back to the city. They plan to use recyclable materials in all aspects of their farms, will strive to be a zero-waste facility and have plans to use wind energy to power their operations.
• Increased tourism and resulting economic benefits. As tourists come to visit the Hantz Farm sites daily, they will frequent other local businesses, boosting the local economy beyond the farm gate.
• More efficient use of the city’s resources. As the farms change the land and bring people back to Detroit, the area will no longer be the prime location for criminal activity. By tearing down old, abandoned buildings, the risk of fire decreases and the police and fire services can focus their efforts on keeping remaining residents safe.

The benefits to this plan seem to be a win-win situation for the city of Detroit in addressing the tremendous challenges it currently faces. However not everyone is sold on this idea quite yet. Opponents to Hantz Farms are skeptical that the project will create the proposed benefits and are worried about the threat that this larger scale farming operation will have on the existing smaller urban farming movement. They are also worried that this plan is just a land-grab for Hantz and his corporation and that there is no guarantee that farms will even be developed on some of Detroit’s most valuable land.

While the skeptics have the right to be cautious about a plan that is far from completion and has yet to be attempted on such a large scale, given the facts, Detroit is left with few options at this point. The Hantz Farming Corporation has the opportunity to bring Detroit residents the things they need most; jobs, security, food and most importantly, hope.

» Hantz Farms Detroit

When we speak of climate change and the environment, the word pulse doesn’t usually make it’s way into the conversation. Maybe it’s because we most often associate the word pulse with the human heart. However, that’s not the only definition of the word and definitely not the one I’m speaking of when considering the environment. The pulse I’m referring to has been the focus of research in agriculture today and it’s name comes from the Latin puls, meaning thick soup or pottage. This pulse is the edible seed from legumes, such as beans, peas, lentils and chickpeas and is commonly grown throughout the provinces of Canada. This type of pulse may actually change the world by helping us battle climate change.

Pulse crops have many special properties that make them unique among other crops and desirable as food among humans. Their benefits are vast which leads me to believe that we will see more emphasis on their use in the years to come.

Besides being good food for our diets with their high protein content, in fact two to three times higher than other field crops, growing pulses can have tremendous environmental benefits. The biggie is how pulse crops, especially peas, lentils and chickpeas pull nitrogen right out of the atmosphere. Then with the aid of soil bacteria in their rooting system, they create their own fertilizer. Environmentally, this has enormous positive implications because nitrogen is the most heavily used nutrient in agriculture, and the main product to create nitrogen fertilizer is the fossil fuel natural gas. According to Pulse Canada, it takes approximately two tonnes of fuel to create, distribute and apply one mega-tonne of nitrogen fertilizer. If we can eliminate this fertilizer, then we eliminate the burning of those fossil fuels that unnecessarily add greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

In addition, pulse crops are great for crop rotation as they are very efficient at fixing nitrogen. This means that the nitrogen they pull from the atmosphere gets stored in their tissues and when they are harvested and die, they leave it behind as fertilizer for other plants. Thus, in future years when the farmer plants other crops, they need to apply less nitrogen fertilizer as the soil is already ‘pre-fertilized’ in a sense.

With the aid of the nitrogen fixation, research has found pulse crops to help increase soil microbial activity, which in long term crop rotation scenarios has resulted in an overall boost of the soil quality. This furthers the decrease in need of unnatural fertilizers that can harm the environment.

If you think we’ve exhausted the benefits of pulse crops, we’re not there just yet, we still have water to think about. Some may wonder, what does a pulse have to do with water? The answer is simple. Plenty! Often in agriculturally intense areas, water quality is of great concern. Much of the water quality issues in agricultural areas come from over use of fertilizers. Over application and sometimes even normal application can cause high concentrations of chemical fertilizers such as nitrogen to leach their way into ground water or be washed into rivers and streams as runoff. This not only poses environmental risks but health risks as well. Pulse crops can help mitigate this issue through their efficiency in nitrogen use and fixation.

The final key benefit to mention is promising research that indicates how the inclusion of pulse crops into crop rotation can reduce the volume of greenhouse gases, in particular nitrous oxide (NO2) emissions of the Northern Great Plains. Nitrous oxide and methane have been found to be 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas, so eliminating more of this substance from the atmosphere can have a very positive impact on our environment and the battle with climate change.

Suffice it to say, pulses seem to have some amazing properties which I’ve summarized:

1. They make their own fertilizer while removing harmful greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, in doing so they require us to burn less fossil fuels that would normally add even more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
2. Because they make their own fertilizer and leave it behind for other crops when they die, we need not apply as much synthetic fertilizer which furthers amazing property #1. It also helps with possible water quality issues from over fertilization.
3. They’re great to use in crop rotation practices as they actually increase the quality of the soil over time.
4. They contain two to three times the amount of protein than other field crops which is good for our diet.

So I would like to suggest that the next time your having a conversation about climate change, the environment or even your health, consider the pulse. The crop that is. 

» Pulse Canada

The scientists at LS9 Laboratories in California are taking a new approach in the search for sustainable fuels. Current sources of biofuels involve the growing of crops such as corn, canola or soybeans, which challenges us to choose between food and fuel. Rising demand for biofuels have caused some staple food prices to soar as land is turned over to fuel crop production and more land is cleared to increase supply. So while we are reducing our carbon footprint by increasing the use and availability of these products, we are forced to make compromises in other areas, meaning that these current alternatives are not truly sustainable options.

Using genetic modification the researchers at LS9 have altered the common Escherichia coli (E.coli) bacterium and encouraged it to eat wood chips, straw and other biomass waste. The result of this fermentation type process is that the bacterium secretes an oil product that burns just like diesel fuel. There are two significant benefits to this new approach. The first is that these altered E.coli will be eating waste products not food stocks that were destined to feed the human population. By using the biomass waste, wood chips and straw, they are eliminating products that would normally go into the waste stream.

And as all geographic regions have some sort of biomass by-product, whether it’s from logging or farming, no resources will have to be shipped large distances to produce the new diesel. This will not only save a tremendous amount of money but will reduce hundreds of thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide from the vehicles which currently transport canola, corn or soybeans to biofuel processing plants.

The second benefit is that the E.coli diesel-producing bacteria create a product that is practically pump-ready. The ethanol biofuels that are currently being produced require a significant amount of processing and distillation, while the process for making E.coli fuel requires 65% less energy. Between the ploughing, fertilizing, harvesting and processing, activities which use fossil fuels to complete, many scientists doubt that traditional biofuel production results in a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Consumers stand to benefit as well, since the majority of the cost of traditional fossil fuels is attributed to transportation and processing, both of which have been significantly reduced as a result of this new technology.

The new production method developed by LS9 would put us one step closer to developing a truly sustainable fuel source. The next challenge for the lab is to be able to develop enough fuel to supply our growing needs. More than 7.6 billion litres of biofuels were consumed in 2009, which doesn’t really put a dent in the astronomical amount of fossil fuels used each year.

In addition to the creation of a new fuel source, scientists have found that with just a few genetic manipulations, the bacteria can produce other chemicals including those that can make detergents, cosmetic additives, scents and flavouring compounds. Truly innovative science is taking our way of life in new directions we never thought possible and leading us down the path toward a more sustainable future.

Having grown up with a dad who works in the agriculture industry, I have spent countless hours listening to (and sometimes trying to block out... sorry Dad!) the agricultural science-themed conversations that were often held around the dinner table. Since childhood I have had a particular interest in all things environmental and find myself fortunate enough to be working in that field today. My father and I would occasionally have heated discussions about what we saw as two different worlds, the traditional agricultural way of food production and my worldview on the environment.

Recently I have been spending a lot of time surfing the Internet, in search of information and new ideas for future Ecollo articles. Many of the articles I find myself attracted to these days blend agriculture with the environment and I am growing increasingly interested in how the work of scientists, producers and growers is supporting the work that is benefitting our environment. This type of partnership is certainly a change from two groups that were traditionally opposed to one another. What’s also exciting is that the people in these two camps are also changing. My dad and I now have discussions about what farmers are doing to increase sustainable practices in their operations and how environmental NGO’s are developing programs that support farmers in making these great changes. A terrific example of this is the partnership between winter wheat growers and Duck’s Unlimited. Farmers are encouraged to grow winter wheat, which helps to reduce soil erosion, requires less weed control and has larger yields, but also provides critical spring nesting habitat for waterfowl.

It is innovative science such as the creation of biofuels from biomass waste using E.coli bacteria and partnerships between the different industries that bring about a truly sustainable future. 

» LS9 Labratories

Life ain’t easy.  We all want to do the right thing, help the environment, live better lives, and leave the planet in a better state than we found it.  But, when it comes to taking action, things get tricky.  Every time we turn a corner we’re assaulted by conflicting viewpoints about what we should and should not be doing.  From global warming to recycling there are plenty of vocal people on both sides.  With so much dialogue flying past our heads every day it can be hard to cut through to the truth, and especially difficult to figure out how to use that truth to inform our actions.

Today we’re going to take up a topic that concerns most of us: pesticides.  Those unnerving chemicals they’re spraying all over our food.  Often it’s easier to just put this aspect of our grub out of mind.  But, while ignorance might be bliss, an educated perspective can do a much better job of putting you at ease while you chow down on your Cesar salad this evening.

Let’s start with the basics: What are pesticides?  Basically, they’re substances used to affect living organisms.  Your mind might initially rush to the image of a crop duster flying low over a farmer’s field, releasing a mist of chemicals.  That’s one use in modern agriculture, but pesticides have a long history of keeping crops healthy for human consumption.  The earliest recorded was the use of elemental sulfur dusting.  Since then numerous cultures have found ways to keep critters off of their food, making sure sustenance was saved from the insects, and maintained for the humans.

There are plenty of naturally occurring substances that have a history of being used as pesticides: Nicotine, derived from tobacco, was used as an insecticide in the 17th century, and Pyrethrum, derived from chrysanthemums, arrived in the 19th century as another natural pesticide.  

However, just because people have been using pesticides for a long time doesn’t mean that they’re safe, or even that we ought to continue using them.  The idea that something is being put on our raw food in order to keep other living organisms away can easily make us wary when we consider eating it ourselves.  After all, we don’t want to be ingesting poisons in our system.  But, consider what Paracelsus, 14th century thinker, and regarded as the first systematic botanist, said: “All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous.”  All substances considered toxic are safe at a small enough dose.  All things that we consider safe become toxic if the dose is large enough.  Pain medication, for example, becomes quite dangerous if ten times the recommended dose is consumed.

So, before we get to carried away and start running in terror of anything that’s been sprayed with a pesticide, insecticide, or fungicide, we need to consider the fact that rigorous testing has been done to ensure that the dose being applied is safe for human consumption.  And, as we all know when it comes to pain medication, certain substances can to a lot of good to decrease human suffering and increase quality of life for all.

Some people might rightly point out that some harm has come out of pesticides.  Cancer, the antithesis of the ever popular ‘live, love, laugh’ motto, likes to rear its ugly head whenever it can.  In some cases pesticide residue has the potential to cause cancer in a small number of the public.  But, before we once again begin running in terror, it’s important to look at things in perspective.  In his 2001 book, The Skeptical Environmentalist, Bjorn Lomborg takes up the terrifying view of our future presented by environmentalists, and offers a well researched alternative view.

One of Lomborg’s examples, addressing the use of pesticides, is summed up in Denis Dutotn’s review of the book in the Washington Post:

“Many well-intentioned environmental policies can have surprising outcomes: Suppose minute pesticide residues have the potential to cause cancer in a tiny number of cases -- one estimate would have it around 20 cases per annum in the United States (not very many in a country where 300 people drown in bathtubs every year). So we ban the pesticides. This in turn, Lomborg points out, would sharply drive up the price of cancer-preventing fruits and vegetables. By reducing consumption, especially among the poor, the pesticide ban in the end would cause more cancer (perhaps 26,000 cases annually) than the pesticides would have caused in the first place.”

Every time we hear about a new, or old, issue, we have to be willing to consider it from multiple perspectives.  Pesticides have benefited our society in a number of ways, and while improper use of these substances can be dangerous, correct application can increase our quality of life.  Pesticides help increase food production, which means more nourishment for the plethora of people fighting daily for their meals; they reduce the number of disease carrying insects, leading to a safer environment for all; and they keep meddlesome rodents out of our homes.  The next time you’re hit with a barrage of bad press for one of the helpful pesticides working to increase our food supply, make sure you do your homework before passing judgment.

» Buginfo

On April 20, 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico something cataclysmic happened, an unimaginable environmental and economic disaster that took 11 peoples lives and injured 17 others. Transocean Ltd's drilling rig, Deepwater Horizon, licensed to BP, the British Oil Giant experienced two critical failures, an explosion and an automatic switch-off device that did not activate. The result, a conservative estimate of over 5,000 barrels of oil being spewed into the Gulf of Mexico daily, which has created a 5,700 sq km oil slick on the surface of the water that is clearly visible from space. The Deepwater Horizon leak that continues to disgorge oil everyday has proven to be much larger than the catastrophic Exxon Valdez tanker spill off the coast of Alaska in 1989, which released 11 million gallons. And unfortunately, it appears that for at least the near future, the rig will continue to discharge oil into the Gulf as all repair and remediation efforts to date have been futile. So what does this mean for the environment and the world in general? The implications are large and definitely widespread.

Obviously we can all see that environmentally there’s going to be some long-lasting horrific effects. Marine life in the Gulf of Mexico is suffering and will continue to suffer for quite some time; but what about the global perspective? Due to wind, waves and currents, the spill is likely to affect more than just the Gulf, bringing about issues for other areas of the world that rely on the marine environment to survive. What about those in the Gulf of Mexico who depend on fishing or other marine activities for their livelihood? It has already been reported that global shrimp and fish markets have been affected, as they have been devastated by the spill and fishing has been closed from Louisiana to Florida. This oil spill is affecting global markets much beyond the oil and gas industries. So what does it mean for the future? Maybe hope.

It’s always difficult to see the good in a bad situation, and this is definitely one of the worst. But with any incident, accident or issue, we as humans tend to open our eyes a little wider. We start to realize our problems and try to create solutions, widening our perspective on the whole. You might be asking where this is going, so let me offer some light. When scientists noticed that climate change was happening and that we as humans might be a large contributing factor, we started to ponder how we were contributing and more particularly, how we might stop contributing. This led to the global green movement, a strong push for lower energy use, water conservation and waste reduction. We then had the Exxon Valdez tanker spill, which lead to more rigorous safety protocols in many different sectors. It even helped push the green movement, driving the desire for more sustainable energy sources that have less potential to impact the environment negatively. Now we have the Deepwater Horizon leak that is devastating the Gulf of Mexico and the earth as a whole. Of course the ramifications of the spill are horrid and I’m not saying that it’s good in anyway, but the truth is, on a global scale this spill might be a blessing in disguise, that is once the clean up is complete and the environment returns to a more pristine state.

Large-scale environmental issues that reach global media can actually help us progress by leaps and bounds; when faced with disaster, we tend to open our eyes and widen our perspective. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill will undoubtedly bring about change in the manner in which we view oil as a source of energy. Renewable resource and environmental corporations such as Nalco Holdings, a water treatment corporation have already seen a rise in stock value while BP has experienced a decline in their stocks due to the spill. Our society is becoming less complacent with ruling giants who pillage the earth and upset the unspoiled environments that we enjoy so much. If anything, this calamity will help continue the push towards more sustainable energy sources. Therefore, as much as the spill is a global disaster that will have environmental impacts for years to come, it will hopefully help accelerate a much needed change in the way our society thinks and behaves.

Gone are the days of over consumption and gluttony as we enter a new era of enlightenment where selflessness, humanity and mutual respect are the norm.

» Huffington Post

Just beyond my kitchen window lays an untainted canvas of new life and vibrant colours, a welcomed sight after several months of stale frigid Canadian snow.  In the yard is a beautiful orchestra of buzzing bees, chanting birds and smooth rippling leaves in the breeze.  While sipping my morning coffee, I’m engulfed in the joy that spring is here and the time to plant is near.  Gazing beyond my yard to a nearby farmers field, I’m reminiscent that soon I will be overwhelmed with plump, juicy and hearty fruit, vegetables and grains.  But an unsettling thought crosses my mind as I see a large pesticide tank being filled in the corner of the field, I wonder as I’m sure many others have, is that stuff safe to go on my food?

With all the negative buzz around pesticides and their use this time of year, I thought I’d look into it myself and uncover the facts that are often contorted through the media.  Let’s just say that I was surprised by my findings.

The first thing I want to make clear is what pesticides are.  We often think of a pesticide as something that kills a pest like a rodent or mosquito, which is completely correct, however the term has a much broader definition.  As defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a pesticide is any substance or mixture of substances intended for: preventing, destroying, repelling or mitigating any pest; this includes insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and a few other substances .  In other words a pesticide is something that protects our crops from an organism, be it a 3,000 hectare farm, home garden, yard or even a lawn, making production more efficient and robust.

The second thing I want to make clear is that not all pesticides are synthetically produced in a lab.  Pesticides are found everywhere in nature.  Many plants produce their own pesticides to defend themselves from attack, like the mint plant which produces a chemical called dolichodial to ward off ants, flies and cockroaches.  However, the mint plant is non-toxic to humans, that is, if we’re exposed to it in moderation.  One should know that all substances are toxic to humans if the dose is high enough.  Take a common painkiller or cough medicine for example; the label clearly states the recommended dosage for safe use, but if you exceed that dosage, you face the risk of further sickness or even death.  The same applies for pesticides both natural and synthetic, given a proper dose it should do more good than harm.  So the question remains, how do we know that a pesticide is safe around humans? This can be answered in two parts.

The first, dealing with registration; in Canada we leave it to Health Canada while in the U.S. the EPA is in charge.  Both of these governing bodies work on similar guidelines, and lets just say it’s not an easy ride if you’re a pesticide and want to be registered in either of these countries.  To start, the ingredients of the pesticide and the site and crop on which the pesticide is to be used are scrutinized with a fine tooth comb.  Then the volume to be used and frequency of use is tossed on the examination table and finally the storage and disposal practices are sat in the interrogation chair.  All of this to ensure that the pesticide in question “will not have any adverse effects on humans, the environment or non-target species”.  If you think we’re done, think again.  The pesticide must go through a further step in the volume and frequency tests, which is a value/efficacy assessment to determine the lowest effective rate of application.  For Canadians, this can mean “up to 50 per cent lower label use rates than the same products in other countries”.  After passing all these tests and evaluations, which I might add can take several years and hundreds of scientific studies to complete, the pesticide is normally granted registration to be used for 5 years in Canada.

The second part deals with a little thing called toxicity or the skull and crossbones.  Like I said before everything is toxic in a large enough dose, and in the Canadian registration process they try to keep the dose at a minimum to reduce toxic exposure.  But the fact remains that a little toxic or a lot toxic still means toxic.  So they put instructions for proper use and safety regulations in place like what safety equipment to wear, how to apply the pesticide, where to apply it and when to apply it, all to reduce our exposure to any of it’s toxic substances.

One might suggest that after all this, the pesticide is now safe around humans.  I on the other hand caution the use of the word “safe” because no matter how low the toxicity of a substance, it’s still contains toxins and the label bears the skull and crossbones.  A better way to frame it would be to say that pesticides can be used in such a way that they pose no health risks if the user adheres to the instructions and safety precautions on the label.  Thus, as you gaze outside while enjoying a cup of coffee, know that with proper care and application, pesticides can perform a very valuable service in many aspects of our lives.

» EPA