Living in Nature

Traveling through the landscapes on the KTX train, my ears first told me about the terrain before my eyes did. The swelling and unswelling of my eardrums made me look up and out the window to see the rolling hillsides and mountains through which we were passing. Villages, towns and cities were tucked down into the mountain valleys, with the green hillsides spreading above them. I didn't realize that Korea was so mountainous - according to wikipedia, the country doesn't have any natural plains or lowlands. Geographic lows are caused by erosion of the mountains. This landscape was beautiful to me because you could look out across the borders of any town and see the mountains in the background. They created a natural border on development and reminded me of our small place in nature. 

It also reminded me of my trip across Wyoming.

I loved these little towns surrounded by nature. However, in many parts of the United States, suburban sprawl has become a huge problem.

Lack of urban planning has allowed housing developments to spread across our plains and completely dominate the landscape. According to the EPA, under natural conditions only about 10% of annual rainfall becomes surface runoff. Unchecked development covers thousands of acres in impermeable pavement which interrupts the natural water cycle of precipitation, infiltration and evaporation. It is not the percentageof impervious cover in the United States that is the problem. It is its concentration in small areas of high population density. Smaller watersheds within larger watersheds may be more than 60% impervious, causing a serious degrading of water quality*. Small storms of perhaps less than a 1/4 acre-inch which normally might be intercepted or infiltrated can result in flooding of our cities, as the water has nowhere to go. Flooding causes numerous health and safety problems for humans, and damages our environment. Standing flood waters spread bacteria and mold, damage property, and wash dangerous debris from the street into our backyards and living areas. Floods also wash pollutants into our sewer systems. Flood waters increase the temperature of stream water by allowing water exposed to the sun and air and hot pavement into our streams. They change the chemical make up of streams, altering the pH, nitrate and sulfate concentrations, and increasing the metals, organics, BOD and TDS loads. Floods also increase erosion, which can kill off both native flora and fauna. 

Green infrastructure (GI) and low-impact development (LID) are two concepts that seek to integrate the water cycle into urban planning, rather than ignore it and deal with its consequences later. Green infrastructure includes green roofs, permeable pavement, rain gardens, rain barrels, and tree and shrub planting. Green infrastructure differs from more traditional drainage ponds, swales, and sewers in that GI seeks to intercept the water before it hits the ground and/or allow it to infiltrate the ground at its source. This will cause more water to be evaporated back into the atmosphere and also infiltrate the ground and recharge our groundwater. Soil is a natural filter that can remove many toxic concentrations of substances from water before it flows into streams. Low impact development is similar to GI in that it seeks to model nature's treatment of precipitation at its source with micro-scale solutions that intercept, detain, evaporate and store water at its point of impact. These solutions are often inexpensive and sustainable, such as breaks in pavement where trees are planted. Another important concept being integrated into LID is watershed planning or the ecosystem approach instead of city planning. Watershed planning puts development back on nature's scale, by incorporating the natural drainage patterns of the watershed, such as floodplains, stream channels, forests and wetlands, into a design, rather than covering them over or diverting them. 

Luckily, these concepts are being incorporated into development plans in the US and abroad. In an interview with Michael Connor, undersecretary of the US Interior on Wednesday, April 15th, 2015, at the 7th World Water Forum in Daegu, South Korea, he said that one of the six priorities of the US Interior was landscape-level planning. The goal is to use science as the foundation to manage resources and direct development. We need to better understand our landscapes, and direct development where it is appropriate. We need to preserve habitat to keep its functionality within our ecosystem. We need to use renewable energy sources where appropriate.

Several organizations present at the World Water Forum were engaging in GI and LID and directing this issue head on, creating opportunities for investment and jobs for our future. The organization IUCN is pivoting the conversation to regard nature itself as infrastructure. It encourages incorporating natural planning into an infrastructure project as a means to efficiently and effectively provide clean drinking water. It sees wetlands, forests grasslands and other natural habitats as water treatment, disposal and storage facilities. Investing in these types of structures can provide water security for low-income residents in developing neighborhoods. Like any investment strategy, costs and benefits of the project should be considered at the outset. However, benefits are now being redefined to demonstrate how environmental infrastructure provides a return on investment.

I would like to provide a counter point. A side note to this discussion is the anti-green economy-movement. There are those who believe that quantifying land preservation actually takes away from the true value of nature. They argue that it is impossible to quantify the total value of open space, and therefore open space planning might be decided on erroneous values of economic importance. There may be value to a natural resource that is not currently being measured. Indigenous systems of value are also not highly represented in the green economy. Rather, ecosystems should be preserved on principle alone, rather than economic value. I am definitely on the side of this argument. This would be my argument for every open space planning project, if we lived in an ideal world. However, we do not live in an ideal world. During my trip to the World Water Forum, I learned that many, if not all, planning decisions are based on compromise, coordination, and communication. GI and LID are a step forward into incorporating nature back into our lifestyles, built landscapes, and infrastructure.

The WISE-UP to Climate project is another initiative that seeks to incorporate floods plains, watersheds and wetlands into existing built infrastructure such as dams, levees, and channels as a way to mitigate against the flood damages produced by climate change. They work to form partnerships to achieve their goals and incorporate the needs of under-represented stakeholders into their planning. They recognize that there are competing demands for water use and the functions of a natural infrastructure project can have different values to different sectors.

A lecture co-hosted by the Millennial Challenge Corporation and US Water Partnerships emphasized the role that governance has to take in LID projects. They also emphasized the need for partnerships across all sectors.

I was able to enter into a discussion on the role of multi-level governance and partnerships with presenters from the Netherlands at the Citizens Forum. They hosted a stimulating lecture on GI to mitigate climate change, in which they emphasized taking a big geographic approach to planning and thinking long-term. GI can promote diversity and emphasize the importance of local place and people. They said it was important to involve all parties concerned. I mentioned how in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy, the US and local NJ government wanted to install dunes along the entire NJ coast as a way to protect against sea level rise. However, a couple of municipalities were suing the state to oppose the measure, citing loss of property value. Was this an example of the failure of stakeholder involvement? The speaker emphasized the need to start a dialogue and develop an understanding about the value-added services of ecosystem investment. Natural infrastructure can help raise local value. People do not like change because they believe they will need to bear a cost up front. However, the benefits to GI and LID are diverse and not one-sided. NGOs can often help bridge the gap of understanding between government and stakeholders when implementing GI and LID projects. Upon hearing that, that moment was my first awakening to the fact that lessons learned in other countries, including developing countries, could be applied here in the United States, right in my backyard.

GI and LID projects provide a way to incorporate nature's structure and geochemistry back into our drinking water, flood water, and waste water management infrastructure as a way to mitigate against flooding and lower the costs of management and treatment. GI and LID projects can range in size from micro-projects to landscape-level planning. However, what all projects have in common is the need for economic efficiency, diversification of return on investment, value-added services for the local population, incorporation of natural drainage patterns, the use of native species, science-based approach, and communication across all stakeholders and investors.

Footnote:
*United State Environmental Protection Agency, Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions Among Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality, 2nd Edition. EPA, Washington, D.C: 2013

Inspiration from Abroad: Cool Things from Overseas We Should Be Doing Here

Traveling is such a wonderful way to generate new ideas. Living in America, many times I catch myself thinking about what a great country this is, and all of the high tech innovations that have occurred in the last ten years. I value our high speed internet, our cell phones, and our social media as agents of change. The use of Google Maps and GPS has created opportunities to explore our world and monitor its changes like never before. American women and men are creating new ways to reuse, reduce and recycle our old materials and create biodegradable packing material so we put less of our stuff into landfills. I know, I know. I am a bit of an Amero-centric rube.

So that is why I was so fascinated to travel to South Korea and see all of the efficient ways that they are saving the environment better than we are. It's the little, everyday things that fascinate me so much, because they would be so easy to implement here. And their implementation would signal a cultural shift for the US, a shift toward making sustainability a part of each day. With small changes in our water use or transportation, we would be reminded every time we flushed the toilet or turned on the shower or boarded a train of the need to conserve water and energy. Conservation would become simply a fact of life, not a fringe topic.

The first thing I fell in love with in Korea were the bathroom showers. The simplicity of having a shower head connected to the sink faucet astonished me - why were we not doing this over here? I loved the tiled floors and tiled walls of the bathroom. I loved the fact that I could simply be in the bathroom getting ready for the day and take a quick shower by the sink. The water savings were obvious  - if I washed my face first, or if I were a guy shaved my face first, I eliminated that running water loss from the shower. Then, as I used the shower, I would simply turn the faucet off when I did not need running water. In fact, my habit became reversed. I only turned the faucet on when I NEEDED running water. The serenity of a quite standing shower by the sink with no running water was beautifully serenaded by the gentle bird calls and sleepy city noises wafting their way in through the open window. My mind and memory floated out the window across oceans and times to my smaller bathroom back home. I looked across skies at my own window longingly, wishing that it had a gentle standing shower to serenade on a cool quite morning.

Posting pictures of my new shower to facebook, my friends jokingly told me they would be much cleaner if they could run a quick shower while sitting on the toilet.....

Tankless water heaters are much more common overseas than in America. Though the heating mechanisms are similar and the actual heating of the water is not more energy efficient, the tankless system conserves energy by not losing heat to standing water. Standing water will overtime drop in temperature, causing the tank to reheat itself to maintain a constant temperature. Tankless heaters do not lose heat to standing water or standing pipe water, and thereby conserve the energy that would otherwise be lost to reheating.

That wasn't the only bathroom innovation I liked. Though we are beginning to have these here, two-option flush toilets were much more prevalent in South Korea than in America. Almost every toilet I used in a public place had an option for a high volume flush or a low volume flush. Again, if we had this simple change over here in America, it would not only save water, but it would be a reminder every time we used the bathroom that our individual choices matter in the need for conservation.


In general, the efficiency of the hostel comforted and calmed me. It reminded me that sometimes we do not need so many things to be healthy and content. Sometimes pleasant company and good coffee is enough....

I'm a natural train rider. Growing up in Boston, I would ride trains all afternoon to get from A to B to C to Z. Public transportation is an active experience - you have to pay attention to your surroundings, keep yourself safe, talk to fellow passengers, and sometimes run to catch the train. Plus you get to look at the scenery or read or catch up on homework! On the opposite side is driving. Driving is isolated, suffocating, and stressful. You are alone with your own head suffering the indignities of the road. If the train is late, at least you get to complain to other people about it!

I love a grand train ride. I love the feeling of being a dignified passenger with somewhere to go, yet relaxing and enjoying my traveling experience. The KTX train in South Korea gave me that experience. I was able to sleep, read, and get some work done. Every time I thought to myself, gee I'm a little thirsty, an attendant with a rolling cart of drinks and snacks would come down the aisle. The most incredible thing about this train is that it runs approximately every seventeen minutes. If you miss one, just take the next one It is roughly 147 miles from Seoul to Daegu, and it took about two hours by high speed train. It only cost roughly US $45, which is so cheap by our standards. In contrast, it is approximately 139 miles from Philadelphia to Washington, DC, and it takes 2 hrs and 14 minutes by high speed train, but costs at least US $150!!!! Plus it only runs every couple of hours, not minutes. This puts a high speed commuter train out of the reach of millions of Americans. If you compare it to driving, it only takes two and a half miles to drive, and costs only about US $20 in gas and tolls (www.rome2rio.com). Which would you choose? Exactly. Amtrak is in a lose-lose situation right now, with not enough ridership to lower costs, and not low-enough costs to increase ridership. We do not invest enough of our government money in public transportation and high speed trains. This is in part because the government is not being pressured to produce trains for its population. Americans will always take a car over a train. Why is it such a big deal that Joe Biden rides the train? Shouldn't everyone who lives outside of Washington ride the train? The government of Korea saw the congested traffic patterns on its major freeways and decided as early as the 1970s that it had to provide a high speed train option, to help move the country's citizens and keep the economy moving. If we want the American economy to keep growing during the reality of conservation, we need a more high tech high speed train line. All across the country rail infrastructure is breaking down. We need this investment in our future.

Also, finally, there was free wifi in many places. It's becoming more common in restaurants in the Eastern US, but it is standard in Korea for there to be free wifi in public places. There was wifi on the train, at the conference, at the hostel, and at the hotel. We should end this debate in this country about whether or not internet is a utility and embrace the fact that it is a public service which will serve to further our growth.

No Matter Where You Go, The Trash Follows

I set off on my journey to the 7th World Water Forum in South Korea with lofty goals: make a difference in the world, complete a project, live in the most eco-friendly way possible, communicate and connect, and most practically, create no trash while on my trip. I really did not like the idea of travelling to another country just to leave behind a pile of trash in my wake. I felt that trash would somehow be a permanent legacy of my trip, when likely I would never be going back there to clean it up. Why should I contribute to Korea's garbage pile? When camping in New Jersey, or anywhere else for that matter, we always operate on the premise of "leave no trace behind." We chose items with little packaging, pick up trash in the woods as we camp, and clean up after ourselves when we leave. The irony is we are simply carrying out our trash to be dumped elsewhere. I somehow thought that I could generate no trash on a seven day trip to another country, or create so little trash that I could carry it with me back to America. But I found that the epidemic of use-once-and-throw-out followed me wherever I went. There was no escaping the trash. However, like many things I have come to learn in life, it is small steps that usually make a difference. It is very hard to change by leaps and bounds. I need to just take everything one step at a time.

It started with the airplane. Much to my dismay every meal, snack, and drink they served came with trash. The flight attendants had to walk up and down the aisles several times just to collect trash. The ear plugs alone were wrapped in plastic, inside a plastic bag, inside another plastic bag with the eye mask. And most people just threw their earplugs out without even using them. Another giant disposable was the blanket and pillow they gave us. Do those get re-used? Or are they simply thrown out at the end of the trip? Even if they are somehow recycled into fibers that is a huge waste for every international flight all over the world every day. I was so dismayed by the end of my flight about the bag full of trash I had generated in just fourteen hours.

Needless to say, I was disappointed. I was sad with myself for so easily giving in, and sad for our society that we have created so many laws to protect ourselves that we end up endangering ourselves.

When we arrived for the first night in Seoul, I was pretty proud of us. We ate at a local restaurant, used regular chopsticks and cups they had in house, and didn't generate too much trash.

I did pretty well the next day. We ate at a local house that specialized in a traditional polluck soup meal. No trash except that paper napkins. Not too bad. 

Though there was the paper coffee cup from the awesome coffee house.....

And the water bottles on the train to Daegu.....but all in all it was a pretty low-key day, trash-wise. 

It picked right back up again the first day of the Forum. Breakfast consisted of a paper cup of coffee (no, I did not bring my reusable travel mug on my trip : ( I packed too many clothes instead....) and packaged pastries from 7 Eleven. 

What really got to me though were the water bottles. Free water bottles were everywhere. It seemed like a joke to me that we were at a global conference to discuss water issues, including ocean plastic, and everywhere I turned there were disposable water bottles. There was a really good opportunity to provide us with a reusable water bottle at the beginning of the forum, when we received our awesome messenger bags with Forum information, but regrettably, it did not happen that way. There were no huge cisterns of water, only endless water bottles. There were only two recycling bins in the entire complex, and they were behind ropes and inaccessible. 

South Korea does have a national recycling program. According to the United Nations Environmental Program, the country's "Extended Producer Responsibility" program has recycled 6.0637 tons of waste in the first five years of its activity. The program required importers and manufacturers to recycle a certain percentage of waste every year. However, while the percentage of waste recycled continues to rise, so does the amount of waste generated by the country ( http://www.unep.org/ ), waste such as our water bottles here. This reminds me of a situation I encountered in the US. In New Jersey, where I live, you can find recycling bins at major stores, shopping centers, and public places. Recycling bins are becoming more and more common in public settings. However, when I traveled to Cody, Wyoming, in the summer of 2012, I did not see a single recycling bin anywhere I went. I'm assuming that more rural areas in the US do not recycle as much as urban areas. Perhaps the same is true in Korea. Daegu is a fairly large city of approximately 2.5 million people (around the size of Houston or Chicago), however, perhaps recycling has more of a presence in the capital city of Seoul. Another possible explanation is that recycling programs target industry more than commerce.

Everyday at lunch there were more disposables. We received awesome food from the Forum in the form of boxed lunches to accommodate many dietary needs. I picked up the vegetarian option everyday, and it was great. It was really nice to have my considerations taken into account. They were packed in recycled cardboard, which was nice. But we received plastic forks and knives along with it. And the meal came with prepackaged condiments inside. So everyday, I wound up with this:

I'm not saying this to be a stick-in-the-mud. Nor am I criticizing the conference. The conference was fantastic and extremely well run. I'm writing this because we know we can all do better. At a conference hosted for 30,000 Environmental Professionals and Engineers, we can share. We can share our condiments in large pots. We can share our water dispensers and drink tap water in reusable bottles. We can scoop our food from common trays. We can bring our own coffee mug. Environmentalists are one group of consumer from whom businesses can demand more responsibility. Environmentalists love to try new things and break old behavioral patterns. We don't mind, no, we actually like going out of our way to save a piece of trash from the landfill. We want our tidy little conveniences to be swept out from under us and be told to do better. So why am I saying this? I had the silly idea of forgoing my conference agenda and just focusing on getting more recycling bins in the Forum. But I don't think I would have gotten anywhere with that. I'm beginning to see in life that it is the small things that make a difference. I don't know if I as one person could have gotten a conference to change its format in four days. I'm beginning to think I couldn't. But what I can do is start with me. Everyday. That is what I am bringing back to America.

So my reusable coffee mug and water bottle have been hooked to my side since I returned. So far everyday has been a (reusable) bagged lunch at work, and that makes me feel good. On a little larger scale, I contacted WasteManagement for a complete guide to recycling in our single-stream dumpster, and emailed it to my office. I can try to plan my meals out so I don't have to purchase disposable items. And lucky for us, there are lots of recycling bins in New Jersey. And what else? I am writing this blog. I'm writing this blog so we can all keep talking with each other about how we wouldn't mind bringing our own silverware to a conference, or how cool it might be to get some gochujang from a big ol' squirt bottle.

So what do you think? Could I have done better? What could I have done differently?