The Tragic Optimism of Human Innovation

Climate change is an opportunity clothed as a crisis. On both sides of the climate change discussion there is a sense of optimism that has thwarted the safety of our nations fiscal investments and human quality of life.  Supporters of adaptation under a warming world are convinced efforts in clean energy will end an era of environmental neglect that alters earth cycles while supporters of slow adaptation want to move forward in the same direction. Our tragic human optimism in our innovations have gotten us here stateside in some sticky situations, yet it wasn't until all sectors were on one accord that local, national and global advancements were made that benefited both humans and nature.

There are three very unique environmental catastrophes that have threatened the productivity of our natural systems, human health and well being as well as our other beloved green....money.

• The Dust Bowl Era- Farming practices and severe drought led to soil erosion affected 100,000,000 acres, created what was called "black blizzards, dislocated 3.5 million people which is about 3% of the population in 1935. This also impacted the economy, the price of land dropped, and whats interesting is that some of the economic downturn was a result of the inability or unwillingness to adapt through shifting to other agricultural products.  Even when the system was not capable of sustaining for the legacy crops and practices some just were not ready to accept that.  This teaches us that "riding it till the wheels falls off" approach is using your optimism to double down on disaster.  The response of President Roosevelt was not to ignore this issue it was to address the practices and utilize the expert scientist to discover how this happened and the ecological strategies that connected to it for resolution. The government invested in science and used the crisis as an opportunity to protect agricultural assets and rebuild a sector of our society to protect food, job, and environmental security for generations to come.  They recognized the threat, they saw people suffering and more importantly the innovation was the relationship between the community, the government and scientists.
• The general use of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane "DDT" - Yet another cascade effect of human innovation gone awry, and a story of heartfelt passion for the use of science to show the connection between human actions, environmental consequences and what we call a crisis in ecology.  The application of this chemical indeed has saved lives protecting soldiers during the later half of World War II from contracting malaria and typhus.  Oddly enough the insecticidal properties of this chemical was learned in 1939 by a swiss chemist Paul Hermann Müller. I'm starting to see the mid to late 1900's as the age of environmental enlightenment. A time in which our intellectual advancements in science and ecology allowed for us to decide how we can reconcile our societal profits at the consequence of our environmental quality. We seemed to genuinely want to not destroy the society we fought so fiercely to protect.  With the publication of Silent Spring by author and biologist Rachel Carson our worlds were turned upside down, now connecting our beloved insecticide solution to harming animals and causing cancer.  With diligent research as well as necessary government intervention after 30 years of its use the chemical was banned in the United States.  Yet another example of how policy, scientists and the community at large worked together to address this system wide issue.  
• Ozone depletion- Oddly my favorite story of socio-environmental accomplishments this was a global issue unlike the localized former two.  The transport of man made chemicals into the stratosphere created a global crisis for the books.  All of earth humans, terrestrial and aquatic life was assumed to be threatened. 

"The international response to the ozone threat has been perhaps the most successful of all global environmental efforts" - Levin Institute SUNY

          With 96 of ozone depletion chemicals being completely phased out in developed countries   people across the world developing nations now are following suit as well. We say we are leaders....and I love the game follow the leader unless they are leading me into a pit of poverty.  The Montreal Protocol initiated resulted in an annual decrease of CFC's from 1.1 million tons to 35,000 tons.

Energy has gotten us to where we are today and I understand the profit driven, capitalist, industrialized society we have created. Yet we have not gotten here by accident and without some tragic consequences. Risking water quality, environmental integrity expecting nature to figure it out is a tragic optimistic and reductionist insult to our dynamic earth. To visit our solutions with a fine tooth comb may allow each side to see the fears of the other.  Again this crisis is an opportunity. I love this earth, I love my city, and I love my country! I owned a business and I loved my profits. What I am saying is that I believe in our ability to create huge problems though our innovation but I also believe in is our leadership in acknowledging; our disinvestment in poor practices that result in the destruction and impairment of earth systems. We need to regroup with our scientists and evolve a new society ready to show the world just how badass the United States is. We save the world and it is our time again to put on the damn cape, stand behind our scientists and innovate in a way that saves us green, and makes us more of the kind that we love so much.

GMO Mosquitoes..Fear? Or Science Chauvanism?

http://rt.com/usa/226203-florida-mosquitoes-gmo-insects/

I thought it was a great article to communicate the contentious apprehension we have with "GMO". Yes genetically modified organism. It is true that science currently has the power to directly access genetic material DNA to change something about an organism. We also have been influencing and modifying genes for sometime albeit less directly. Think about your pet for example. Your domestic dog or car is the result of passive genetic alteration through intentional breeding. The desired body size, coat texture or coat color, and temperament  are results of intentionally mixing genes to get the dog of your choice. 

Enter in the convo of GMO foods as a scientist I understand the double edged sword of resolving threats to crop quantity/quantity (such as pests or poor soil quality because the environment sucks) while not fully knowing the potential threats it may cause in human health or economic sector. 

Nonetheless GMO food wouldn't be needed if our natural resources were being respected and we did not live in a capitalistic global economy. (Ok stick with me I'm getting to the bugs )

People's fear of GMO at times is astonishing. In 2013 the FDA approved the first ever GMO flu vaccine. I didn't hear too many people complaining about this advancement nor did I hear any uproar about it in 2014 as we entered flu season. It's almost as if it was no big deal. 

I see this as what I call "science chauvinism". I've booked (face booked) about #FWP first world problems. It isn't until we see the direct and immediate removal of a threat to our own livelihoods that we will trust the science and scientists. The further removed we are from the system or the reality of the systems impact on other humans and their local economies the more biased and trustless we become. We have the privilege of thinking 10-20 steps ahead of science because science has saved our lives and environment. While the status of health and poverty are not absent from first world nations we are way beyond worrying about our children dying from the flu or measles. 

Now the bugs....

1. Only females feed on human blood and therefore are the target for this strategy 

2. The DNA modified in the lab population targets the larvae of the insect not allowing it to mature 

3. If the larvae of this Mosquito that carries the disease can not live they can not fly they can not bite

4. Non biting males will be released to mate with females 

5. An infected person can come from somewhere else without knowledge...a mosquito that is already here in the states can bite them and transmit it to another person 

6. I believe people want certainty about what happens if this insects DNA interacts with humans. I say to that "science never has 100% certainty I wasn't certain I was going to be in the population of women with complications from an epidural but I was; you are given the risks with all your meds but you take them. We have science that wouldn't need to exist if climate change and invasive species wasn't an issue but we do. When you think about GMO's in the future or any science for that fact take a step back and ask yourself are you being a science chauvinist because you'll trust it if your life were immediately threatened. I support science literacy but I support human exploration of solutions. The sooner we come to grips with the trade offs our IMPERFECT science possess the better. We are scientists not psychics."