Click here to download the July 2010 Edition

Print PDF

We are arriving at a juncture in history where old land-tenure arrangements are no longer working and must be replaced by new arrangements. Though there is probably nothing more sacred in the Western psyche than private property, it is truly a Pandora’s box of unforeseen consequences. This reality has not yet dawned upon the general consciousness but the warning signs are abundantly clear, and the cost of housing is just one flashing red light. In 1955, Peter van Dresser bought a home on Canyon Rd. for $850. Today, my monthly rent exceeds that amount. If nothing else, Americans are beginning to realize that the “American Dream” of owning a home is a dream; it is simply out of reach or requires such an extraordinary sacrifice that it is not worth pursuing.

Ironically, what began as an alternative land tenure model for low-income, poverty-stricken, disenfranchised communities has become the model for what everyone needs access to today, affordable homeownership. The Community Land Trust (CLT) movement has grown exponentially in the last forty years and there are now over 241 CLT’s across the US according to the National Community Land Trust Network. Unquestionably, the primary objective of the modern CLT movement is to provide affordable homeownership and its ability to deliver on that promise is most impressive. As small as this movement is, it has not gone unnoticed. Local government community planning agencies and affordable housing offices around the country are paying considerable attention to assisting emerging CLT’s because they have discovered that public subsidies for permanently affordable homeownership are best utilized and retained with the CLT model.

In NM, we have three CLT’s. Sawmill Community Land Trust in Albuquerque, Tierra Madre Community Land Trust in Sunland Park, NM, and the Jacona Farmland Trust near Pojoaque, NM.

The Sawmill Community Land Trust, founded in 1997, is most consistent with the classic CLT model because the land is wholly owned by the nonprofit, the residents have direct democratic control, and they have instituted a land use plan. Sawmill has built over 56 affordable homes and is planning a commercial site, community center, neighborhood park, and community garden. Sawmill is considered one of the most successful CLT’s in the country.

Tierra Madre Community Land Trust was founded by the Sisters of Charity in 1998 to serve low-income, Spanish-speaking, Mexican Americans in Sunland Park near the border of Mexico. The community has nearly 50 units of passive-solar, straw-bale housing, built largely by the co-operative effort of member families. Homes are sold for an average of $23,400. The CLT holds a 99-year long-term lease with the State of NM, and homeowners in turn lease land from the CLT for about $100 per year. Because of this unusual arrangement, Tierra Madre is not a true CLT because they don’t presently own the land, but perhaps that will come.

Jacona Farmland Trust was founded by Helenty Homans, a Czech native who immigrated here at age twelve to escape WWII Europe. In 2004 she donated her 3.8 acres with agricultural land and three homes to the Santa Fe Community Housing Trust to ensure affordable housing to future generations. Jacona is not a true CLT either because it is managed by the Housing Trust, but is a big step in the right direction. Said Homans, “My motive – again, it’s a tiny little thing I’m doing – is combining the intent to have affordable housing, open space, and to preserve agricultural uses, because New Mexico has been a real second home for me, after my homeland.” Jacona Farm is a model for future development in rural NM.

The Town of Cochiti Lake is not a CLT or any variation thereof, but it is worth mentioning because 400+ people live on long-term leased land owned by the Pueblo of Cochiti, thus homes are considerably less expensive than elsewhere.

Community Land Trusts are often confused with other arrangements so it’s important to clarify what they are not. Real Estate Trusts are private trusts for private purposes, organized for specified beneficiaries and/or financial gain. Land Conservancy Trusts preserve land and protect it from development. The preservation of land is their sole aim and they are not intended for human uses. Agricultural Trusts are similarly organized, to preserve farmland from the encroachment of development, but they also aim to keep farmland usable for agricultural activity. Communes and intentional communities are typically organized as private trusts created by and for people with a shared philosophic outlook. Limited equity cooperative members own shares of a co-op’s assets. A CLT is not any of these but will typically collaborate with conservancy and agricultural trusts, and lease land to co-ops.

A CLT is designed for human uses, for improvements to the land for mutual benefit. A CLT is not designed for land preservation but for land use (though land preservation can be an incorporated as an objective). The land must be put to use to benefit individuals and communities.

Besides the main benefit of affordable housing, there are also many incidental benefits that naturally arise from this new land tenure arrangement. CLT’s are naturally insulated from the devastating effects of private property, free of land concentration, land speculation, and absentee landlordism. CLT land cannot be sold and land cannot be used for any purpose other than what the community deems an appropriate, sustainable use. Because of these factors, CLT’s naturally restore individual and community interests and balance those interests so that individuals and communities get their needs met both today and tomorrow.

Both individuals and communities have valid and legitimate interests in land tenure and land use. Individuals want and need affordable homes that cannot be pulled out from under them for long-term security and generational continuity. True communities are built from this basis with all members of the community being housed equitably, affordably, and securely.

The community wants and needs to maintain continuous access to its land for all its members for housing, a sustainable local economy, and social well-being. Communities also want and need to retain whatever value has been created collectively such as communal resources and amenities, and a stable and healthy community character. And like individuals, communities want and need to pass on a sound inheritance and legacy to future generations.

The equation noted above should be commonplace; the primacy of individual and community interests with a balance between the two, but surprisingly, it does not presently exist. Present day private property arrangements stealthily but assuredly erode and finally topple individual as well as community interests.

To put this in perspective, NM provides a fine case study. The federal government owns 41.8% of land in NM and the State of NM owns 12% of the land (private/corporate interests control much federal and state land for mining, gas, oil, ranching, and forestry). Native American tribes own a little less than 10% of land in NM. Adding up these figures, it appears that federal, state, and Indian lands account for about 64% of land in NM, so private land must amount for about 36% of the state. Ted Turner, the renowned “green” land speculator/grabber, alone owns 4% of the land in NM, about 2 million acres, leaving 32% or less of privately held land in NM. Of that 32%, 90% of that land is held by just 5% of the populace/corporations (1983 NM survey). That leaves just 4% of all the land in NM for 95% of the population of NM (or in other terms, Ted Turner owns as much land as 95% of the population of NM). In sum, a very small minority of private/corporate interests are controlling 86% of the land in NM (10% of land is held for Indian reservations), so just 4% of land in NM is available for virtually the entire population of NM.

It is absurd, given our present context, to talk about individual and community rights and interests. They have been shredded. The reality is that a minority of private/corporate interests control and dominate individual interests as well as community interests. The consequences of this arrangement can be noted at every level of society, from the local to the national and international levels. We surely wouldn’t be in the position we’re presently in with corporate monopolies and international financial institutions dominating our lives if it weren’t for this takeover. Oil Company BP could not be polluting the gulf waters and threatening our entire oceanic life, and the life of our planet, if it were not for private interests dominating and usurping individual and community interests. Private property arrangements exacerbate gross imbalances of power and create untenable conditions for people and the planet.

The growing crisis of affordable housing here in Santa Fe is a perfect example of a community having lost control of its land base and its fundamental rights, as individuals and families, the foundation of communities, are held hostage to this situation, left landless and homeless, deep in debt and struggling daily to make ends meet. What security, what rights, what sovereignty, what sustainability, what community, what local control, what local economy, and what well-being do individuals and communities have left? Less and less as time goes on. Democracy is usurped at the economic level long before it ever reaches the political level.

A sense of place and a sense of security are so vital to individuals and communities, which are constructed of individuals forming larger social organisms that are lost and adrift without this cohesion. The two are inextricably bound. It’s uncanny that we place such little value on these fundamental conditions for human and societal well-being. We seem largely anesthetized to the fact that these things even matter, and substitute a flimsy proposition that a good job, a family, and “success in life” (i.e. economic prosperity), should suffice. But our condition, underneath it all, and in spite of the bravado, is incredibly unstable, insecure, and anxiety-ridden.

The insecurity that people un-naturally endure is real and a consequence of economic conditions generated by inequitable land tenure arrangements. And the angst is real as well and generates real social consequences. The threat of unemployment due to job cuts, illness, and economic conditions that we have no control over, is like an ever-present alarm in the back of our head. There is no home to turn to for most of us that is truly safe, stable, and secure, where we are assured that our needs will be met for as long as we need refuge. Even the birds have refuge and are given sanctuary. Why is it that the concept of refuge is an anachronism in today’s society?

Notwithstanding an earthquake or political coup, a Community Land Trust provides a blueprint for restoring individual and community security. First of all, a CLT home can be had so much less expensively than a typical home that it can be paid off much more quickly, leaving behind years of labor and the vicissitudes of fortune or fate. The land can be acquired by donation, leaving its members free of creditors immediately; or if purchased with all hands contributing, the land can be paid off quickly. That a community holds the land in perpetuity, and not privately for short-term profit provides another layer of protection. And the community itself, the people of the CLT, are invested in the land and place collectively, for long term benefit. One needn’t struggle alone, and help, collective labor, camaraderie and other benefits can be procured. A CLT is here to stay; that is its mission. The people and the land are re-bound and re-united.

Even more security can be infused into a CLT by creating self-sufficiency so that the homes are not dependent on outside life support systems and neither are its inhabitants. CLT members can build their own local economy to the best of their ability. The Pueblo communities and the villages of northern New Mexico were completely self-sufficient and independent for centuries, producing their own foodstuffs, shelter, and all other necessities for comfortable living. A farm, pasturage, hunting, fishing, orchards and a commons served a small community well.

Right here at home we have an extraordinary model for what this can look like. The Pueblo of Tesuque is presently engaged in re-building self-sufficiency through their farm project, the Tesuque Agricultural Initiative. They grow traditional Native foods of corn, beans and squash, as well as vegetables and fruit. They also have goats for milk and cheese, chickens for meat and eggs, and bees for honey. Their aim is to feed the entire Pueblo of 600 people. The Pueblo of Tesuque, just like all the other pueblos, never privatized land so they are in the envious position of having land and being able to designate it for local needs such as food production.

Re-establishing the self-sufficient rural village is not so far-fetched and we’re certainly not the first generation to be thinking about local self-sufficiency and local economies. In 1974, Peter van Dresser, the decentralist, solar pioneer, and community visionary, wrote a 17-part series in the New Mexican describing in detail how to resurrect New Mexico village life.

In contrast to the Pueblos, the city or county of Santa Fe would have to purchase land they don’t have, which costs a fortune today, to even think about providing food production for the residents here. Santa Fe Canyon Ranch, recently acquired by Santa Fe County for $7 million, is located in the La Cienega Valley. There are 470 acres of which a substantial proportion is prime agricultural land. Will this land be used for agriculture and affordable housing in equitable CLT arrangements to serve our local community or will it be privatized as is the usual course of events and the entire public investment lost almost immediately?

The fact of the matter is that we no longer have control over our food production just like we no longer have control over housing that is affordable. What is known as the “farmland crisis,” the inaccessibility of land for small farmers, is as severe or even more severe than the affordable housing crisis. Should the economy be disrupted or fail, even temporarily, we will see a major tragedy unfold. It is estimated that just 3% of our food is grown locally, and it’s very probable that much of that food is grown on land that is not owned by the farmer. His tenancy is as unstable as our own. And the farmers that do own land? What guarantee is there that they won’t be forced to sell their land, leaving for jobs in the city when they can no longer remain financially solvent, a problem that has been plaguing farmers for well over a century.

The “land problem” is multi-dimensional and circuitous; our land is held hostage, unavailable for housing or food production, the two major necessities of life.

The Community Land Trust can reverse not only the problem of affordable housing but can return land to the people for local food production. The importance of this dual function, this potential of a CLT, cannot be overstated. There are very few community land trusts today that recognize the patterns of the overall land tenure picture, incorporating both of these elements into their land use plan, returning affordable housing and local food production back to the people, but it will and must come.

Individual and community rights and interests can be restored but the key is that people regain control and sovereignty over their lives. The CLT model in whatever form it takes makes this possible, whether it be affordable housing or an effort at complete self-sufficiency. Whatever a CLT community wants and needs is possible. Local control over housing and land-use decisions are inherent, indivisible, and indefinite. The organization is democratically organized with open membership, inclusive governance, and direct accountability to the community it serves. Security, safety, a sense of place, and a refuge are just some of the many beneficial byproducts. This is local control at its finest.

The Community Land Trust is unique and its benefits immeasurable. Anyone can start or participate in forming a CLT and there are no legal impediments to its formation. It does not require an Act of Congress, a “transfer tax” or any redistribution of wealth, does not require a bloody uprising, a Che Guevara leader, or turn our economy into socialism or communism. It restores the integrity of individuals and communities, and puts control back into the hands of people. It is ancient. It is modern. It is ethical. It is time.

The Community Land Trust model will continue to evolve and incorporate more and more of the sustainability movement, beginning with better methods for building truly affordable, green homes; energy conservation and use of renewables; farmland and wildlands preservation; and local economic self-sufficiency. The CLT movement is growing and with it comes more and more land to be reclaimed by the people, for the common good. The Community Land Trust model can take us in the direction we must turn as we confront the impasse before us; enlivening community, reclaiming democracy, respecting the Earth, sharing our inheritance, re-learning independence, self-sufficiency, and sovereignty, and re-connecting with life.

* If anyone has land to donate for an emerging rural, self-sufficient, sustainable CLT, please contact Rebekah (contact info below).

To be continued next month, Part 5 will investigate non-polluting and non-extracting, affordable green building for self-sufficiency. This article is also available online at The Santa Fe New Mexican website http://www.santafegreenline.com/

Rebekah Zablud Azen is a long-time student of traditional indigenous lifeways, non-revisionist history, economics, and land tenure issues – passports to understanding humanity’s present predicament and enabling us to identify practical solutions for survival and restored balance in a new era. Rebekah can be reached at 505.424.9475 or rebekah@cybermesa.com.

Print PDF

Nestled in the small mountain village of Arroyo Seco outside of Taos, is one of only three remaining hostels in New Mexico. Hostels are affordable travel accommodations, which began in post-war Europe to allow extensive travel opportunities for young adults. By the 1980s hostelling became popular in America, and many states had a handful of hostel choices, but by the ‘90s their numbers began to decline. Today, most large US cities have only one hostel. This makes the Abominable Snowmansion Hostel all the more special. It is located at the base of the Taos Ski Basin, allowing winter skiers affordable housing options. The summer months attract hikers, fly fishers and visitors to the city of Taos.

But there is more going on than meets the eye. This hostel has turned the acres of land around the grounds into a large organic garden/farm, growing everything from herbs and medicinal flowers to standard vegetables. They use no pesticides or genetically engineered seeds, or farm vehicles. All weeding, planting, watering, and maintenance are done by hand. Whose hands? The youthful visitors.

At a time in our country when many college graduates are having a difficult time finding standard jobs, especially green jobs, many youth are eager to work toward a sustainable future and learn all they can through experience. Organizations such as the “World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms” (www.wwoof.org) are booming in popularity and pointing today’s youth toward organic farming opportunities, including the farm at the Abominable Snowmansion. For a nominal hostel lodging fee, these youth show up from across the US and many international countries, to plant and dig in the rich soil. For their hard labor, they are welcome to eat anything they help grow.

The hostel has seven large tipis on the grounds, along with outdoor bathrooms, an indoor kitchen and a recreation room. The tipis are extremely popular and are usually booked months in advance. A fire pit site is in the campground. Many summer nights a fire is lit and musical instruments played. The singing and storytelling seem to create a sense of belonging and community. Communal kitchens, abundant recreation opportunities, and the chance to make lasting friendships with kindred spirits keep young people coming summer after summer.

The diversity of food, herbs and spices grown here is one of the fascinating features of this organic farm. Almost 100 different plant species adorn the grounds. Organic herbal teas grown on the site are offered free to all of the hostel’s guests, who are welcome to pick vegetables from the garden as they ripen. The hostel provides free rice and beans, and it is quite common for groups to pick fruit and vegetables and create community evening meals. What is not harvested from the garden is dried and used for winter visitors.

Perhaps the most exciting aspect of the organic showcase is the diverse edible mushroom farm located in the back of the hostel. Growing mushrooms outdoors can be tricky, as moisture and sunlight directly impact growth conditions. The hostel has placed wood logs in strategic locations, and covered the top of the fenced-in farm to help create an outdoor microhabitat with controllable moisture and sunlight. This is a fantastic educational project.

For guests who cannot commit to a summer of farming, the hostel staff will take the time to introduce sustainable and natural skills such as herbal preparations, paper making and composting, especially in the spring and summer months. These opportunities keep young people hanging around long past the last harvest, and offer families with young children the opportunity to take educational and affordable vacations.

The hostel itself has designated family rooms, and there are plenty of toys, games and children’s books in the lobby. The village of Arroyo Seco has several natural restaurants and a natural grocery store, and yoga and art classes are offered. The Earthship colonies of Taos are just a short drive away. They offer guests the opportunity to learn sustainable building skills. Local hot springs, hiking, and the city of Taos provide activities for all ages and interests. Overall, a visit to the Abominable Snowmansion Hostel during the summer growing season has much to offer. A visit anytime can be a wonderful experience.

Lena Hakim is an environmental scientist and resident of Santa Fe. She enjoys visiting and promoting local grassroots sustainable projects. She can be reached at lenahakim@yahoo.com.

Print PDF

SolarLogic made headlines last year when it won a local economic development grant from the city of Santa Fe. Since then the company has been developing its flagship products, the SLIC (SolarLogic Integrated Controller) and the SLASH-D (SolarLogic-Assisted Solar Heating Design). The combination of these products manages the inherent complexity in solar heating system design and control, removing the burden of expertise from the installer.

Dana Orzel, a long-time solar heating installer from Ridgway, CO, said, “The SLIC is the smartest solar hot water & boiler integrating controller I have seen on the market. The commonsense approach addresses the fundamental and advanced control parameters, and the current condition of every valve, sensor and relevant temperature, and it provides remote, web-based system trouble shooting and parameter adjustment.”

Following the ongoing beta-test period for the SLIC, the company will unveil its 2nd generation product at the end of 2010. At that time, the SLIC will be made available to heating contractors across North America. SolarLogic plans to use the SLIC and SLASH-D products to effect over a 10-fold increase in solar heating installations in the next ten years.

For more info, contact Fred Milder, SolarLogic’s CEO at 505.577.4633.

Print PDF

“As we build a thriving solar industry in NM, it is important that we attract all aspects of the industry. That is why I am pleased to announce the establishment of the CFV Solar Test Laboratory and the Fraunhofer R&D facility,” Governor Richardson said. “This shows that our renewable energy policies and pro-business attitude continue to draw international interest and investment.”

The CFV Solar Test Laboratory is a joint effort between CSA Group, Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems, Fraunhofer USA Center for Sustainable Energy Systems, and VDE Testing and Certification Institute. The new lab will test products for certification to North American and International photovoltaic test standards.

“We are very excited about the location of our new test facility. The vast majority of PV installations in the US will be located in the Southwest, and Albuquerque allows us to be close to those markets,” said Christian Hoepfner, President, CFV Solar Test Laboratories, and Director of Technical Operations, Fraunhofer CSE.

In addition to the CFV Solar Test Laboratory, Fraunhofer CSE and Fraunhofer ISE will operate a R&D facility at the same location, focusing on long-term reliability, reduced costs and increased performance of PV modules. The new facilities will be located in the former Advent Solar Building. The location provides excellent access to the airport, Sandia National Labs, UNM, and other major players in the PV supply chain.

Farmer’s Market in Albuquerque Goes Solar

In its efforts to become more sustainable, Albuquerque’s downtown Grower’s Market has become one of first farmers’ markets in the country to be exclusively solar powered. The new system was installed and designed in collaboration with Clean Switch, a solar energy design and installation company, and the University of New Mexico Sustainability Studies Program. The Downtown Action Team, the non-profit group responsible for this change, hopes to create more awareness of the potential of solar power among the market’s visitors, and encourage more people to seriously consider switching over to this sustainable energy source.

Print PDF

Gerald Ansell

Here in our beautiful and supportive Southwest region of the USA, plastic bags appear to be of a somewhat unimportant and relatively background importance in our busy lives. Most of us take for granted that practically every time we go shopping at our friendly nationwide department store, its checkout will provide us with a nice, convenient “free” plastic bag or two, or three or more that enables us to carry our purchases to the car. Most of us probably use the bag once more to bag-up trash under the kitchen sink or maybe as a doggie waste bag. Less than 2% of us take it back to the store for “recycling” or (heaven forbid) a “second usage.” An unknown percentage of us are vaguely aware that when the wind blows, a lot of these bags somehow decorate our highways and byways by wrapping themselves around bushes and fences. Oh well, who cares?! Just another of life’s endless trivia… It certainly has NOTHING TO DO WITH ECO-MASS DESTRUCTION. Oh! And by the way, what is that?

Think again! Since our emergence on Earth, mankind has almost certainly proved to be its most creative, versatile, optimistic, self-perpetuating, intelligent, self-indulgent, and in many respects appreciative species and guest. For reasons to still be understood however, we have also conducted a never-ending, but as yet officially non-declared WAR on both ourselves and our host, the Earth’s eco-structure. For thousands of years each of our now non-existent civilizations, and even our current one, has creatively developed an impressive array of self-destructive weapon systems to annihilate each other, ranging from spears, swords, clubs, gunpowder, nerve gases, germs, chariots, tanks, battleships, warplanes, etc etc; plus associated manufacturing capabilities. To crown it all we have a variety of incredible nuclear devices capable of destroying thousands of humans, whole cities and the nearby ecology ALL-IN-ONE-GO. Usually its ensuing wars were declared between constituent groups such as tribes, countries, empires, religions, states, etc. For those of us who enjoy the History Channel, much of its information propagates the reasons why the wars or conflicts got started, who won, who lost, who performed well, and who the villains or heroes were.

Mankind’s UNDECLARED war upon its planet’s fragile ecosystem has taken place for many of reasons above: i.e. ego, political and economic power, food and minerals supply, more control, the sheer intellectual ignorance and arrogance of the majority of its populations, laziness, short-term profitability etc., etc. This undeclared war is again accompanied and accomplished by the sheer ingenuity, energy and creativeness, and often inherent goodness of the same mankind who wages it. During the past millenniums, mankind’s usually unintended eco-destructive activities have developed an impressive array of “weapons” such as energy and materials dependent upon non-sustainable sources, as exemplified by their addiction to oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear suppliers and mining interests. During the past 2-3 centuries of the Industrial Revolution these have rapidly become almost indispensible to mankind’s current way of life here on planet Earth. They have resulted in monolithic global industrial organizations which now dictate every government’s financial, manufacturing, educational, import/export policies and their growingly captive populations’/consumers’ social needs, wants and minds.

So! Just where do our precious, convenient and seemingly innocuous PLASTIC BAGS fit into the disturbing set of utterances above? In terms of HARD REALITY, their current disposal results in a yearly killing, by choking, ingestion or getting caught-up, of up to 2 million birds, at least 100,000 marine creatures such as fish, turtles, plankton, and their habitats in and on our planet’s oceans and land. As things stand now as mankind’s population and therefore plastic bag usage increases, the killings and destruction will probably increase accordingly. Plastic bags obviously share end results comparable with regular weapons of mass destruction.

Plastic bags, wrappings and other food and beverage containers as we know them today, made their debut with Rock-and-Roll and the Beatles during the late 1950s and ‘60s. The plastic bags were considered at the time to be highly convenient and worthwhile because they are essentially impervious to the the passage of water and moisture, insoluble in water, light, easily manufactured to be either transparent or colored, and easily and attractively labeled with an array of readily available printing products. In those early days some were even made from bio-derived and degradable materials. Within the next 10-20 years or so, however, it emerged that the most convenient and apparently cheapest way to manufacture plastic bags and a variety of other related packaging and containment products was with essentially polyethylene PE, which is derived mainly from oil and natural gas. Besides being cheap to manufacture and distribute, they were effectively protective of what they contained, whether frozen, airtight or as convenience bags. These containers transformed the industries of distribution and packaging of food and consumer goods throughout the world. Their emergence coincided with, or perhaps contributed greatly to, much of the world’s past 30+ year modern-day history.

During this period of time the Earth’s population started to increase almost exponentially, and its food and material goods demands rose accordingly, resulting in trading, manufacturing, importing, exporting and consumption patterns becoming globalized. Plastic bags and their vast accompanying array of containment products (especially plastic bottles) have become a seemingly essential part of the ensuing global enterprises.

It is estimated that at this moment in time the world’s population utilizes more than 500 billion (500,000,000,000) plastic bags a year – at a rate of approximately 1 million/minute. They require the equivalent of 60 million gallons of oil or natural gas for production. Depending upon the county utilizing them, less than 4% get recycled. They may perhaps be burned as a highly inefficient fuel source, make new bags, or be recycled into relatively durable plastic products such as outdoor furniture, trash containers, ornamental pots, etc. Again, and highly dependant upon where in the world they are being disposed, they might either be deposited with municipal trash, literally dumped out of /within sight, or dumped in a nearby river, stream, canyon or the sea. If by chance they do get buried, it can take between 100 to 1,000 years for them to decompose completely. To hide their unsightly presence, many break down into smaller pieces, thereby becoming more edible to wildlife. However they still do not decompose. During this period their major but slow decomposition product is methane, one of the most troublesome of all greenhouse gases. If dumped in such a way that they can be transported by wind or water, they are chemically stable enough to still take years and years to decompose. They travel for literally thousands of miles, litter up the land everywhere, and provide tempting-looking food sources for the millions of birds as well as land and sea creatures they eventually kill by their ingestion. We certainly see many thousands of these pieces of plastic right here in the Southwest alongside every roadside, stream, river, canyon, mountain trail and desert area.

Before leaving the subject of the final resting place for our precious plastic bags, it is worth noting that perhaps our suffering planet’s greatest and least known tragedy is the vast quantity of plastic bags and other plastic trash that finally gets swept into the oceans of the world and collected by their vortex currents into regions several thousand square miles in an area known as Gyres. The most well known and most studied is the North Pacific Gyre, about a thousand miles off the Californian coast, and covering an area at least twice that of Texas. Ocean currents mainly from Asia, India and the USA have carried over 40,000 pieces of plastic litter per square mile there. It is choking the ocean’s plant life and sea creatures, and practically relegating this region to becoming a “dead zone.” According to the Blue Ocean Society for Marine Conservation, the Algalita Marine Research Foundation and several others, there is strong evidence of 4 other similar major Gyres in the Indian, North and South Atlantic and South Pacific Oceans, and lesser ones elsewhere. With a growing worldwide human need for fish, and the expanding evidence that the majority of mankind’s thirst for oil and natural gas is also going to be wrested from the seabed and below, the prospects for our oceans to continue supporting the world’s ecosystem and providing a major portion of our food supply do not look too rosy, as is being currently demonstrated in the Gulf of Mexico.

Well! Well! Well! One might ask, “So what can be done?” In 2001 Ireland became extremely concerned about its consumption of about 1.2 billion plastic bags (316 per person) a year. It imposed a tax on plastic bags that reduced its consumption by 96% within a year. Several cities within the US have finally resorted to this solution to essentially reduce the pressure that plastic bag disposal places on municipal resources. Some are even considering banning the use of “free” plastic bags at the checkout counter. Sadly, since 2001 Ireland does not appear to be within the World’s Top “10” in financial leadership, and even the mention of additional taxes to solve any sort of problem raises the ire of most of our plastic bag users. One indisputable fact does remain however. In the end, the market cost of any product does seem to determine how much it gets consumed. Perhaps a Federally mandated surcharge of perhaps a dollar per bag MIGHT make us all think before using them. If one does not wish to to pay the surcharge, then it’s quite simple: DON’T TAKE THE BAG – BRING YOUR OWN – or CARRY THE PRODUCT TO THE CAR IN THE CART. Interestingly, many major grocery stores are trying to induce us to do just that by offering 5 cents for every reusable bag one takes to the store. My wife and I have meticulously used reusable bags and collected just over $52 – 5 cents at a time, in two years from our local grocery store. Even for two of us, that is a saving of about 10 bags/week, over 1,000 in two years, and $52 for our favorite charity. Imagine the corresponding economics for a USA population of 300+ million or the world’s 3+ billion.

So there we have it: The next time we are offered a plastic bag to cart our goods from the store, the following thought might perhaps flash across our busy minds. Shall we:

Clutter up our municipal waste with a product that evolves greenhouse gases?

Choke a bird to death?

Kill a fish, plankton or other creature and its habitat at the same time?

Litter a highway, stream, river, mountain trail or desert?

Dump it anywhere that’s convenient?

Put it in a trash bin where it might get recycled?

Return it to a store that collects them for recycling?

OR

Do the easy thing:

BRING OUR OWN BAG.

PERHAPS GET A REFUND FROM THE STORE.

DON’T PAY A SURCHARGE IF IT IS EVENTUALLY MANDATED.

It’s not the complete answer. It is an important issue, and as in most cases, the choice is ours.

Print PDF

A new report by Headwaters Economics, an independent, nonprofit research group, shows that New Mexico has emerged as a clean energy leader, increasing its percentage of green jobs faster than other Rocky Mountain States. NM’s combined strategy of targeted public policy and strong support for business has made it a regional and national competitive center of clean technology innovation, especially solar power, which is capturing energy-related jobs and attracting investment.

“New Mexico’s success shows the importance of both policy and political leadership at all levels of government, from county commissioner to United States Senator,” said Julia Haggerty Ph.D., the report’s author. “The state’s aggressive outreach program, backed by strong incentives—including property tax breaks, bonding, and worker training—has attracted new businesses and jobs to the state.”

The Headwaters Economics study compares how NM, Colorado, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming—five states with vast traditional and clean energy resources—are taking advantage of clean energy opportunities, and concludes with five keys to success for the states to further benefit from the emerging green economy while measuring the likelihood that each state’s policies will promote future growth and investment.

Green Economy Jobs

Using a conservative measurement of green jobs, the report—Clean Energy Leadership in the Rockies: Competitive Positioning in the Emerging Green Economy—found that employment in the green economy has grown significantly faster than total employment. In NM, for example, the number of overall jobs in 2007 was 13 percent greater than in 1995, compared to 62 percent growth in the green jobs sector. Looking at the five-state region, from 1995 to 2007, total job growth was 19 percent, while job growth in the core green economy was 30 percent. Nationwide, overall jobs grew by 10 percent, compared to green job growth of 18 percent from 1995 to 2007.

Looking at business establishments, in 2007 the five states supported 3,567 green enterprises with 50 percent based in Colorado, 16 percent in New Mexico and in Utah, 11 percent in Montana, and 6 percent in Wyoming.

“All of the states have opportunities to benefit from the green economy, but it does not happen by accident,” said Haggerty. “States performing the best—such as NM and Colorado—have made a strong, deliberate, and lasting commitment to growing their green economy.”

Investment Dollars

The Clean Energy report also measures private and public investment for the five states. In 2008, the study region attracted more than $500 million dollars in clean energy-oriented venture capital, a ten-fold increase compared to 2000 levels. In NM these investments totaled $239 million between 1999 and 2008, and the state ranked 12th nationally from 2006-2008, the latest three years available.

When looking at public funding, Colorado ranked 15th among the 52 states and territories in receiving competitively-awarded federal stimulus grants from the Department of Energy. Utah and New Mexico fell toward the middle of the pack, ranked 30th and 37th, while Wyoming and Montana ranked 49th and 52nd respectively.

Energy Production

Renewable energy production is growing in all five states, and there is every reason to expect continued rapid expansion. Among the five states, Montana and Wyoming stand out for their wind and geothermal potential, Utah for its solar and geothermal, and Colorado and NM for strength in all three. From 1990 to 2007, NM’s renewable energy production has grown by more than 200 percent, the highest rate of the five states.

Energy Efficiency

On a more cautionary note, the study found an uneven record for how the five states are pursuing energy efficiency—a necessary, cost-effective part of any long-term economic strategy; though New Mexico has an Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) aimed at utility companies.

Why New Mexico Leads

New Mexico policymakers have made succeeding in the clean energy economy a public priority. This leadership, when combined with strong policies, an attractive set of incentives, and world-class research facilities such as Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories, gives NM a winning advantage to attract jobs.

The state has demonstrated a commitment to turning its advantages into entrepreneurial success, as with New Mexico 9000, an alliance of the NM Economic Development Department and Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies. This coalition provides logistical and financial assistance for attaining ISO (International Organization for Standardization) compliance, which is key to selling products internationally.

Five Key Steps to Future Growth

States can do a great deal to benefit their future position, and the Clean Energy report concludes with five keys to success needed for the region and NM to foster continued growth:

1) Strategic Pairing of Incentives with Clear Policy Goals. Progress depends on a smart mix of appropriate incentives and regulations, such as Renewable Portfolio Standards with meaningful targets and compliance strategies. New Mexico has strong clean energy and efficiency mandates.

2) Encourage and Capture Large-Scale Investment. To attract growing private investment and billions of federal dollars, states must have a mix of policies, incentives, and proven development expertise. NM is a leader, ranking 12th in the nation for attracting clean technology venture capital from 2006 to 2008.

3) Cultivate a Well-Resourced Business Environment. Companies on the cutting edge of technological development benefit from skilled workers and access to world class research institutions. NM’s two national labs, combined with a growing high technology manufacturing base around Albuquerque, make this state a regional and national leader.

4) Leadership. Developers and manufacturers of clean energy and energy efficiency technologies operate in a highly competitive global environment, and they need to see consistent leadership in order to commit to a state. The governors of three states—NM, Colorado, and Montana— all have made significant clean energy outreach efforts that have paid off with the successful recruitment of global corporations to each state and established their reputations as leaders, particularly for NM and Colorado, within clean technology sectors.

5) Overcome Limited Infrastructure Capacity. To fully cultivate their renewable energy resources, the five states must overcome an inadequate infrastructure; which includes an outdated, overstressed electrical grid as well as federal, state, and local governments that currently lack the capacity and the necessary plans to respond to permits for new construction (for new facilities and transmission lines). New Mexico and Colorado were later (2007) to establish state infrastructure authorities.

The full study, digest, state fact sheets, and state-by-state comparisons can be found at

www.headwaterseconomics.org/greeneconomy.

Print PDF

John Gwynn

They’re really coming this time, the electric cars; quiet like NASCAR on mute, but due to arrive in such numbers that even a corporate bigfoot like GM won’t be able to crush them all. And we’re not talking about the golf carts that haul your crazy Aunt Carol around Sun City, the ones that pull over so bicycles can pass.

Get that image out of your head. That’s not what people want as their primary wheels and that’s not what they’re going to get. These new plug-ins are real street legal machines. All are lean, to lessen the load on their fancy lithium-ion battery packs, and some, like the vaunted Tessla and the mysterious Fisker Karma, might even pass for street mean. They just don’t stink up the planet as much.

GM in fact is leading the charge with its long-awaited Volt plug-in hybrid due later this year. It will go 40 miles on pure battery power before its gas engine kicks in to extend range up to 300 miles.

Once mighty Toyota promises a plug-in Prius, but not until 2012, and with only a 12 mile extended electric range. Maybe they’re afraid of it running away. Or, as some might say, referring to unintended acceleration: “It comes with a cord that maybe should act as a restraint.”

All the major players will show up sooner or later: Ford, VW, Volvo, BMW. Most will offer PHEVs – plug-in hybrids with the security blanket of a gas motor to allay “range anxiety.” Most will look as good, or as non-descript, as their corporate siblings. (The Volt has been described as a “cross between a Chevy Malibu and a Maglite.”)

One category buster is Nissan’ s Leaf (taking orders now for delivery this fall, when the leaves are at their finest), an all-electric offering with 100-mile range. Its proud parents are cooing over its svelte rear end with no tailpipe. (Evolution baby; we don’t have tails either.)

Which brings up the point that all these cars, at least while in electric mode, are claiming to be “zero emissions” vehicles. What they really mean is “zero tailpipe emissions,” because batteries emit electrons rather than carbon atoms. But the power needed to charge batteries is another story that only begins at your garage outlet. If that receptacle is hooked up to the public utility grid, those missing tailpipe emissions have most likely been displaced to a tall smokestack out by Four Corners. And that means your slick new electric baby is not totally innocent of carbon releases (although probably a third less carbonic than a gas engine.)

Electric carmakers don’t like to talk about this: where you get your electricity is your business. And there are so many good reasons to go electric – cost savings alone are eye-popping: $.02 a mile versus $.20 a mile for gas – that they don’t need to.

Two groups are talking about electric sources however. One is the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. You may have seen their ads featuring animated lumps of coal singing wholesome Christmas carols: It’s South Park with actual filth instead of virtual potty mouth. Another ad shows a cord plugging into a gleaming coal nugget segueing to “let there be light” and the whole American way of life. On their web-site, Americaspower.org, Big Coal cuts to the chase:

“Electric vehicles are great for Americans for several reasons. … odds are good that the electricity charging them will be coal generated. By relying more on domestic coal and less on imported oil, we’re greatly increasing America’s energy security. Plus, if the plug-in hybrid’s electricity can be produced utilizing Clean Coal Technology, we can also greatly reduce the greenhouse gases that are currently being released by every car on the highway… That sounds like a win-win to us.”

The logic is as smooth as coal extraction is rough: If electric cars are good, and most electricity comes from coal (77% in New Mexico), that makes coal green, right? Picture Don Blankenship (CEO of Massey Energy) in a plug-in Hummer. The only little problem is that “Clean Coal Technology” is about as pie-in-the-sky as landing people on an asteroid (maybe more so).

The other group that has something to say about electric car energy sourcing is one I’m affiliated with, alternative energy providers. Our story is less epic than the gods of coal: no tearing tops off mountains or forcing carbon back in the proverbial toothpaste tube. It’s homier: What if we all put up a little solar or wind plant right where we stable our plug-ins; wouldn’t that put a plug in carbon emissions?

The coal industry points out that the sun doesn’t shine when folks most need a charge, but that’s a bit of a red herring. With grid-tie back-feed solar, the sun does shine when daytime power demands peak. Solar PV feeds the grid when it’s most hungry, and draws back at night for charging purposes. The net result is less carbon in the atmosphere. Further down the road to the “smart grid” is a smart solar homeowner who sells PV power during peak rate hours, then charges his/her car batteries with cheaper grid electricity at night, and then also sells some of that back the next day. It’s called V2G (“vehicle to grid” or “everyman an Enron”). And did I mention that car batteries might serve as home back-up sources during outages… Big Coal didn’t.

So how many solar panels does it take to charge an electric car? Most of the new models will travel about 5 miles per kWh. So if you want to drive 25 miles a day, you’ll need 5 kWh per day beyond your normal electrical consumption. That’s about 5 solar modules. The math has a nice symmetry, which usually indicates an elegant solution.

John Gwynn is a partner in Bellasolar LLC, a Santa Fe-based solar installation company.

Print PDF

In response to the destructive pumice strip mining taking place in Northern New Mexico’s Jemez Mountains, eco-preneurs Andrew Ungerleider and Gay Dillingham co-founded Earthstone in 1993. Pumice is a volcanic rock used as an ingredient in concrete, as a mild abrasive in cosmetics and cleansers, and to abrade blue jeans, giving them their “stonewashed” look. Ungerleider, working with a ceramicist, found an alternative using recycled glass. It was a cost-effective and superior alternative, which was completely earth-friendly. Utilizing ground glass and carbonate mimicked a volcanic eruption inside the controlled environment of a large kiln. The result, “earthstone,” is ultra-lightweight, non-toxic, non-flammable, and insulative material with excellent compressive strength. It is also anti-microbial and completely sterile.

While the initial products were for consumer and industrial cleaning and sanding applications, continued development of the patented technology led to products for horticulture, water filtration, and green technology building materials. In scientific field tests at accredited third party facilities around the world, including the University of Arizona, the agricultural products have been shown to exceed the physical characteristics and performance of pumice and other commonly strip mined materials such as perlite, vermiculite, clay and stonewool or basalt.

Earthstone’s products reduce environmental impacts at both ends of the production chain. Besides replacing strip mined materials, the company found a way to give waste glass a new life – and keep it out of the landfill. Recycled glass bottles (mixed broken cullet) are turned into environmentally friendly cleaning products, abrasives, hydroponics substrates, container garden soil enhancers, and functional, affordable outdoor living accessories.

Earthstone has divided its business into two parts:

Earthstone International, LLC is focused on environmentally safe, foamed glass products used for household and commercial abrasives, and non-toxic heavy-duty cleaning, and holds patents for future applications such as building materials. The products are largely distributed through big box retailers and the internet. (www,GoEarthstone.com)

Growstone, LLC is focused on the sustainable horticulture and agriculture markets, and sells its innovative, environmentally friendly products to retail hydroponic stores, garden centers associated with big box stores, and to (primarily) commercial greenhouse growers. They use the “growstones” as a growing medium because they are highly efficient for moisture absorption, which allows them to reduce their watering cycles, and it brings oxygen to the root systems, both of which promote a healthy plant. Also, because the product is silica-based, some of the silica is gradually released, which also contributes to the plant’s health. Growstone’s horticultural products are reusable, recyclable, and adaptable to many growing systems, regional practices and climates.

Waste to Saleable Products

It is estimated that the total spent in the US each year just to transport waste to landfills reaches a staggering $50 billion. If we add the cost of collecting, hauling, sorting, disposing from construction, mining, industry, and agriculture, the price tops a staggering one trillion dollars, more than the entire 2009 federal stimulus package.

In 2008 Growstone, LLC entered into an agreement with the city of Albuquerque to process all of the waste glass from the city’s landfill and recycling program. Besides providing the glass waste for a nominal fee, the municipality has supplied a building to house Growstone’s glass crusher, and Growstone has recently completed construction of a production plant at the Cerro Colorado West Side landfill that can process 12,000 tons per year.

The glass is ground into a fine powder. A natural foaming agent is added, and it is then baked in natural gas-fired kilns into various sized lightweight growstones. “The product is created at roughly half the temperature and a tenth of the time required to create glass from silica,” explained Growstone CEO George Morandin. The natural gas is obtained by converting the landfill’s off-gas methane. (Landfill sites produce a tremendous amount of methane. Albuquerque has heretofore flared it off; a great waste of a resource, not to mention the greenhouse gas emissions being put into the atmosphere.) Growstone’s manufacturing process does not require water.

Additional applications for the Earthstone material are being tested. Some of the markets being developed include: engineered fill for roadbed construction and retaining walls, filtration for fish waste in fish farming plants, lightweight aggregate for soil stabilization in areas prone to mud or landslides, ultra-lightweight aggregate for concrete blocks and other cement-based products, underground thermal insulation for buildings and pipelines, and energy absorbing impact barriers.

Considering the thousands of tons of waste glass in landfills, and the cost to municipalities, this sort of recycling has tremendous potential. It may be a perfect marriage of public/private money because the municipalities supply what is, to them, waste. The company turns it into a salable product and green jobs.

Glass is heavy, and transportation expensive with a potentially large carbon footprint. The company’s long range plan is to establish a series of plants similar to the mid-size one in Albuquerque, 1,000–1,200 miles apart throughout North America, each with a 500-mile service radius. This could create a revenue source for municipalities, and make land adjacent to landfills useful.

Earthstone has evolved into a recognized leader in the growing international movement toward sustainable business practices. The company’s corporate mission includes returning a percentage of profits to worthy causes.

Stop Wasting the Waste

In his new book, The Blue Economy: 10 Years, 100 Innovations, 100 million jobs, noted eco-preneur Gunter Pauli addresses the issues of sustainability that go beyond mere preservation, and engage regeneration. Whenever we don’t know what to do with a waste, we discard it. That is antithetical to the way natural ecosystems operate. Making waste is not the problem. The problem is that we waste the waste we create.

Pauli’s team reviewed 3,000 cases in English, German, Spanish and Japanese publications to find which would present an opportunity to move industry and commerce toward sustainability independent of subsidies or tax breaks. The author submitted a shortlist of 340 technologies to a team of corporate strategists, expert financiers, investigative journalists and public policymakers. In Pauli’s book Earthstone/Growstone is cited as one of the 100 innovations that seize entrepreneurial opportunities that emulate ecosystems, and cascade energy and resources to add value and generate multiple exchange benefits, translating them into income and employment. Earthstone/Growstone is named #15 out of 100 inspiring competitive business models and #11 of 100 inspired by nature.

For more information, visit www.EarthstoneTechnology.com and www.Growstone.com.

Seth Roffman is a writer and photojournalist. His work has appeared in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, Native Peoples, Weekly Reader, New Mexico Magazine and other publications. He co-founded and edited a guide to sustainability in Santa Fe before becoming managing editor of Green Fire Times.

[SIDEBAR:]

A Quick Primer on Glass Recycling

• Every two weeks Americans dispose of enough glass bottles and jars to fill up two tall skyscrapers. All of these jars are recyclable!

• A modern glass bottle would take 4,000 years or more to decompose – and even longer if it’s in the landfill.

• Recycling just one glass bottle saves enough energy to light a 100-watt light bulb for four hours, power a computer for 30 minutes, or a television for 20 minutes.

• Glass containers come in four different colors: clear, blue, brown and green. Glass must be separated by color to ensure that new glass is not created from a mix of colors. Earthstone does not have to separate the recycled glass by color to produce its products.

• Only about 28% of all glass bottles and jars are now recycled.

• Glass makes up about 8% of America’s municipal waste.

Sources:

1. The Earthworks Group Recyclers Handbook (www.cityofinglewood.org)

2. www.recycling-revolution.com/recycling-fact.html

3. Glass Packaging Institute (http://gpi.org/recycle-glass/environment/

4. www.gpi.org/glassresources/education/

Print PDF

Crop rotation, a type of companion planting that focuses particularly on nutrition, is an approach to maintaining healthy soil that has been around as long as there have been gardens to grow food. The plants are doing their own work to help each other. The main principle is very simple: in any given area of a garden, try to plant crops from different plant families successively in order to balance the nutrients that are taken from or added back to the soil. If your garden space is 6 feet by 12 feet, for example, the area could be divided into six equal spaces of 2 feet by 6 feet through which crops of different families are rotated annually or seasonally. It’s often convenient to make a simple map of the rotation zones and the crops that will be rotated as needed. Crop rotation can be applied from year to year as crops are changed; or better yet, from season to season as new crops are planted according to the cool or warm season at hand. For example, if you harvest a crop of spinach, instead of replanting the same area with spinach or chard, plant an unrelated crop like zucchini or cucumbers. Besides preventing depletion of nutrients in the soil, crop rotation also helps to prevent the proliferation of disease and pests, which accumulate when the same crop (or a close plant relative) is planted season after season in the same location.

The main information you need in order to have successful crop rotation is to know which plants are related, or not. For example, some of our summer favorites are in the Solanaceae family, and therefore are related: eggplant, pepper, tomato and potato are relatives to each other. Carrots, celery, parsley and parsnip are related (Apiaceae family). The Asteraceae family includes artichokes, chicory, dandelion, lettuce and radicchio. The Brassicaceae includes many popular crops, most of which are cool-season favorites: arugula, broccoli, cabbage, Brussels sprouts, Chinese cabbage, kale, mizuna, totsoi and watercress. Beets, spinach and Swiss chard are all in the Chenopodiaceae family. The family Cucurbitaceae includes cucumbers, squashes, pumpkins and melons. Beans and peas are related, and in the Fabaceae family. Liliaceae family crops include asparagus, garlic, onions and leeks. Claytonia and purslane are relatives. New Zealand spinach and corn are in the Tetragoniaceae and Poaceae families, respectively.

In addition to family relationships, it’s useful to know which crops are heavy feeders and therefore taking more nutrients from the soil; which are light feeders, and which actually give back to the soil. It’s not surprising that most of the veggies we love to eat are heavy consumers. Tomatoes, corn, squash, lettuce and cabbage all take lots of nutrients, especially nitrogen (N) from the soil. In order to replace the nitrogen, in the next round of planting the rotation can be a crop that gives nitrogen back, such as any legume, including peas or beans, or a cover crop like alfalfa, vetch or clover. Other nutrients can be returned to the soil via compost. After a season of heavy feeders, besides nitrogen, it’s good to replenish phosphorous (P) and potassium (K). Then, in the next season or next round of planting, try to plant light feeders such as root crops. Sweet potatoes are light feeders, for example. Green peppers don’t take lots of nitrogen, but they do love other nutrients, though they may be planted after heavy feeders.

Cover crops fit well into year-long rotations, and a full rotation for one zone of the garden may span more than one year if only one crop is being planted each year. Ideally, it is best to wait two or three years before replanting the same crop in a given area, especially if that crop is a heavy feeder, like corn.

Crop rotation is a convenient and practical way to have your plants help you with your garden maintenance!

Susan Waterman has a Ph.D. in botany and over 25 years in sustainable agriculture. For more info, visit www.harvestbyhand.com. Questions? E-mail green@harvestbyhand.com.

Print PDF