Sustainability Now! on KSQD.org

According to Simon Dalby, Professor emeritus in the Balsillie School of International Affairs at Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, Canada, global politics over the past 70 years has been driven by an overabundance of "firepower," both nuclear and carbon-based.  The first was used by Great Power to threaten incineration of the world, by intention or accident, in the name of "national security."  The second now threatens the future of life on Earth--human and nonhuman--but Great Powers (and the not-so-great) resolutely refuse to give them up in the name of "national security" and "lifestyle."  In 2022, Dalby published Rethinking Environmental Security, an analysis of firepower past, present and future.  Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a thought-provoking conversation with Simon Dalby about these two threats and what countries are not doing about it.

Nuclear power is being touted as a way of providing clean energy, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and paving the way to a zero-emission future. There is talk of a “nuclear renaissance,” with small modular reactors (SMRs) replacing the gigawatt nuclear behemoths of the past, quickly and at much lower cost.  But the United States’ experience with nuclear, now going back 70 years, turned out to be much more costly than predicted.  The country’s one hundred or so operating reactors have generated prodigious quantities of highly radioactive spent fuel that is being stored in so-called swimming pools and caskets adjacent to the plants that produced it.  Blame politics, if you will, but it remains waste.  And only a month ago, a federally subsidized deal to build a cluster of six SMRs in Idaho collapsed, due to cost overruns and construction delays.  So, is that renaissance real or just hope and hype?

To find out more, join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with Professor Allison Macfarlane, Director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at The University of British Columbia.  Dr. Macfarlane was chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2012-2014.  She holds a PhD in Geology from MIT, was a member of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which addressed the 70-year old challenge of radioactive waste disposal, about which she continues to write.

Long-time listeners to Sustainability Now! know that we periodically turn to a focus on plastic, whose production is predicted to skyrocket over the next few decades, as fossil fuel companies look for ways to sell their product.  Plastics are not forever, although they last a long time in the environment and are piling up across the world’s lands and oceans.  Even notionally “compostable” plastics require special handling if they are to be returned to their constituent components, and most of these plastics are not handled specially.

If you could make a better plastic—one that would decompose into biological carbon in your backyard compost pile—wouldn’t the world beat a path to your door?  Maybe not. Join SN! host Ronnie Lipschutz and Raegan Kelly, Head of Product and Sustainability Lead at Better for All, for a conversation about composting plastics.  Better for all is trying to widen use of PHBH, a biologically based plastic that breaks down with minimal treatment in your back yard.  We are going to talk about why it is so difficult to get the manufacturers of plastic and plastic products to use PHBH and what Better for All is trying to do about that.

Sequoias are among the oldest living things on Earth, and most of the world’s sequoias are in Sequoia and King’s Canyon National Parks. Since 2020, according to the National Park Service, almost 20% of that iconic species have been destroyed by wildfires.  The parks’ management is planning to repopulate the burned-over areas with thousands of sequoia seedings, in an effort to rebuild six groves.  But not everyone supports this project: some ecologists argue that there are enough seedlings growing in those groves to provide the next generation of trees.  Join host Ronnie Lipschutz to hear about the pros and cons from Dr. Christy Brigham, Chief of resources management and science at the two national parks and one of the architects of the plan, and from Dr. Chad Hanson, cofounder of the John Muir Project, who is a critic of the plan.

Photo credit: Gary Coronado, LA Times

When you go out into the world and walk on the Earth, have you ever wondered what was beneath your feet?  Animals and plants, of course, but mostly soil.  Soil is a wonderful substance, an essential element in the riot of life that covers the planet’s continents.  But soil is not without life of its own: a handful of fertile soil is home to more organisms in a than there are people on Earth.  And these organisms are vital to plant and animal nutrition and growth.  Join host Ronnie Lipschutz and Dr. Chelsea Carey, Director of Soil Research and Conservation at Point Blue Conservation Science  for a fascinating conversation about the life beneath our feet.

Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for this Blast from the Past with Dr. Helen Caldicott.  According to Dr. Caldicott, the nuclear doomsday clock of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is set at 100 seconds to Midnight, but 20 seconds is closer to the mark. Dr. Caldicott has devoted the last forty-two years to an international campaign to educate the public about the medical hazards of the nuclear age and the necessary changes in human behavior to stop environmental destruction and nuclear catastrophe. She calls this “Global Preventive Medicine.” Caldicott is also the subject of “If You Love This Planet,” which won an Academy Award in 1982 for best documentary.

For uncounted millennia, the creatures of the world’s ocean have been hunted, captured and killed by human beings.  For most of that history, however, this was done for subsistence purposes.  Only over the last few centuries, was the slaughter of whales, seals, otters, turtles, sharks and other marine species justified in the name of capitalism and industry.  Beginning in the late 1960s, exposing and preventing this continued decimation became the mission of individuals and groups dedicated to direct action meant to disrupt those who continue to hunt, capture and kill.

Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with one of the best-known of these activists, Captain Paul Watson, who recently published his memoir Hitman for the Kindness Club—High Seas Escapades and Heroic Adventures of an Eco-Activist.  Watson was a cofounder of Greenpeace, founder of Sea Shepherds and most recently established the eponymous Captain Paul Watson Foundation which “aims to educate and raise awareness about the illegal exploitation of oceanic ecosystems and marine species, while also establishing an international anti-poaching entity to enforce conservation laws and treaties.” Watson has commissioned and skippered numerous ships and campaigns, fought against the murder of marine species for more than half a century, has been on the forefront and frontline of direct action to protect the biodiversity of Earth’s marine environments.

What do you know about CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, passed in 1970 and signed into law by then-Governor Ronald Reagan? For more than 50 years, CEQA has been used to inform decisionmakers and the public about the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects but, in recent years, it has been applied in situations for which it was not designed, especially new housing development.  In response, both Governor Newsom and the State Legislature are seeking to amend the law to prevent various activists and opponents from obstructing new housing.  Not so fast, say the law’s supporters.  They point to a recent report by the Rose Foundations that CEQA has had little, if any, impact on housing projects across the state. So, who is correct?

Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with Professor Deborah Sivas of the Stanford Law School. She teaches environmental law, directs the environmental law clinic and has represented various environmental organizations in the courts.  We will talk about CEQA and whether it is really standing in the way of more housing in California.

The Rights of Nature is one way to rethink the relationships between humans and Nature, but are there other ways to think about those connections? Join host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with Dr. Rosalind Warner, professor of political science at Okanagan College in British Columbia and Research Fellow with the Earth System Governance Project.  Warner is studying the role of kinship metaphors in Earth System Law, with kinship connoting more ethical relationships among humans, Nature and earth’s non-human inhabitants. Earth System Law is an emerging body of legal precepts, principles and practices that bring together ethics and law with the planet’s dynamic physical and biological cycles. Tune in to hear a new take on human-nature relations.

More than 50 years ago, Christopher Stone, a UCLA law professor, wrote a groundbreaking book Should Trees Have Standing? in which he argued for the right of trees to be represented in courts of law.  Since then, the Rights of Nature movement has taken the world by storm; some countries have encoded such rights into their constitutions.  But what does it mean to say that trees, rivers and animals have rights? Does the “rights of nature” make any practical sense? And who is pushing for such rights?

Join Sustainability Now! host Ronnie Lipschutz for a conversation with Katie Surma, a reporter at Inside Climate News. She has been covering the “rights of nature” beat at ICN since 2021 and has written extensively on the topic.  Find out whether the trees and critters in your back yard and all around us are people, too.