Greenpeace II

wow. this might get long.
so let me start with last week.
before thursday last week we spent a lot of time learning a ton about designing campaigns, why they're designed, how they're designed, blah blah. we learned a lot about why and how greenpeace functions and the ins and outs of the breakdown of the organization ( i.e. the departments: actions, campaigns, legal, development, research, etc and how they relate). we had a project we worked on for two days to simulate the creation of a campaign against bottom trawling (if you haven't heard: bottom trawling is a relatively new fishing technique being used virtually 'round the world, but is not extremely embedded/popular yet. it basically consists of a giant ship dragging a weighted net along the ocean floor to catch fish. problem is that it catches more than fish. including species we've never even heard of. we're destroying entire ecosystems before we've even come to see them. the solution lies somewhere in the UN framework because of the international scope of the issue ( i.e. trawling occurs mostly in the 'high seas,' international waters). spain is the biggest culprit, 40% followed by portugal and russia, 7% each. here's how it can relate to you: almost of the ORANGE ROUGHY we consume is bottom trawled. other than that there isn't much consumer/citizen involvement with this issue becaues of the international "forum" of the problem.) lots of this.
thursday all 20 of us students and our two organizers/trainers went to pennsylvania. the place rocked except the water reaked of sulfur (rotten eggs). (when they first told us, i was like 'ain't no thing', i can take it, but it seriously was really difficult to drink. and the whole house smelled of it. blegh.) but other than that, it was awesome. we did tons of group building activities and received feedback about our personal group dynamics, discussed how we work in teams, how to work in teams, worked on active listening, shared (really personal) motivations for being here, etc etc. generally we got a ton closer to each other and i realize that i have A TON of differences from a lot of these people. here are some: most people don't know much about science. i know about coal plants, plants, birds, and how stuff works that other people aren't familiar with. i'm not braggin or anything, i'm just surprised that i am almost the expert of the group on this (in my opinion) elementary stuff. but i guess that's part of greenpeace, because it's more than just a bunch of tree hugging pot smoking dirty smelly hairy environmental science-minded people. "we" work hard to avoid that stereotype. and i learned that most people have seen clueless. i, however, have not and will not. they will try to get me to. and i'm the only one beside our female organizer (amy) who doesn't regularly shave. people were seriously grossed out, using the word "vomit" repeatedly. and surprised that i've ever had a boyfriend. dang they need to get out more.
[sigh]
and then today.
we have assigned readings and the one for today was a 30+ page article from the new yorker (magazine) explaining global warming. reading it was really defeating. the scope of many of the problems brought up, which are already happening and being unaddressed, makes it seem so overwhelming and almost not worth "fighting" against. (here's what i mean: we're really close to the hottest the earth has ever been, in any accessible history (mostly ice cores which go back like millions of years), let alone the existence of humans. "shit is fucked up" in greenland, and basically the entire arctic. furthermore, "average global temperature rise" will disproportionately affect the arctic. feedback mechanisms up the wazoo. for more details, see al gore's campaign tactic: an inconvienient truth. bring some tissues, recycled ones. if you have questions, try me.) and then, the fact that this administration BLOWS and we're basically holding up WORLDWIDE PROGRESS through the kyoto protocol. australia hasn't signed either. there's a cool website, exxonsecrets.org, which maps out all the players in the disinformation campaign against the scientific certainty of global warming. basically, exxon (+etc.) pays key people to distribute mad-style info that makes people question the existence of the issue. at this point all i can think and feel (literally, physically feel) is: we're screwed. sca-rewed.
psh. and then some lady came and lectured to us about greenpeace's campaign called cape wind to help try and get an offshore wind turbine system off the coast near mannhattan or something. (130 turbines, 420 feet tall, 5.2 miles offshore, 1/2 inch of viewable horizon space from the shore.) i grilled her like crazy and she didn't answer my questions. here are some examples: well first, she didn't seem to know much about the science of global warming and i think she said a few incorrect things. not cool. (a quote "i'm not a scientist, i just read papers and go on their recommendations" that's cool and all, but i wasn't cool with her not knowing about the stuff she was trying to present to us). i asked her if she thought wind power was a feasible alternative for electricity generation in america, given these stats now: 50% = coal, 20% nuke, less than 1% wind. (ESPECIALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBAL WARMING). she said yes. it is "highly feasible" (quote.). so i said... if a) the gov't madstyle subsidizes nuclear energy for electricity, b) we already have a lot of plants in place, c) electricity generation doesn't produce co2, d) and noting the (supposed) urgency of global warming, does she feel that nuclear is a good stepping point for electricity generation? no. absolutely not. greenpeace is (to my surprise) surprisingly against nuclear energy. as far as i've been taught, which was, granted, by a nuclear physicist, one of the leaders in the world, not a big threat and environmentalists are just uninformed about realities. i haven't gotten an answer to this question. i will.

i seriously could go on a lot more but i feel that it's probably long enough to where you're not reading or not interested. i'll post more on a blog and then send you the address later this week.

logistics:
if you would prefer to keep receiving emails, email me to let me know. else, i'll just post it to a blog. also, i think i might be buying a cell phone tonight so when i miss your call, i'll know and not just seem like an irresponsible cellphone user for not calling you back.

i think that's it.

do your part in this thing:
- stay informed, and if that means asking me, please do, learning teaches.
- if you read something that blows you out of the water, tell others.
- if you want to act or something, let me know and i'm sure i can distribute something or other to you somehow. i mean, i am sitting in the national greenpeace hq and all.

so yeah. i am also interested about your life. let me know or something. sometime.
peace, love, and the end to global warming before all the polar bears die,
ari

Greenpeace I

so i was just walking down the hall and i thought to myself, 'damn, i'm in the greenpeace national headquarters in d.c'....today was the first day of the program (called the GOT / greenpeace organizing term)...we went through all of what we'll be doing this semester, including mostly training, campaigning, driving boats...etc. we're going on this 'surprise' (they won't tell us where we're going yet) 2.5 week trip to bird-dog and campaign ...the campaign we're working on is called project hotseat, focused on "saving the world" from global warming. they're going to brief us on it tomorrow.

some of the verbage they use (today) like "saving the planet" and a lot of people here talk about the "ignorance" of the general public (moreso the GOT participants than GP employees)...or fighting / victories / stuff like that that kind of confuse me coming from a more "ecological" view. in ecology there aren't really wins and losses, per se, and i'm not sure how i feel with a lot of what greenpeace is putting out there. especially their reluctance to explore (at least openly) the possibility of nuclear energy as a source for electricity, which they briefly mentioned today and said that it was, i guess, an antithesis to peace...so that skepticism is (in my opinion) useful, necessary, and humbling and hopefully i can maintain that in light of the weight of this program and city rather than being sucked into it.

this city definitely feels powerful. walking down the streets, viewing the capitol building at night, and just being in this city makes one stand taller. not necessarily prouder, but i definitely feel a sense of power and "getting shit done" oozing out of the walls around here. giant corinthian columns dwarf you, and all the museums are free (botanical gardens, smithsonian, etc)..so exploration is really easy.

at GP we can have visitors, so if any of you want to come and visit you can spend a day (or more) in my shoes and see a training or two.

i'll keep you posted as things progress, and i'm trying to get a cell phone around here, so you can call me if you want to remember what my voice sounds like.

keep it up and keep in touch
ari