A fascinating article in the NY Times, entitled “But Will It Make You Happy?,” discusses the relationship between consumption and happiness. A major finding of acdemic research is that “spending money for an experience… produces longer-lasting satisfaction than spending money on plain old stuff.” So playing board games, having picnics, taking classes, and learning to play an instrument may make one happier than buying material goods, and this is likely far better for the environment. I’m noticing a small cultural movement towards a simpler lifestyle that desires less stuff, local products, and less consumption. Due to the existing American consumption patterns and the rise of American-style consumption patterns in China, any such movement would be a positive development.
August 11, 2010
Does Consumption Make You Happy?
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under China, Consumption, EnvironmentLeave a Comment
August 10, 2010
Job Announcement: Executive Director, Water in the West, Stanford University
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Announcements, Law Schools[2] Comments
Executive Director, Water in the West, Stanford University
The Program on Water in the West (“Water in the West”) is a joint research effort between the Woods Institute for the Environment and the Bill Lane Center for the American West launched in 2010. It represents a strategically designed set of research and policy initiatives to develop and demonstrate solutions to major water challenges facing the western United States that are sustainable from economic, ecological, political, institutional, and equitable perspectives. In its initial years, Water in the West will focus on three main research areas:
• Better management of groundwater, including groundwater banking, and of surface and groundwater interactions • Development of metrics and design performance measurement systems or “dashboards” (along with the filling of data gaps) needed to effectively guide and drive efforts in California and the remainder of the West to move toward more sustainable water systems, and • Expanded and improved water reuse, including use of reclaimed water for irrigation and watershed restoration.
The executive director of the Program on Water in the West is the chief executive officer of this research initiative. As such, s/he will provide strategic leadership and management direction to all stakeholders in the project.
Job Description
The Executive Director will have principal responsibility for:
1. Leading Water in the West in developing a strategic plan and overseeing its implementation with individual research track leads.
2. Managing fundraising efforts
3. Managing the research budget and accountability for budgets to all funding sources 4. Creating and overseeing a communications strategy 5. Serving as a liaison to the press and Western water community to communicate the research program and results, as well as to find real-world applications of the work 6. Approving hires and overseeing the work of Water in the West staff personnel; managing and coordinating the efforts of participating and affiliated faculty and graduate students
Time permitting, the Executive Director will also engage in research and the authoring of reports within Water in the West’s three focal areas.
The Executive Director will report to the directors of the Woods Institute and the Bill Lane Center for the American West. All staff associated with Water in the West will report to the Executive Director. The Executive Director will be an employee of Stanford University, and based at Stanford, but will likely also spend some time off-site in the West communicating with and engaging stakeholders in the agriculture, policy, environmental, and water management communities.
Professional Qualifications
1. Demonstrated success as an inspirational leader with experience leading a team, keeping strategic focus, building consensus, and thinking big; director-level work experience in the non-profit, public, or private sectors preferred 2. Significant experience working on Western water issues and strong relationships with key constituencies and stakeholders, preferably in California 3. A demonstrated ability to navigate through complex partnerships in a diplomatic manner 4. Strong record of collaborative and relentless fundraising 5. The flexibility to travel regionally Personal Attributes 1. Strong interpersonal skills to inspire trust and motivate team members and external stakeholders 2. Practical bent with a focus on applied solutions and turning ideas into action 3. Ability to communicate effectively with a range of people from different environments, sectors, and society 4. Willingness to listen to others and learn from their best ideas, intellectual curiosity, approachability, and openness to input from all levels of staff and a variety of external stakeholders 5. Superb professional presence, with a proven ability to write and speak effectively 6. Ability to manage a budget Education and Experience Requirements:
Advanced degree required in relevant area. Three to five years experiencing working on Western water issues required.
Compensation for the Executive Director includes a competitive base salary and an excellent package of employee and health benefits.
Interested candidates can submit a cover letter, resume, and reference list (of at least three individuals) online at jobs.stanford.edu, job identification number 39085.
Stanford University is an equal opportunity employer and is committed to increasing the diversity of its faculty and staff. It welcomes nominations of and applications from women and minority groups, as well as others who would bring additional dimensions to the university’s research, teaching and clinical missions.
August 10, 2010
Federal ruling raises questions about programs that promote renewable energy
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Climate Change, Energy, Environment, LawLeave a Comment
See the Time Argus article here.
August 10, 2010
Does Butter Hold the Secret to Solving the Climate Crisis?
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Agriculture, Climate Change, Energy, Environment, FoodLeave a Comment
Doubtful, especially given the amount of methane that dairy cattle produce. But see here.
August 10, 2010
Should the Local Co-Op Carry “Conventional” Food?
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Consumption, Environment, FoodLeave a Comment
With books from Michael and movies like Food Inc., there is increased awareness of the environmental costs of our industrial food system. My local food co-op grocery store in Montpelier, Vermont, is considering expanding to have a second store in Waterbury, Vermont. (See the article in the local paper here.) An issue that has arisen is whether the new store should carry conventional products since many in the community (that walk to the existing grocery store space that would be taken over) are low-income, and conventional food is cheaper. The problem is that the organic market is already resembling commodity-driven industrial agriculture (e.g., lots of food miles, factory processing, lots of packaging, etc.). My suggestion is that the new co-op not carry conventional food, but instead consider creative programs so low-income individuals have access to better food products. Ideas might include free memberships, sliding scale for membership dues based on income, and greater discounts for those already on government assistance. The Co-Op should continue its committment to being a “member-owned, community-based natural market committed to building a dynamic community of healthy individuals, sustainable local food systems and thriving cooperative commerce,” therby shifting people’s food choices for the better.
August 9, 2010
In Crackdown on Energy Use, China to Shut 2,000 Factories
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under China, Climate Change, Consumption, Energy, Environment, Law1 Comment
In the last 6 months, China’s energy consumption far outstripped all predictions, causing great concern to the Chinese government as national energy efficiency goals may not be met. Now look at the response according to the NY Times article “In Crackdown on Energy Use, China to Shut 2,000 Factories.” My concern, however, is that no programs to close manufacturing and energy facilities will offset the increased energy demands of the Chinese consumer population.
August 9, 2010
Did the “Stimulus Package” do Good for the Environment?
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under China, Climate Change, Energy, Environment, Law[3] Comments
“Flipping” through the 407 pages of America’s $787 billion economic stimulus and recovery package, formerly known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, one quickly discovers that the legislation is truly overwhelming. The Act, if properly implemented, could provide the country with the necessary infrastructure and resources to make better ecological choices available for knowledge consumers. The Act takes great strides toward promoting energy efficiency, as well as renewing the nation’s transportation systems.
In the broad environmental context, the stimulus package focuses first on energy efficiency and conservation, and second transportation and car technology. The Act provides funding for green investments for such varied locations as the Department of Defense, public housing, residential homes, and schools. Eight billion dollars has been provided for state and local weatherization efforts and assistance, plus an additional $3.2 billion for local energy improvements, including funding energy audits, energy conservation incentives, energy retrofits; developing advanced building codes; and creating incentives for government purchases of energy efficient installations in buildings, as well as new traffic signals and street lights. Money is also available to support fuel cell technology, smart grid technology, carbon sequestration, and alternative fuels.
Have these funds be used effectively, providing new choices for individuals such as more mass transit designed with urban geography in mind, faster and more frequent train service, improved and affordable hybrid and plug-in cars, and accessible information about weatherization and affordable building products?
The Act does provide vast sums to improve car technology and the country’s transportation system. For example, incentives exist to produce better hybrid and plug-in electric vehicle technology. The Act contains $2.4 billion in incentives to buy plug-in hybrids making available $7500 tax credits for individual purchases. It provides $8 billion for Amtrak and high speed rail, as well as $8.4 billion for public mass transit nationwide. In doing so, the Act brings immense promise for rail service for all types in the United States. The President himself has proposed a nationwide high-speed rail plan and has indicated that the stimulus money is just the “first step” of a “long-term project,” suggesting that more money may be forthcoming. Some rail projects that have been discussed for decades like expansion of the Downeaster from Brunswick and Portland, Maine, to Boston, and high-speed rail from Milwaukee to Madison, Wisconsin, actually might happen after decades of discussion.
However, the Act still allocates far more money (in my view, far too much money) for roads and highways. Perhaps this should be expected given the amount of resources already allocated to the nation’s highways and automotive industry, and that Americans have grown accustomed to “free” roads. Train travel might be better if they received the same travel subsidy as the motor vehicle industry. (I note that China is spending a much larger amount on high-speed rail than the U.S.)
My home state of Vermont will spend 20 times more stimulus money on highways compared to public mass transit. Similarly, of the $529 million in total stimulus money rewarded to my birth state of Wisconsin, nearly 20% will be spent on a single highway project, the reconstruction and expansion of Interstate 94. Across the country, nearly four times more money will be spent on roads and bridges versus rail service, $28 billion versus $8 billion in the first installment. The disparity is striking. It means that the infrastructure of sprawl will persist, and individual energy consumption and the risk of climate change are being hedged against the creation of carbon-free automobile technology.
August 8, 2010
Issues Become Real For Vermont Law School Family in China
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Announcements, China, Fulbright, Vermont Law SchoolLeave a Comment
An article about my family’s experience in China is now available here.
August 8, 2010
Energy Efficiency is Not About the Windows
Posted by Jason J. Czarnezki under Energy, EnvironmentLeave a Comment
There’s an interesting Op-Ed in my local paper entitled “Energy Efficiency is Not About the Windows,” making the argument that energy efficiency in the home is about sealing up the home and cracks around the windows. To me this raises, a broader question: What are the most energy inefficient structures in my community, and how are the best “low-hanging fruit” for energy efficiency in my own home?
For my own home, home energy-audits are available (often subsidized) and turning down the thermostat and hot water temperatures are good starts. But the community at large is a more dififcult query, since resources should be allocated to the largest energy hogs. While on the Montpelier Planning Commission before we left for China, we learned there were funds available to potentially do a large-scale energy efficiency project in town. Most people on the Commission wanted to do a singular big project. I argued that we should identify the most energy inefficient structures in the community, make them efficient, and spread the cost saving to the entire community. My proposal was simply not sexy enough, and gained little traction. I find it unfortuante that low cost – high benefit envioronmental choices often receive so little play (e.g., chaulking your windows and home weatherization), but the big ticket items (e.g., new windows or biomass plants) seem to get everyone so excited. What’s wrong with a little cost-benefit analysis?
August 7, 2010
Most Americans cannot name a single member of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) (according to a 2006 Findlaw.com survey), and in my experience (and yes, I’ve done pop quizzes) most law students cannot name all 9 members of the SCOTUS, which has actually become more difficult following the consistency of the Rehnquist Court. So in an effort to help my students and with today’s swearing in of Elena Kagan, the current nine members of the Supreme Court are:
Chief Justice John Roberts, and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
But lists are boring so here are some predictions, some more bold than others:
(1) Justice Ginsburg’s seat will be the next vacancy on the Court.
(2) Scalia’s seat will be the next to open after Ginsburg’s, causing extensive media and public interest.
(3) Identity politics will continue to play a major role in the nomination process (first Asian-American on the Court?)…..
(4) …..But age (or, better stated, youth) will trump and the next nominee will be born in 1955 or later.
(5) We will see 4 woman on the Supreme Court no later than 2017.
JASON J. CZARNEZKI 