Senator Bernie Sanders, looking relaxed
Senator Bernie Sanders, looking relaxed

A friend and I were discussing the presidential election, and he brought up the tired old shibboleth that the Democrats got so badly burned on George McGovern’s 1972 campaign that they don’t feel any progressive candidate is electable.

I will concede some surface similarities: both are/were genuine progressives who can ignite the youth vote, neither had the support of the party elite, both were critical of the war machine.

But if anything, I’d say McGovern is more accurately compared to the failed campaigns of Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, and John Kerry—and even John McCain.

Now—why is Bernie’s campaign different?

  1. Unlike the Dukakis disaster, the Republicans can’t make “liberal” sound like a curse word. Bernie is more than liberal. He’s progressive. He is an open socialist, so calling him a socialist has no traction; we all know that already, and it doesn’t seem to be hurting his performance.
  2. He has a track record of coalition building and getting things done both as an executive (as Mayor of Vermont’s largest city, where he served multiple terms and continues to be enormously popular) and as a legislator.
  3. His fundraising prowess is astounding, and has been outside the mainstream Democratic party channels. It’s new money coming into the party. While Trump can claim he’s not beholden because he’s funding his own campaign, he is closely allied with his fellow billionaires. Bernie is a candidate of the people and supported financially by the people.
  4. Bernie has enormous integrity—and that makes him unique in the current crop of candidates. Clinton, Trump, Cruz, and Rubio have all been accused of various shady dealings (as was Gore).
  5. Bernie’s strength on the left and Trump’s on the right shows clearly that the old style of politics-as-usual is out of favor. About the only thing they have in common (other than their NYC roots) is that their campaigns have been fueled by enormous voter disaffection with politics-as-usual.
  6. He uses social media better than anyone else in the race—and this is one of several reasons he polls so well with Millennials.
  7. Unlike McGovern, Dukakis, Kerry, or McCain, Sanders is a skilled orator who really knows how to work a crowd.
  8. He polls better than Clinton in match-ups against all the Republican candidates.
  9. Ambitious agendas are always more popular than treading water. Clinton urges us to tread water—to protect Obamacare, to accept the economic crumbs falling off the silk tablecloths of the 1%—to keep things as they are. Bernie urges us to think big. It’s the same message of hope and change that inspired millions of first-time voters to come out for Obama. But Obama was a centrist running as if he were a progressive, and he let a lot of those people down. Sanders has been putting his beliefs into action for decades. And he can show consistency over time, unlike the flip-flopping Clinton and Trump.
  10. His positions would actually help the majority of voters if they became policy.
  11. He’s attacking an enemy that is disliked (Wall Street). And he’s reaching out to all the constituencies Trump (and to a lesser extent the other GOP candidates) has attacked.
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

"Doubles the Beauty of Your Hair" shampoo ad from 1925
“Doubles the Beauty of Your Hair” shampoo ad from 1925

I recently ate at a restaurant whose decor included old advertising posters. An ad for coconut oil shampoo from 1925 fascinated me.

Why? Because it used so many of the modern copywriting principles we copywriters try to incorporate. It started with a benefit oriented headline, continued with social proof in the first sentence, quote thousands of users unquote, and then went right into long copy with a lot of benefits.

1925!

I’d love to know what copywriter has this in his or maybe her portfolio. Guessing it might have been John Caples.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

How is opening a hair salon and beauty school related to social change? Hair cutters are not found in large percentages in social change movements crowded with professional organizers, academics, writers, school teachers, and the like.

Kabul Beauty School by Deborah Rodriguez (cover image)
Kabul Beauty School by Deborah Rodriguez (cover image)

Which makes the best-selling memoir by Deborah Rodriguez (with Kristin Ohlson, published by Random House), Kabul Beauty School: An American Woman Goes Behind the Veil a unique and remarkable book.

Fleeing a series of oppressive and sometimes abusive marriages, Rodriguez goes to Kabul, Afghanistan, in 2002, while the war is raging and the Taliban have just been kicked out–and stays for five years. Originally, she comes as part of a humanitarian agency relief crew. She’s just beginning to assist with trauma counseling and the like when word gets out that she’s a hairdresser. And she’s mobbed first by desperate women in the relief community, and then in the military, and then among the locals; the Taliban had shut down all the beauty parlors, and the few that opened up after their departure were typically using primitive equipment in less-than-sanitary conditions.

Very quickly, Rodriguez realizes that she cannot meet the demand on her own and sets up a school for beauticians, carefully selecting the women she think can be successful. The result is a city with dozens of western-trained professional hair salons owned by local women.

In an Afghanistan just emerging from Taliban control, women have essentially no rights. Vigilantes inflict their own “justice” on women violating the ultra-strict interpretations of Islamic law. Few work outside the home; fewer still run a business. While it isn’t what brought her to this work, Rodriguez realizes the transformative effect of what she’s doing; she comes to social change by making it happen.

This is a route to social change not often explored. Yet, exporting an existing career into new sectors and markets–not just cosmetology but all sorts of other possibilities–may be one of the easiest ways to get people involved in peace-building.

Bravo, Ms. Rodriguez!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

I went to my first same-sex commitment ceremonies around 1979 and 1980, never dreaming that the day would come when such unions would be recognized in every state of the United States of America.

Thank you, Justice Kennedy for your beautiful opinion, and the other four Justices who added their names. And thank you, President Obama, for being consistent in your support since the day you announced that your thinking had evolved on this issue.

And thanks to the activists who brought the country forward, including those who were brave enough to do this long before it was legal.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

hazardous waste site167218_9505NOT an April Fools joke: a year-long government forensic investigation found that a nuclear waste drum explosion at Los Alamos was caused by a chemical reaction with the carbohydrates in the wheat-based kitty litter it was packed in. This accident on February 14, 2014 released radiation into the environment and caused the state of New Mexico to impose large fines on the federal government. But the feds are refusing to pay.

Worse, there are 678 more drums packed with the same kitty litter, and it doesn’t look like the people at Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL) have any plans to proactively do something about it.

Since it’s in the public domain, I’m reprinting William Boardman’s article where I found out about this. It originally ran on Reader Supported News.

But first—Boardman asks, “Was LANL cutting safety corners to cut costs?”

I think he’s totally wrong about why this kitty litter was chosen. As a cat owner who used to use clay cat liter and now uses organic ones, I think I can shed some light on that. And I think the implications for nuclear policy worldwide need to be pointed out.

Here’s my take on what happened:

  • LANL’s instructions on packing the waste are probably decades old. At the time they were likely to have been written, clay kitty litter was all there was. The numerous plant-based kitty litters are a recent invention. So they specified “kitty litter” rather than “inert kitty letter composed of clay or rock” because this was not an issue when it was written.
  • Anyone who has used both can tell you the organic kitty litters are far more absorbent. They typically cost MORE than clay litters, so cost clearly was not the issue.
  • Because they’re flushable, they’re marketed as environmentally friendly.
  • So, someone who didn’t happen to be a chemist but was aware that these litters absorb more (and possibly was also motivated to do something for the environment) was in charge of procuring, and of course went for the litter seen as more effective and green.

In other words, that part was 99% likely an honest mistake, and the major human error was in the failure to update the storage regulations. The failure to deal with the remaining 678 drums, however, is criminal stupidity and should be dealt with before there are more explosions.

What this means for policy

–>BUT the whole problem with the nuclear industry is that it relies on a world where human error doesn’t happen. Unfortunately, human error happens constantly. Not only that, but this situation shows a major communication failure in just a few decades.

But  exploding kitty litter is the least of it. The instructions we pass on about how to “safely” store nuclear waste need to last 250,000 years! That’s how long it takes plutonium to become mostly inert (it never goes away completely). Not only have we never built a container that has lasted a quarter of a million years, we’ve never had a language that long. We are making an assumption that future generations will be able to understand our instructions and replace the storage drums when they wear out. Meanwhile, we’re bombarding them with highly radioactive waste that shortens their lifespan. Radwaste has this tendency to embrittle and corrode things.

Factor in accidents (far more prevalent than most people realize; there have been more than 100 significant nuclear accidents), security concerns, environmental consequences of the entire fuel cycle. Every one of these provides the potential of grave human error with catastrophic results. Large areas of the Ukraine are still sealed off after Chernobyl, almost 30 years ago.

Now add in nuclear’s wretched economics, and the availability of safer, cheaper, cleaner renewable energy resources. We have absolutely no need to go down this road.  And developing nuclear power may turn out to be the second-worst act of hubris in our very hubristic history; the first is nuclear power’s older brother: nuclear weapons.

Japan, one of the most nuclearized countries in the world (and sorely lacking in many other energy sources), managed pretty well without its nukes when they were shut down after Fukushima. Many countries have banned or started to phase out nukes, including Germany, Italy, and Belgium. Isn’t it time the rest of the world joined them?

Here’s Boardman’s article:

Kitty Litter Shuts Down Sole US Nuclear Weapons Waste Facility
By William Boardman, Reader Supported News
07 April 15
More links at original site:

https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/29496-focus-kitty-litter-shuts-down-sole-us-nuclear-weapons-waste-facility

U.S. nuclear weapons buildup ignores waste dangers

Now it’s official: using the wrong kitty litter can cause a severe and expensive nuclear accident at the nation’s unique underground radioactive waste containment facility, shutting it down indefinitely. <https://energy.gov/em/downloads/technical-assessment-team-report>

What’s NOT official yet is why the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) used organic kitty litter that caused the nuclear waste accident in the first place, or why LANL used that kitty litter in some 678 other drums of radioactive nuclear weapons waste now located at LANL and other locations. It’s also NOT official that the wrong kitty litter was deliberately and deceitfully used for more than a year. Nor is it yet clear why the federal government, having violated New Mexico environmental laws, refuses to pay the state $54 million in fines for federal law-breaking.

Last winter, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) appointed a Technical Assessment Team of independent experts from other government labs, and the team spent most of a year investigating the 2014 Valentine’s Day radiation-release accident at New Mexico’s federal Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP). On March 26, 2015, the team produced a 277-page report that concluded that radiation was released from the facility when a single container (Drum 68660) over-heated and failed because the nuclear weapons waste it contained was packed with the wrong kind of kitty litter. That kitty litter was “chemically incompatible” with the other contents of the drum, causing it to overheat, creating gases that forced open the lid in a “thermal runaway” that led to the spill that released radiation to the environment and that still renders a large section of the underground storage area lethal to humans.

The assessment team concluded that the February 14, 2014, drum failure took about 70 days to develop before the drum was breached. The accident released radioactive isotopes of Uranium, Plutonium, and Americium in uncertain amounts that are officially thought to be relatively small. As of early April 2015, Drum 68660 is the only drum that has failed. The experts determined that there were other containers in which radioactive waste was packed with the wrong kitty litter, and that any of these might fail, although they say they believe another failure is unlikely.

In part because the accident site remains largely inaccessible, the assessment team wrote that it “could not determine the cause of the drum breach with absolute certainty.”

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s multiple radiation risks continue

While most of the drums of nuclear weapons waste laden with organic kitty litterare already underground at WIPP, there are an estimated 113 in temporary storage in Texas and 57 remaining at LANL. One of the drums at LANL is a “sibling drum” to the one that burst underground. The two drums were packed with waste from the same “parent drum” and with the same Swheat Scoop kitty litter, but other elements of their contents were slightly different. The drum still at LANL is monitored for heat and remains intact. LANL has shipped more than 1,000 drums of waste to WIPP since it opened in 1999. Remaining LANL waste stored above ground on-site was threatened by wildfire in 2011 and remains near an earthquake fault line.

The DOE assessment team did not address the question of why the waste packing process at Los Alamos stopped using non-organic kitty litter as usual and switched to Swheat Scoop. The World Nuclear Association, an industry group in London, explains the kitty litter mix-up by saying: “The DOE did not specify its preferred brand…. However, SwheatScoop happens to be made from wheat and therefore contains carbohydrates which provided fuel for a chemical reaction with the metal nitrate salts being disposed of.” Each 55-gallon drum of nuclear waste typically includes about 50 pounds of kitty litter.

Rumors that the accident at WIPP was caused by the wrong kitty litter used by LANL surfaced soon after it happened. In May 2014, New Mexico’s Environment Department secretary, Ryan Flynn, issued a formal order to LANL to secure the drums with the wrong kitty litter, saying in part:

Based on the evidence presented to NMED, the current handling, storage, treatment and transportation of the hazardous nitrate salt bearing waste containers at LANL may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to health or the environment.

Was LANL cutting safety corners to cut costs?

In November 2014, after a six-month investigation, the Santa Fe New Mexican portrayed LANL as behaving either incompetently, or with reckless disregard for safety, or with something like criminal negligence – perhaps a mixture of all three. Motivating LANL malfeasance, the paper suggests, was the desire of the private contractors running the lab to meet the June 30, 2014, deadline for clearing waste from the site, thereby protecting and extending its $2.2 billion annual operating contract with the U.S. Energy Department as well as another $80 million a year for managing LANL.

Like so much of the U.S. nuclear weapons program, LANL is a cozy, profitable, corporate-welfare monopoly for a private consortium calling itself Los Alamos National Security. The Delaware Limited Liability Company was formed eight years ago by four entities: Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services, URS Energy and Construction, Bechtel, and the University of California. As stated in its by-laws, the company purpose is “to manage and operate the Los Alamos National Laboratory in a manner that furthers the interests of the national security and advances the DOE/NNSA missions, programs and objectives in accordance with the terms of the Prime Contract.” In other words, it is a privately held national security profit center that, according to Bloomberg, “engages in the businesses of nuclear defense programs, facilities management, science and technology to homeland security challenges, and safety and security.”

Los Alamos National Security LLC is, by its very nature, a limited liability conflict of interest in which at least one conflict is between profit and security.

Santa Fe New Mexican lays out tough case against LANL

As viewed by the New Mexican, the parent company, Los Alamos National Security, allowed its employees at LANL to take numerous actions that could protect the company’s profits by risking the security of others. The gambit appears to have failed by just one drum. Its elements, perpetrated or allowed by LANL employees or contractors, included, according to the New Mexican:

• … workers packaging the waste came across a batch that was extraordinarily acidic, making it unsafe for shipping. The lab’s guidelines called for work to shut down while the batch underwent a rigid set of reviews to determine how to treat it, a time-consuming process that jeopardized the lab’s goal of meeting the deadline. Instead, the lab and its various contractors took shortcuts in treating the acidic nuclear waste, adding neutralizer and a wheat-based organic kitty litter to absorb excess liquid.

• Documents accompanying the drum, which were supposed to include a detailed description of its contents … made no mention of the acidity or the neutralizer, and they mischaracterized the kitty litter as a clay-based material – not the more combustible organic variety that most chemists would have recognized as hazardous if mixed with waste laden with nitrate salts….

• Documents and internal emails show that even after the radiation leak, lab officials downplayed the dangers of the waste – even to the Carlsbad managers whose staff members were endangered by its presence – and withheld critical information from regulators and WIPP officials investigating the leak.

• The waste container that ultimately burst would not have met federal transportation standards to get on the road from Los Alamos to Carlsbad, nor would it have been accepted at WIPP, if its true ingredients had been reported by the lab.

• In documents filed with the New Mexico Environment Department before the accident, LANL reported that the waste in the drum that would later burst “is stable and will not undergo violent chemical change without detonating,” and “there is no indication that the waste contains explosive materials, and it is not capable of detonation or explosive reaction. The materials in the waste stream are therefore not reactive wastes.

• LANL has never publicly acknowledged the reason it switched from clay-based litter to the organic variety believed to be the fuel that fed the intense heat.

• Organic kitty litter may have been mixed in up to 5,565 containers of waste at LANL starting in September 2012 that were incorrectly labeled as holding inorganic litter, according to an assessment conducted by WIPP personnel.
LANL did not respond to inquiries by RSN seeking an explanation for the change from inorganic to organic kitty litter during 2012-2014.

Commenting on the story in the New Mexican, Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group wrote in part: “The treatment processes LANS [the LLC] used were illegal as well as dangerous. Shipping the waste was illegal. Providing the fallacious manifest that accompanied the drums was illegal. Failing to provide accurate information after the fact when NMED asks for it was and is illegal.”

In the most recent study group bulletin, Mello notes that not every misdeed in the nuclear world will reach the public and cites an example from December 2014 when eight people at LANL were apparently contaminated with Plutonium but there was no news coverage.

Nuclear safety is an expensive mirage, all for the sake of nuclear war

The cost of failure of the single drum contaminated with organic kitty litter will almost surely run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. WIPP alone estimates its recovery plan will cost at least $500 million, and an additional $200 million or so for an improved, new ventilation system. These estimates do not include the additional costs of holding the nuclear waste stream while WIPP is closed, or the cost of improvement and compliance at LANL or any other facility.

When it opened in 1999, WIPP was supposed to have a 10,000 year leak-proof design life protecting the public from nuclear weapons waste radiation. That design life turned out to be only 15 years of safety, although further releases of radiation since Valentine’s Day 2014 have apparently been limited.

The Department of Energy says it is committed to reopening WIPP by March 2016, at least for partial operation, but that’s uncertain, since no one has ever tried to fix an underground nuclear waste facility before. Meanwhile, the ceiling of the underground salt cave had a significant collapse in January, when a section of ceiling 8 feet by 8 feet and two feet thick fell in a non-contaminated section of the one square mile storage area. As WIPP management acknowledged at the time: “This event highlights the need to continue prioritizing roof bolting and ground control in both the contaminated and uncontaminated areas of the WIPP underground facility in order to ensure safety and habitability in the underground. This area was originally scheduled to be re-bolted during the annual outage in February 2014.”

In March, more than a year after Drum 68660 burst, decontamination of the underground area began, as reported by WIPP: “Employees are using a modified piece of agricultural spraying equipment that allows them to apply a fine water mist to the walls and floor. The water dissolves the salt and washes it down to the floor. When the salt recrystallizes, it encapsulates the contamination and prevents any resuspension of radioactive particles.”

And now the federal government has reversed its past practice of paying fines for violating state laws and regulations. In December 2014, New Mexico’s Environment Department levied a total of $54 million in fines on the federal (outsourced) operations at WIPP ($17.7 million) and LANL ($36.6 million). Now the Energy Department is taking the position that it would be illegal to pay New Mexico’s fines, even though it has done so in the past. New Mexico is reportedly preparing a new order against WIPP, LANL, and others with fines totaling $100 million.

Underlying this struggle over the safety of nuclear weapons waste is the Obama administration’s perpetuation of longstanding reliance on a massive nuclear weapons force comprising more than 7,500 warheads, more than 2,000 of which are presently deployed around the world. The Obama administration has embarked on a program of improving and expanding the American nuclear force. A key element of that program is the fabrication of Plutonium pits (nuclear bomb triggers).

Making these essential elements of American weapons of mass destruction has been assigned to the Los Alamos National Laboratory, even though LANL has demonstrated its ability and willingness to gamble on lying about using the wrong kitty litter.

——————————

William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

The Four Intelligences of the Business Mind--Book Cover
The Four Intelligences of the Business Mind–Book Cover
The Four Intelligences of the Business Mind: How to Rewire Your Brain and Your Business for Success, by Valeh Nazemoff (CA Technologies, 2014), reviewed by Shel Horowitz, primary author, Guerrilla Marketing Goes Green

According to the Nazemoff, any successful business needs to concentrate on four different types of intelligence.

The first is financial intelligence, which most people already think about when they think about business.

But we also have to think about customer intelligence, data intelligence, mastermind intelligence. Mastermind is really what we normally think of as brainstorming. It’s the idea that a group of people can be smarter than any one individual.

In data intelligence, she suggests marrying the “9 Cs”—Collaborate, Consolidate, Communicate, Collect, Connect, Coordinate, Change, Converse, and Convert—to the classic 5Ws and an H that every beginning journalist learns to ask: Who, What, Where, When, Why, How.

Combining these, we get what she calls neuro-economics. And sometimes, small incremental changes that create a big result.

To me, the most interesting chapter was on customer intelligence. She talks about how to develop a customer profile, personas, and markets. and how to use this information to create communities. But she also shed some fascinating light on data. Specifically, the importance of determining whether your data is good. And I love her statement that success is not about how much data you have, but whether you have the right data.

These intelligences have implications in decision-making; Nazemoff talks about using them to determine who is responsible to make the decision, who is accountable, who gets consulted, and who simply gets informed.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

cover of the book, Creative Anarchy
Creative Anarchy cover (green side)
For a non-visual learner like me, Creative Anarchy is a mind expander. The author has brought together ideas from design studios around the world, many of which offer very non-traditional approaches.

The book has two key principles. The first is that rules are made to be broken. The second is that in order to break the rules, you must understand them.

For example, a common rule in book publishing is that books have both a front and a back. However, this book has two fronts. The larger, green, side is more or less about the rules. The thinner, red, side is about breaking those rules.

It makes fascinating reading.

However, as someone who occasionally hires graphic artists, I find that I generally insist on two rules that only get lip service here. First, I believe that it is usually important to write copy before considering the design. And secondly, I believe that any visual representation should enhance the message. Some of her examples do this beautifully and creatively, while others left me scratching my head and saying huh?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

After a three-year pressure campaign from Green America and the Natural Resources Defense Council, National Geographic has agreed to include 5 percent recycled paper into its formula. The magazine earlier agreed not to use old-growth-forest paper fibers.

Of course, lots of magazines are already using recycled paper, many of them at a far higher percentage than 5 percent. Some, including the adventure travel magazine Mountainfreak and the eco-oriented earth Island Journal, already use 100% recycled paper.

But this is National Geographic! The slick-paper photo-intensive standard-bearer for educational travel.

In other words, out the window goes the argument from any magazine that the quality of their photography makes it impossible to use at least some recycled. If National Geographic can do it, any magazine can do it.

So this could be a game-changer in the industry. And it’s an industry that needs its game changed. Many major magazines still use 100% virgin paper. Of those that do include some recycled paper, most use only 10 to 30 percent.

And on the consumer side, far too much magazine waste goes to the landfill, and far too little to the recycling center.

Like so many industries, change happens when both consumers and producers are aligned in a goal of creating more eco-friendly products using more environmentally appropriate processes and materials. So if you subscribe to some paper magazines, ask your publishers how much recycled paper they use, and if they might use more.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

My local paper, the Daily Hampshire Gazette in Northampton, Massachusetts, ran a brilliant editorial, “The GOP’s Ship of Fools,” on who’s responsible for the idiotic and totally avoidable government shutdown.

Here’s a little piece:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor led reporters into a room Monday and showed them an empty table, suggesting that if only Democrats and the president were willing to talk, the government would not have been hours from a new fiscal year without a budget. Do not be fooled. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Democrats were about to get what they wanted — a government shutdown. Do not be fooled. Senate Leader Harry Reid observed that McConnell (R-Absurdistan) was channeling “1984” author George Orwell as his speechwriter, so upside down was his logic.

Want to read the whole thing? You’ll find it at gazettenet.com/home/8759377-95/editorial-the-gops-ship-of-fools —I recommend that you read it.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Are you a locavore?

From June through October, the vast majority of or dinners are 60 percent or more sourced locally—and the majority of that, hyperlocally: either our own garden, or the Next Barn Over CSA farm 3 miles up the road, or the artisan cheeses and breads we buy from area farmers markets. (In a CSA farm, you pay a membership fee and then collect the harvest all season)

Last night’s dinner, about 80 percent locavore, was typical: Of the five different dishes I prepared, four used only local main ingredients (plus very small quantities of non-local flavorings, such as olive oil, salt, and balsamic vinegar):

  1. Cucumber-tomato-basil soup. All three main ingredients from our garden, plus a touch of hot pepper from the CSA .
  2. Grilled shitake mushrooms, grown by a friend of ours one town over, and seasoned with herbs from the CSA farm.
  3. Our own green beans and onions in a nonspicy peanut sauce (locally made one-ingredient natural peanut butter thinned with boiling water—yes, I know, the peanuts, were grown elsewhere, but I ground them myself a couple of days ago, using the store’s machine).
  4. Organic brown rice (the one nonlocal main ingredient) with our own tomatoes, our own oregano and lavender, the farm’s thyme, and local Greek yogurt.
  5. Salad with our own cucumbers, the farm’s salad greens and red bell pepper, and a local artisan goat cheese, garnished with non-local walnuts.

I was in a Mediterranean mood, so I used a lot of oregano, thyme, Greek yogurt, and salt. Some meals are more Indian,  Chinese, Italian, or Mexican themed, some are a mix—and some have no theme at all.

Eating like this has been remarkably easy, frugal, and infinitely rewarding—I’ll talk more about that tomorrow.

This time of year, our menu planning revolves around what’s in the crisper. I cooked what I cooked because we had two big bags of green beans in the fridge,and one of them was harvested three or four days ago and was not going to last too much longer, by our standards. I’d originally thought I’d make a mixed-veggie dish with our garden broccoli, zucchini, and eggplant—but when I saw the large number of beans that had to be used, I shifted the plan. The rice was left over from Dina’s cooking Thursday night, and we’re still inundated with cucumbers, so I built both the soup and salad around them (all-told, I used eight cukes and four tomatoes plus another seven or so for a batch of frozen sauce I made this morning).

Last night’s feast was a typical meal in the Horowitz/Friedman household. It’s how we eat in the summer and fall. In the winter, we often still manage to eat 30 to 50 percent locavore, drawing heavily on what we’ve frozen and dried during the harvest.

It’s still August, and our freezer is already crammed with corn, kale, green beans, three kinds of our own berries, tomato sauce, garlic scapes, basil pesto, and I forget what all else, and our pantry is lined with jars of dried zucchini and tomatoes—all of it local and organic, and processed while still very fresh.

Growing up in New York City apartment buildings in the 1960s and 70s, “locavore” was an unknown concept. The “fresh” vegetables  we ate were trucked from California and had been sitting for weeks and most of our my friends ate their veggies out of cans. So the way I eat is a radical departure from the way I ate as a child. I knew ONE family with a garden: friends of my mother who lived in suburban Westchester County.

Tomorrow, please check back—we’ll look at the impact of eating locally and organic—how being a locavore is good for you, your wallet, and the planet.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail