I generally stay away from the whole "San Francisco has changed, techbros suck (but, c'mon, ugh), the soul of the City is disappearing" whine, even though it's almost impossible to NOT moan about in some way the many aspects of this changing cultural landscape, especially as it morphs from queer refuge to bourgeois fortress.

But today it really really struck me how staid and boring and above all CURATED San Francisco has become.

Of course, I also feel the need to caution myself about the inevitable and natural nostalgia of the more reckless days of my youth, but I can't help but feel like the City was an organism that screamed I AM ALIVE much more convincingly even just 10 years ago, not to mention when I was discovering it 25 years ago as a small-town girl who knew this was a place to which was worth escaping.

There have been a few essays and articles posted in the last few months about the second coming of Bay Area tech that are, both separately and together, very interesting indeed.

First, in both timeline and foundation:

Rebecca Solnit's excellent essay on the burgeoning San Francisco dot com environment, for London Review of Books

All this is changing the character of what was once a great city of refuge for dissidents, queers, pacifists and experimentalists. Like so many cities that flourished in the post-industrial era, it has become increasingly unaffordable over the past quarter-century, but still has a host of writers, artists, activists, environmentalists, eccentrics and others who don’t work sixty-hour weeks for corporations– though we may be a relic population. Boomtowns also drive out people who perform essential services for relatively modest salaries, the teachers, firefighters, mechanics and carpenters, along with people who might have time for civic engagement. I look in wonder at the store clerks and dishwashers, wondering how they hang on or how long their commute is. Sometimes the tech workers on their buses seem like bees who belong to a great hive, but the hive isn’t civil society or a city; it’s a corporation.

Onward, to the intersection of this phenomenon with philanthropy and community:

The Bacon Wrapped Economy

More young people have more money in a more concentrated place than perhaps ever before. Old money is being replaced by new, but it's a new kind of new, one that has different values, different habits, and different interests than the previous generation. The very rich have always, to a greater or lesser degree, been guilty of excess, but what's changed is that the Bay Area's new wealth doesn't necessarily have the perspective, the experience, or the commitments of the group it's replacing.

And that brings with it a whole host of disparate side effects: The arts economy, already unstable, has been forced to contend with the twin challenges of changing tastes and new funding models. Entire industries that didn't exist ten years ago are either thriving on venture capital, or thriving on companies that are thriving on it. It is now possible to find a $6 bottle of Miller High Life, a $48 plate of fried chicken, or a $20 BLT in parts of the city that used to be known for their dive bars and taco stands. If, after all, money has always been a means of effecting the world we want to bring about, when a region is flooded with uncommonly rich and uncommonly young people, that world begins to look very different. And we're all living in it, whether we like it or not.

AKA, coffin nail number nine in my nonprofit career. I definitely saw this happening when I left my last nonprofit job -- the money is there, but the focus, priorities, and commitment of the donors are way less grounded in reality. I get that in the best of worlds this can also possibly make some nonprofits be a bit more accountable, and can possibly make the arts more dynamic, but what I'm actually seeing are the unsustainable side effects: fickle, less committed support in exchange for moving mountains, and shallow donors unaware of the issues that are important to vulnerable communities made up of folks who are definitely not bringing in a $2000+/week paycheck.

And lastly:

Oakland Ranks Number 11 on List of Best Cities for Tech Start-Ups

Here it comes.

Okay, so as much as I find start-up culture and tech drones and $25 cocktails somewhat sad, I continue to be torn by this type of stuff. On one hand, Oakland needs the tax base and has benefitted in many ways (still more so peripherally) from tech. And cities are living organisms -- always changing, growing, adjusting -- with the consequential growing pains, so why not? But is this stuff going to fix public schools? Save our community libraries? Lower crime rates? Or just get us more people in $100 hoodies gushing about how edgy Oakland is at their $40 brunch served by an ex-Oaklander who now commutes from El Sobrante? I fear we'll get folks who don't value or even SEE anyone else but folks like themselves.

But sooner or later, everyone has to live in the world they've created: "...now I can make a billion dollars building a cool photo app or targeting ads to people more effectively. And that is a problem: More and more people in tech are making huge amounts of money, and people aren't curing cancer because it's not an attractive thing to do."

We can dream, and this is the world we made?

Been back for a couple of weeks from another successful couple of weeks in Tokyo. This was really a perfect trip this time around: Trevor logged a lot of training time and I got to meet some of the wonderful British Budo folks he met last year, and there was also plenty of time to see our friends and family, and take in a lot of what Japan has to offer -- which is, namely for me:

Excellent food...



(Serious damage being done with friends at all you can eat yakiniku, Akihabara)

And great people...



(Jeebus, just look at that mass of people! [Takeshita Street, Harajuku])

"But saudade!" you exclaim, "I know you've been going to Japan for many years now, but surely you're not so jaded yet that there must be more to visiting than just food and crowds of people-watching?"

I mean, I guess.

;)

I have covered many of the things I love about Japan over the last 7 (!!!) years I have blogged here; my friends have been nearly regaled to death for almost 20. So, you'll have to forgive me if I come across as jaded, which is lame. It's more that I don't want to bore you! Japan, my friends, is super interesting (settle in for the long haul if you ask me sometime about growing pains and tenability around rigid societal constructs there, which is endlessly fascinating to me); more important though, is that IT IS TOTALLY RAD.

Lemme see...something somewhat new to blog about (and, more importantly, give an excuse to put up pictures)...

Okay, so, the gorgeous natural environment (can be) a big winner. Even though I find Japan's reverence of nature juxtaposed with their almost fanatical desire to control and politically monetize it somewhat off-putting, I also tend to waffle and find their control fascinating. From bonsai to parking space-sized park retreats in the middle of highrises to lining rivers with concrete to ostensibly control their flow, it always makes for an interesting environment.

For the last few years I have visited during cherry blossom season. The impermanence of cherry blossoms -- they only bloom for a couple of weeks and then they are gone -- represent the intense and ephemeral qualities of life. All of Japan takes time out for hanami, or cherry blossom viewing, for that short time. We usually go to Inokashira Koen, in Kichijoji, but alas, there were few blossoms left this time around. But spring had definitely sprung.



Architecture, too, is a wonderful thing to behold in Japan. While there are plenty of plain Soviet-style concrete block buildings jutting about, and often it seems there are no zoning laws so you're left with a sort of weird jumble in high density, suburban, and mixed-use areas alike, there also seems to be gorgeous traditional architecture and exciting and innovative new architecture everywhere you turn.

My particular passion is that old-school, proletariat spirit, or shitamachi. While I crave the pounded dirt-floored homes still in use in the more rural areas of Japan, I spend most of my time on the city now, so the tiny, tin-sided, home/business mixed use buildings dating from the early 20th century to post-war tend to be my jam. These are in Shinjuku bordering a park and the pleasure district. Lying somewhere between old and new, I love this shitamachi spirit and seek it out anywhere I can.



These newer, but still old-school, passageways in Nezu -- just a hop, skip, and jump from the museums and shopping in Ueno -- were also lovely to behold.



And finally, no shitamachi-style trek is complete without visits to the old-school drinking establishments, or nomiya, that are centered around shitamachi areas like Asakusa and Ueno. This alleyway was tucked away in a tiny corner of Shinjuku, just bordering the highrises and fancy bars and clubs of Kabuchicho.



*LOVE*

Architecturally, the new and old can be blended seamlessly as well. This is the new gorgeous Asakusa Cultural Center, by Kengo Kuma and Associates, Tokyo.



Beautifully lit up at night, I was still sad it was closed in the evening. I usually go to Asakusa in the evening to avoid the temple crowds and get my old-school outdoor nomiya on, and I had no idea this had just been completed. Next time I am going inside!

Then there's what lies in-between all the glass and steel in one of the most sophisticated cities in the world. Trevor and I happened upon a building removal site in Shinjuku. Wild what lurks beneath, and it ain't all that sophisticated.



But even though you've got some serious analog shizz happening right behind and below the bright lights of the big city, I would be remiss if I didn't mention this other wonderful thing about Japan: the amazing attention to quality, detail, and service. This is in addition to how people are in general helpful and polite, even if they aren't working and supposed to help you; get them drinking, and normally shy Japanese will love you like a brother.

Coming from a place like the Wild West, it can seem almost criminal how well-done and polite even the most simple of things are created and transacted.



So my insanely delicious, healthy, and perfectly presented matcha latte kind of brings me full circle. I always appreciate Japan, and there is always something wonderful to experience and behold there, but really, it is all about the food...



(my udon and umeshu at the gorgeous Maenohara Onsen, Shimura-Sakaue)

And the people...



Ja mata, Nihon.

One other thing: I think it rips through your clothes when it takes you over. Windows found Bennings' torn and bloody clothes in the storage room after he was taken over. Earlier, Nauls found a pair of shredded and dirty longjohns in the kitchen trash can, but the nametag was missing. They could be anybody's. Nobody, nobody trusts anybody now, and we're all very tired. There's nothing more I can do, just wait. This is R.J. MacReady, helicopter pilot, US outpost #31...

Russian Scientists Bore Into Ancient Antarctic Lake

Common-sense design:













Change Tasklight

...insert a coin into the lamp to turn it on, and when you want to turn it off, the lamp will dispense your coin back...the lamp was designed to be used in public places like libraries, where forgetting to flip the switch is not uncommon.













Way cool.

Unbelievable.















Camel Thorn Trees, Namibia

Photograph by Frans Lanting

Tinted orange by the morning sun, a soaring dune is the backdrop for the hulks of camel thorn trees in Namib-Naukluft Park.

source

I'm always looking for an excuse to eat more oysters...

It's OK for Vegans to Eat Oysters

[W]hat if we could find an animal that thrived in a factory-farm cage, one that subsisted on nutrients plucked from the air and that was insensate to the slaughterhouse blade? Even if that animal looked like a bunny rabbit crossed with a puppy, it would be A-OK to hack it into pieces for your dinner plate. Luckily for those of us who still haven't gotten over the death of Bambi's mother, the creature I'm thinking of is decidedly less cuddly. Biologically, oysters are not in the plant kingdom, but when it comes to ethical eating, they are almost indistinguishable from plants.

Very interesting argument in this article, and plenty of facts about oysters and the good environmental ethics of their cultivation that I didn't know.

Mmmmmmm...can't wait until I get back out to Hog Island.

There's the Japanese kicking our asses at environmentalism...



(But wait! There's more. Great, right?)

...and then there's the Japanese NOT kicking our asses at environmentalism.



But wait! There's more. Great, right?

While I was optimistic about an international outcry to the Taiji dolphin slaughter when I first blogged about The Cove last year, I didn't expect a halt -- especially when Japan still thumbs its nose at international horror and participates in whaling.

Cautiously rejoicing, but keep those media eyes trained on Taiji.

Anyone who reads this blog knows I am a penny-pinching, reducing, reusing, recycling, reconsidering and refusing fool. And it is for this very reason that I am loving this stuff:

Swap Meets, Web Sites On Rise As Economy Falls

I've been thrifting for two decades -- first out of necessity and fashion, and now more out of frugality, green principles, and, well fashion too! I am loving these sites that are popping up all over the internets. One of the sites profiled in the above article, Rehash, is a particularly good one for fashionistas. Freecycle is another well-organized one (they've even got them in the UK) where I've found things in the past for my old offices, and given some things away as well.

At least there's an itty bitty silver lining in this bad economy cloud.

The Freakonomics blog at the New York Times posted an interesting bit today, about The Economist's debate on the commodification of water.

At The Economist debate site, pro is supplied by Steve Hoffmann, Managing Director, WaterTech Capital & co-founder, Palisades Water Index Associates. Con is provided by Vandana Shiva, Director, Research Foundation for Science, Technology & Natural Resource Policy.

Hmmm, excuse me for being skeptical of the shameless frat boys that make up the free market at a time like this, but judging merely by the titles, I do have an instant gut feeling of who I should trust!

While I agree that water supplies would probably, in theory, be better "managed" were market rates applied (definition of managed being fluid depending on which "market" you were talking to), Hoffman's attempt to play the social justice card -- by offering first thing that the beneficiaries of said (safer, more consistent, more abundant) water supplies would be folks who are underserved in the first place -- make me not only suspicious, but a bit queasy.

To wit, let's ask something that makes this perfectly clear: what have corporate interests done for YOU lately? Especially one that is a "merchant and investment banking firm that specializes in serving the myriad of companies that...comprise the water industry?" When has big business cared about whether the needs of not only the underserved but our ecosystems are being met, especially if they don't have a voice to the tune of millions of dollars?

From Vandana Shiva's abstract:

When water's social and ecological values are ignored and markets determine how water flows, it starts to move against the law of gravity. It moves upwards – to money – from the poor to the rich, from agriculture to industry, from the countryside to the city. In water markets, water moves from having a high ecological and social value, but a low market value, to having a low ecological and social value, but a high market value.

Water markets take water from where it is needed by nature’s economy, people’s economy and the countryside, to where there is purchasing power for water as a commodity—the urban areas, industry and industrial agriculture. Managing a scarce and precious resource like water requires conservation, equity and the recognition that as the basis of life, water is priceless.

Water, a neccesity for all of Earth's life, should not be corralled to serve the greed of the free market.

Nate Sensel and Troy Farmer play chess in a temporary park created out a public parking space across from New York's Museum of Modern Art. The game was part of the Trust for Public Lands 2008 National Park(ing) Day, an international event in which people reclaim parking spots for a single day
















Such a cool idea. I'm often surprised to discover tiny parks in Japan that are about the size of an American parking space or two. I used to wonder, "why bother?' But they make a difference in the modern human landscape that for many is mostly blacktop and neon. They do for me.

I'm curious though -- it's just one parking space, so why for just one day?

San Francisco Start-Up Produces Jet Fuel From Algae

I don't know much about this, but it presents well. Seems to be a much better alternative to corn. Okay, I'm paying attention.

This was a pretty interesting read:

Stanford Biologist Sees Money in Preservation of the Environment

This is a new way of saving nature. Until now, the conservation movement has said people should care about nature for nature's sake - with charity as the driving economic force to preserve land. And that, [Stanford biologist Gretchen] Daily said, has failed. She sees a renaissance in the conservation movement hinging on investment.

[...]No one gets paid for water purification or climate stabilization or protecting biodiversity on a large scale. That's what Daily envisions.

She advocates at the state and even country government level, using software developed that can, for example, "estimate the worth of a forest full of pollinating insects vital to nearby crop production."

Where does it make sense to convert forests to agricultural production? Where should they be left alone?

Financially strapped countries could find the tool crucial, advocates say. A poor nation might be tempted to let a rich corporation develop land because it doesn't know the dollar value of the natural resources that will be destroyed.

"If you put yourself in the shoes of a poor government, it's hard to turn down the cash deal," said Mark Tercek, a former official at investment giant Goldman Sachs who recently left to head the Nature Conservancy. "It's hard to put a value on these services. That's what (Daily) is trying to map out."

--

"We're in the biggest mass extinction since the dinosaurs," [Daily] said in her Stanford office, which is covered with photos of her husband and two children. "People estimate we'll lose half of the Earth's life forms in our lifetime."

I don't know who "people" are, but that postulation is scary.

On a related note, this reminds me of the fundamental difference of policy that has guided two different nonprofits I've worked for, and how I believe it has been the key to their successes. Both social justice nonprofits, this difference stems from a crucial bit in their mission statements: investing in their grantees and clients, versus a "charity" approach, which I have seen firsthand foster community and allow dignity and personal power in one's life to drive lasting change.

Oh lord, help me remember this in my own life's little interactions!

Have U.S. Drivers Reached The Filling Point of No Return?

It took some time, but Americans are responding to rising energy costs by driving smaller cars and cutting back on miles they log on the road.

The persistence of high energy prices plays a role. It takes time for consumers to make changes that lower energy use. That isn't so much because people first shrug off high energy costs. They can and do react quickly. But the most important factors in energy-consumption changes come only with time -- buying a new refrigerator or a smaller house or trading in a sport-utility vehicle for a smaller car.

"What we're seeing now is prices have been high for a while and consumers have become convinced high prices are here to stay. That's given them time to make changes, such as the car they buy," said economist Christopher Knittel of the University of California, Davis. "That has larger effects than, 'Well, I'm just not going to drive to the mall this week.'"

This is big. We are going into a massive cultural shift that will see Americans not only changing the way they drive, but how they interact with their local community. I daresay this may even convince folks of how spoilt and entitled we've been, as we have clearcut our way through fossil fuels with our massive SUVs and McMansions and the like with nary a glance at what the consequences are for the rest of the human populace. May we finally experience even a small bit of what our ignorance has wrought on the rest of the world, and may we begin to learn from it (and turn it around before Wall-E comes to pass!)

And if you still feel like complaining after that spiel, chin up! Get a grip on yourself about our paltry almost $5 per gallon, and fall on your knees to praise jeebus -- you could be living in Britain!

At $9 Per Gallon, British Driving Habits Change

Many environmentalists have quietly rejoiced that the high cost of fuel is apparently achieving what governments have largely failed to: a reduction in carbon emissions.

But not all subscribe to this logic. Tom Burke, an environmental scientist and former government adviser, says high pump prices "inevitably fall hardest on people who can least bear them, instead of on governments who took wrong decisions."

"You can't just say it's a good thing that prices go up and people will do more sensible things," he says. "Older people, people already at the bottom of the pile, will find it harder ... to live and anyone who welcomes that has lost their humanity."

BTW, I am one of those folks who has "lost their humanity." I do hate high gas prices for the same fundamental reason everyone else does -- it makes my life less convenient -- but I do secretly rejoice at the same time. And yes, for those of you keeping score at home, it is easy for me to rejoice. I live in an area with ample public transit, I am healthy enough to ride a bike and walk, and I have plenty of shops carrying the necessities within walking distance of my apartment.

But no matter: I still think gas prices being so high is a good thing. And more to the point, I don't think we can be so simplistic as to say welcoming high gas prices equals not caring about the suffering of the people on the bottom of the pile. What a ridiculous idea. To focus on environmentalist glee over something that will actually change the bad behavior of millions of people, rather than focusing on the failures of public policy to address the inevitable shitpickle that was looming and now exists because our insatiable hunger for non-renewable resources is simply rhetoric, and lack of foresight.

This is also what capitalism wrought, baby. Nothing is perfect in our capitalist society. But even so, many folks are anti social programs and anti spending for community benefit until it hits them straight in the gut. I have no patience for people who are Capitalist when they get the long straw and Socialist when they don't get their way. Anyway, you work for policy with what you have been dealt; environmentalists have been doing that very thing in an unresponsive populace for years. And with what we have been dealt, change seems to only come from discomfort.

Any uncomfortable change (read: one that makes us evaluate need vs. want) that is good for the whole of our society and our world will inevitably hit some of the most economically fragile first -- whether it's paying a living wage for goods and services (buh-bye Wal-Mart), or getting in line with Europe and reining in our entitlement around fossil fuels. The key to leaving the least amount of people behind is demanding and working for social programs, and being community-minded.

There are poor, sick, and old people everywhere, and I don't see the preponderance of said populations elsewhere being used as an excuse to not do the right thing for the environment and our future as humans. In addition to the obvious -- exploring and implementing alternative fuels -- demand better public transit, build communities that incorporate necessary businesses within them, and get to know grandma or your neighbor and take them to the store or to work with you.

It takes time to change, but we're on our way.

I feel like all I've been doing is complaining lately, but I just have to post what's currently pissing me off. From this article, in a nutshell, it is namely:

1) State officials say the amount of pesticide applied shouldn't pose severe health risks, but they've also refused to rule out that the spray can affect humans, particularly sensitive people such as children and the elderly.

Or people with lungs, or skin, or eyes. Read on...

2) The U.S. Department of Agriculture obtained an "emergency exemption from registration" from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that allows the agency to use the pesticide in aerial sprays over California cities. Because of that exemption, the spraying program isn't subject to state approval, according to representatives of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.

Not subject to state approval. That has all kinds of implications for future nastiness.

3) There is no widespread infestation of the light brown apple moth, but U.S. Department of Agriculture officials say they are trying to head off a potential disaster.

Check out this fact sheet about Checkmate -- the pesticide being used -- and the light brown apple moth.

What is laughable is the assurance by the Feds that since the EPA has no concerns about the pesticide and even allows farm workers into the fields after spraying, we shouldn't worry either. This is the same EPA that exempted power plants from new mercury emission rules and needed a Supreme Court order to force them to regulate greenhouse gases. Um, yeah, sure -- I feel better already.

Less important, but still relevant: what happens to organic farms in the area? Also, my inner conspiracy theorist is inevitably suspicious about being used as a guinea pig for other more destructive applications, like biological weapons. This isn't right, and it smells fishy.

To paraphrase Senator William Proxmire – ‘If a foreign government crop dusted our children and our cities with powerful, secret, untested, unwanted pesticides – we would consider it an act of war’

David Dilworth, Nov 2007, HOPE Executive Director

Earth Day is Sunday, and the San Francisco Chronicle, like many papers, is running a green section demonstrating ways to reduce your carbon footprint.

What I really like about the spread this year is that they are chronicling some really easy ways for regular folks to reduce their fossil fuel consumption around the house. Saving energy doesn’t have to be difficult, but so often the more urban papers tend to focus on things that are really unreasonable for the majority of America, so naturally some folks just freeze up and change nothing. Approaching greening your life on a scale is a really a nice reminder for people who are already pretty green, and a gentle way to ease people who aren't so green into changes around their home. Big changes, especially related to lifestyle, usually don’t happen overnight.

So, check out your carbon footprint with this test. If you’re unhappy with your score, the Chron also aggregated a bunch of web resources with information about greener living, for everything from gardening to eating out.

A big one from the list that I highly recommend is getting a free gas and electrical audit, as well as a water audit, from your respective utility companies for your home and office. I just did this for my office, and not only do you get a really good idea about how much energy gets wasted in your space and how easy it is to stop it, but they give you free stuff like shower and faucet aerators. I installed them, and guess what? Now we are saving gallons a minute, AND they provide better “spray velocity” than what we were using before! People actually wash their dishes more now instead of leaving them in the sink for some other schlub, because it is easier to clean them. No joke. Everyone loves the aerators at my work. Total score.

Ah, and closely associated with reduction, I read a pretty good article today about the built environment and obesity.

[Former Director of California's Department of Public Health Richard] Jackson says the attempt to create safety and convenience has spawned its own set of problems: "Now we have obesity, diabetes, cancer and joint problems, instead of dysentery. We're richer than before, but things don't feel right. We work harder, we drive farther, we're fatter, we're more depressed. Our lifestyle is making us more unhealthy, and a lot of that is based on our built environment."

Yes, it's true, comfort kills. Amen. But there's a big aspect of the built environment that people seem to forget about, because it intersects with our own willpower. Check this nastiness, yo. Gluttony combined with the prevalence of non-foods as breakfast-lunch-dinner is still the root of our problem. But, as I said, baby steps. Recognizing the built environment, and the gah! of sprawl is a good start.

NP: Rock Plaza Central, 'SexyBack'

As I said earlier, the holidays are officially "on." What better day than Black Friday, or Buy Nothing Day, to give thanks for what you have, plan your charitable giving, and spend some energy on things that matter most?

December 1st is World AIDS Day. Here are a couple of really good promotions going on to help support Youth AIDS:

1. Kiehl's is donating 100 percent of sales of their delicious grapefruit hand and body cleanser to Youth AIDS. This is a great gift for Secret Santas or the hostess of the party you're attending or the house you are staying at for the holidays. I certainly wouldn't sniff disapprovingly at it either *wink*

2. If you're on MySpace, when you add 3 Needles as a friend before December 1st, 10 cents will be donated to the Youth AIDS Africa project. A free and painless way to do your part to not only raise some funds but get this critically acclaimed movie about the global AIDS crisis on everyone's radar, and get people talking.

If you're starting to think about tax season, and write-offs, or you just like to give a little back, here are some of my official endorsements for your hard-earned charitable donations:

1. Global Fund for Women

I worked here, I know the tireless women and men who work here, I know their courageous and fearless grantees, their dedicated international board, their loyal supporters. I know the good work this organization does for women's rights around the globe. Committed, positive, and passionate, GFW consistently invests over 3/4 of their funds into programs, above and beyond what is encouraged by such charity watchdogs as Charity Navigator; this year, they have invested over 80 percent toward programs, and have received 4 stars, the highest rating from Charity Navigator, for the fourth year in a row. Donate to the Global Fund for Women.

2. Greenpeace

I usually like to support small community-based environmental organizations, because I feel the most good is done to support your community first as a building block in a healthy environmental foundation, but longtime international healthy oceans advocate Greenpeace gets my vote this year because of the diversity of their programs, their commitment to nonviolence, and their support of people working to educate the public with scientific fact about the state of our oceans -- this article is why they are getting my support this year. Donate to Greenpeace.

3. Union of Concerned Scientists

I've been an admirer of UCS for some time. UCS merges scientific study with citizen action to work toward environmental stability and sustainability. Sharing their findings about everything from the benefits of organic food to the feasibility of renewable energy sources with the public, media, and governments, township to federal, has made them a well-respected environmental advocate in government policy. I also love their commitment to education -- making environmental awareness both realistic and easy to understand -- as well as their passion for removing the imposed hierarchy between scientific and "layperson" advocacy. Donate to Union of Concerned Scientists.

These are the charitable organizations I have committed to supporting this year, and I encourage you to check them out. But I would also love to get recommendations for charitable giving from anyone who reads this blog. Whatever you decide to support financially or spiritually, the most important thing this holiday season, and always, is to remember those who are less fortunate, and those organizations that are working to make our communities and our world a better place.