The Florida Keys, third longest barrier reef in the world, is a dead zone. Ninety percent of the big fish, the tuna, the sharks, and other things, are already gone in the oceans. There’s a dead zone in the Gulf Of Mexico every summer the size of New Jersey, where there’s not enough oxygen for things to live. So it’s not a question of ‘Can the oceans take any more?’ The oceans can’t take any more. They couldn’t take any more fifty years ago. The question is, when are we going to stop?

Watch the full interview here.

Seafood is a $1.8 billion industry in Louisiana, with another $1 billion in retail sales  driven by recreational fishing.  If the estimates about possible environmental damage are proven conservative, Gulf Coast states are in for a world of financial pain, up to $4.3 billion in losses according to BBVA Compass Bank economist Nathaniel Karp:

Karp said Florida has the most at stake, facing potential losses of $3 billion alone, including $2.8 billion in tourism, $18 million in commercial fishing and $138 million in recreational fishing…

Louisiana could face economic losses of $948 million, including $880 million in tourism, according to Karp’s estimates. Louisiana’s commercial fishing business stands to lose $31 million, while its recreational fishing industry could lose $37 million, he projects.

And if the drip, drip, drip of information about this spill is anything to go by, the numbers may turn out to be much worse.  Christian Science Monitor reporting suggests upwards of 25,000 barrels of oil per day are spewing into the Gulf instead of the 5,000 barrel estimate being used in data crunching, a number which could skew upwards even further if the damaged piping is further compromised by the flow of gritty oil.   With that oil pocket rumored to be tens of millions of gallons full, an unplugged flow could spread for months.

Such projections take on more significance now that the first attempt to dome the spill failed this weekend.   It also still remains to be seen if the mushroom cloud of oil will reach the current that could pull the oil up the southeastern seaboard.

Our nation’s top experts are now suggesting “stuffing shredded tires, golf balls and other debris into the well’s failed blowout preventer,” while they work on a differently-shaped dome to repeat their attempts at sealing the leak.   Can we really justify offshore drilling if we aren’t truly capable of foreseeing and planning for the consequences that could cause permanent damage to delicate coastal ecosystems and our food chain? Can’t we admit that some technology is still beyond the scope of our knowledge?

Coastal citizens are realizing the stakes of such acts.   Support for offshore drilling in Florida (35%) has dropped precipitously (from 61% in 2008).

And yet politicians seem to be doubling down on their efforts to fill oil coffers, instead of promoting alternative energy sources that could yield new job sectors to partially replace the lost manufacturing jobs of this recession.  For instance, Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell, who seems to continue jerking further and further right since his election, is pushing to drill off the coast of his state as soon as possible.

Then there are the conservative talk heads like Bill Kristol, who suggests drilling CLOSER to shore would limit the danger of offshore drilling, and Sarah Palin who still considers drill, baby, drill to be prudent and necessary for energy independence.

Indeed, we need to create a platform for home grown energy, independent of the Middle East, but real leadership on energy would take us to the next generation of energy creation: one that demonstrates that those who grace the top of the food chain have the awareness that environmental stewardship is a necessary factor in moving society and the human race forward in a sustainable manner.

We’re not particularly good stewards of anything when we can’t even acknowledge the boundaries of what we know before aggressively drilling in the abyss.

As a result of this law, plastic bag use plummeted from 22.5 million bags a month to just 3 million.  (Side note: the $150,000 and counting generated by this tax is earmarked to fund Anacostia River clean up.) People increasingly can be seen carrying tote bags of various sizes and shapes when running errands or grocery shopping.

The law brought about an almost instantaneous shift in behavior, which could be as much about peer pressure and status as it is about saving a nickel here and there. A paper in the March issue of the Journal of Personality & Social Psychology reported on a study of factors influencing more environmentally-aware purchasing behavior.  “Supporting the notion that altruism signals one’s willingness and ability to incur costs for others’ benefit, status motives increased desire for green products when shopping in public (but not private)…”

It’s not enough to be personally aware of the impact your greener actions have within your community, you’re more apt to make the more pro-environment decision when other people can see you.

Which makes me wonder about corporate America. Given the fundamental lack of transparency that leads to epic crises like the Wall Street melt down and the mine safety debacle in West Virginia, would the same forces at work on individuals work on corporations.  Could consumer demand of greater transparency across the providers of goods and services throughout every industry sector, yield more community-centric corporations that consider the social and environmental costs when making business decisions?

(Hat Tip David Berreby of Big Think)

Why are these initiatives never possible when politicians are still in office?

I’ve bottle-fed an orphaned baby kangaroo and can say, on an ordinary day, such a brush with wildlife is unforgettable.  To find animals that survived a horrendous fire and to have a shared moment is extraordinary.

The story gets better from there.

Sam arrived at Southern Ash Wildlife Shelter, run by Colleen Wood, where she made the acquaintance of Bob, another rescued koala.

“They keep putting their arms around each other and giving each other hugs. They really have made friends and it is quite beautiful to see after all this. It’s been horrific,” said Wood . . .

Tree, a volunteer with the Country Fire Authority Victoria, has visited Sam since her rescue and was delighted to see she had bonded with Bob.

“They’ve really taken a shine to each other as they are both burned and share the same burned smell,” he said. . .

Wood said the koalas would be released back into nature once a suitable habitat is found.

There are a couple of cute pictures if you click through to the article.

It just goes to show you can find beauty even in the wake of utter devestation.

Last month, David Green wrote about shorter work weeks as a possible key to higher productivity for Fast Company.

Naturally, most businesses blanch at the notion of giving up any competitive edge in a globalized economy. But it’s not as if moving to a four-day (or 32-hour) workweek would simply lop 20% off the economy. Cutting hours may actually raise per-hour productivity. France, home of the 35-hour week, creates more GDP per work hour than the United States ($37 versus $34, as of 2003). Norway spanks us too ($39), and Norwegians work 26% fewer hours a year than Americans. It’s a myth of modern hypercapitalism that an overworked, sleep-deprived, stressed-out workforce is a necessity. Studies have consistently shown that longer workweeks increase productivity only in the very short term. In a recent survey by Salary.com, workers copped to wasting about 20% of the average day Web surfing and gossiping.

At my last job, it became obvious that while cubicles may promote interactivity between staff members, it also leads to a lot of time being wasted because it’s hard to block out surrounding conversations, so you wind up doing more socializing that you intend to. Fortunately, I wound up assigned to a cubicle at the far end of the floor with little foot traffic. I don’t think management understood why I kept turning down cubicles in the fray (which was thought to be the good real estate) when they freed up; I spent too many hours at the office to begin with, being a social butterfly was not going to make my days shorter.

While there appears to be a compelling argument for a 4 day work week (improving work place efficiency, some life balance, and being aware of one’s environmental impact v. the badge of honor/shame if you log insane hours), inertia persists. But it seems our not-officially-in-a-recession economy may allow Americans to shorten the work week, if not eventually start taking back their time.

When Ohio’s Kent State University offered custodial staff the option of working four days a week instead of five to cut commuting costs, most jumped at the chance, part of a U.S. trend aimed at combating soaring gasoline prices.”We offered it to 94 employees and 78 have taken us up on it,” said university spokesman Scott Rainone.

The reason is simple: rising gas prices and a desire to retain good workers. . .

“In our office, we have people who travel anywhere from five or six miles to a couple who are on the road 45 to 50 minutes,” Rainone said. “As the price of gas rises, the level of grumbling rises.”

The cost of commuting is making the shift to telecommuting and compressed work weeks more palatable to employers who typically want bodies in the building. Employers are also looking to cut back on overhead expenses, which shared office space can do. Yes, the sharp increase in expenses makes getting your job done more expediently beneficial to both workers and management.

As always, feel good changes that benefit the environment, not as important as feel good changes that benefit the bottom line.