Antibiotics & Meat

Although the FDA banned the use of antibiotics for growth promotion in animals, growers are still allowed to administer the drugs prophylactically- before any animals are sick. This means that growers are still essentially free to use as much antibiotic as they like on their animals, which helps the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria. Another possible harm is that exposure to the antibiotics that remain in the meat might affect the bacteria normally resident in our bodies. While this is still somewhat speculative, it's worth looking into....

Marijuana: A Fair and Balanced Look

Yes, I know the phrase has lost its appeal (if you are old enough to remember when Fox News used it as its motto) but this is a really nice article. The author is in favor of marijuana legalization but as a doctor she is also aware of its negative effects, particularly on the teenage brain. Worth a look.

A solar panel on every roof

Have you heard about California's new law that requires homebuilders to put solar panels on every new home they build?

An economist at UC Berkeley's Energy Institute wrote a two paragraph letter to his representative in the California legislature. Basically, he's opposed to the idea: there are many more cost effective ways to fight climate change than this one, so why stick homeowners with a bill like this?

"Sea greens"- the tasty new eco-alternative

What creates jobs, fights climate change, and helps people eat better? The new ocean farming industry raises "sugar kelp," mussels, scallops, and oysters all on the same plot of ocean. The farmer featured in the 60 Minutes short is completely sold out, with his produce going to high class institutions and eateries. And while chefs experiment with using "sea greens" instead of traditional greens like spinach, scientists continue to investigate how underwater forests can help clean the water just as forests above ground help clean the air. Coming soon to a Whole Foods near you!?

Uber and Lyft in the Nation's Capital

A few weeks ago I shared the New York Times' take on ride-sharing services, and today I've come across the Washington Post's take. There are a few facts I found interesting: first, as noted in the NYT piece, the services do seem to add trips: there is less use of Metro than there used to be, and increasing tax revenue from the services shows more trips there. Importantly, the increase in trips is more than the decrease in Metro riders, so there are just more vehicles on the street than there used to be. Second, though, this tax revenue can be an important part of paying for Metro and other public transit: right now taxes are at just 1% of the cost of a trip, and putting them up to even 5% ($1 on a $20 Uber trip) would make a large dent in the budget shortfall facing Metro.

Impacts of climate change

A few papers recently published in the journal Nature are raising awareness of a potentially devastating impact of climate change. The slowing of ocean currents could lead to big temperature changes around the world... and a devastation of world fisheries. That would be bad. This short post sums up that research: hat tip to Prof. Sarah Jacobson at Williams College for pointing it out.

The price of pollution

More great work by one of my heroes, Princeton's Janet Currie. In this latest piece she and her coauthors were able to deduce the effect of a congestion pricing scheme on asthma among local children. It turns out that if you make people pay the costs of what they are doing (i.e. contributing to traffic and making pollution) then they will do it less, and things will move in the right direction. Who knew?

A recent followup (May '19) asks what such a policy might mean for Baltimore. This on the heels of a policy getting the green light in NYC. Food for thought!