By Jen Kelso

Chameleon Blogger

Loyola’s biodiesel program, which uses leftover waste from our own dining halls to create fuel that powers our campus shuttle buses, is the first licensed operation of its kind. But what makes it even more special is that from the start, students have been the driving force behind its success. In fact, the first STEP (Solutions To Environmental Problems) class in 2007 produced a group of students committed to the idea who really helped the biodiesel production proceed.

One of these original students has stuck around long enough to become the biodiesel lab manager today. Zach Waickman was a communications major at Loyola when he decided to take the STEP class that fall of 2007. Even though he didn’t know much about the science side of it, he instantly loved the various challenges associated with trying to launch an operational biodiesel lab. That first semester, he recalled, the group working on the biodiesel project had “nothing, nothing but motivation.” Sometimes, that’s enough.

As the biodiesel lab project grew more and more developed and exciting, Zach stayed involved by taking Advanced STEP in the spring of that semester. But at the same time, he also had a demanding and serious internship at Fox news. “About two weeks into the internship, I realized I didn’t want to do that at all,” he said. His internship experience just paled in comparison to his work with the biodiesel lab, and he realized that he just wanted to channel all of his energy toward furthering the lab. He began to spend free time at the lab, just learning everything he could. By the end of the semester, he’d had his effective epiphany: “I loved biodiesel. I loved all the challenges, all the components of it. It got me, hook, line and sinker,” Zach said.

Sticking with the biodiesel program through all its ups and downs provided Zach with a direction and purpose, as well as some pretty amazing successes. More than once, the future of the biodiesel lab was saved by nothing short of a miracle. “We just kept going,” he said. Battling through constant money issues, highly competitive grant programs, and bureaucrats trying to keep them from being licensed, the biodiesel team, Zach included all along, proceeded on stubbornly, and it paid off. Now the biodiesel lab is poised to move in the fall and greatly expand its capacity, an amazing next step in the biodiesel journey.

When Zach graduated, he was fortunate to be able to make biodiesel his job—all because of the one class he took a couple years back. As the biodiesel lab manager, Zach oversees the production of the fuel as well as other ongoing projects (such as making soap from biodiesel byproducts) and works with biodiesel fellows each semester and summer. He’s able to stay involved with something that has added much meaning to his life over the past few years, which is awesome.

If Zach hadn’t decided to take that STEP class, his life would be radically different today. Most likely he wouldn’t work in a biodiesel lab, and he wouldn’t have had some of the most formative experiences of his college years. That’s why it’s important to step outside of what’s “normal” every now and then. Doing something you wouldn’t normally do—taking a class, signing up for a retreat, going to a club meeting, taking on a new volunteer position—could just lead to something that could change your life.

Infographic by Hannah Otto. Fracking consists of drilling into the ground to relase natural gas from the earth’s rocks.

By Ericka Reyes
Marketing Director

The F word. You know what I’m talking about.

The world’s most controversial word; the one you shouldn’t use, but you do anyway.

You guessed it. FRACKING.

Fracking, also known as hydraulic fracturing, is the process of drilling or injecting fluid into the ground at a high pressure in order to fracture shale rocks to release natural gas inside.

It sounds pretty technical and maybe a little boring, but trust me, it should scare you.

Why? Well, what would you say if you knew your government was putting cancer-causing chemicals into the ground and your drinking water? Well, that’s fracking.

Sure, they say the intent isn’t to harm anyone; it’s to get energy for our homes and cars.

They say it’s a cheap way to get the gas necessary for our daily lives.

Maybe it’s cheap for the government and the gas companies, but not for the people who have to live with long lasting health side effects.

Every time a fracking job is done, up to 600 chemicals are used to create fracking fluid.

Some of them are known carcinogens: uranium, lead, mercury, and methanol.

Don’t worry you guys. It’s just going into our environment and groundwater. Some studies have shown that it even pollutes our air.

When fracking, a pipe is drilled deep into the ground.

A wonderfully sanitary fluid is placed down the pipe and, at the very bottom, creates an extreme amount of pressure that causes fractures in nearby rocks.

Once cracked, the natural gas within the rocks rises through the pipe.

If you go on YouTube to watch the fracking process, the release of gas looks impressive and maybe a little bit frightening, but the process that leads to this is even more disconcerting.

After the fracking process, about 50 to 70 percent of non-biodegradable fracking fluid is left in the ground.

Unfortunately, the government has approved the use of fracking water for “safe” drinking.

The water is transported to nearby towns and cities where it can cause sensory, repertory, and neurological damage.

According to the government, the cost of a few sick individuals is minimal.

The reported sensory and respiratory problems are just fleeting conditions.

Only 1,000 cases have been attributed to fracking, but they are growing as people learn more about what is causing their illness.

Keep in mind the next one affected can be your grocer, your neighbor, or you.

For more information, visit earthworksaction.org.

Ericka is the marketing director. She can be reached at marketing@luchameleon.com.

http://youtu.be/eOM5mxcNm9s

Check out the very first episode of Chameleon News, filmed in front of this week’s Campus Hotspot, the St. James Chapel at the corner of Rush and Pearson near the Water Tower Campus.

Stay tuned for next week’s episode of Chameleon News, with a brand new Campus Hotspot!

Anchored by Ericka Reyes/Marketing Director
Written by Kim De Guzman/Editor-in-Chief
Produced by Sean Keenehan/Section Editor

Photo from chicagonow.com/The Belmont neighborhood area offers many options for environmentally friendly shopping.

By Sarah McBride
Chameleon Staff Writer 

The Belmont neighborhood is notorious for its wide variety of thrift stores to shop from.

Lovers of vintage fashion, those who want a greener way to shop, or anyone looking to find a deal on clothing, because we’re all on some sort of budget, should explore the neighborhood and see all it has to offer.

To help in your thrift store search, we’ve explored the area and scouted out some great thrifting options.

In addition to clothing and accessories, many of the stores in the area also have unique home décor and interesting old items.

Belmont Army has some interesting old knick-knacks and kitchen items. There was a particularly odd set of Santa mugs.

Hollywood Mirror has everything from tacky to just plain bizarre household décor and features some wacky Christmas decorations as well. Remember the weird troll dolls? They have those too, along with other old toys if you happen to be interested in that sort of thing.

These shops are great for finding alternative Christmas gifts this holiday season. Whether you need a gag gift, a fabulously ugly Christmas sweater, which can easily be found at Ragstock, or a gift for the person that has everything, you’re sure to find something on Belmont to fit your unique gifting needs.

Also be sure to check these stores out if you’re looking for a creative piece to decorate your apartment or dorm.

Belmont Army

Location: 855 W. Belmont Avenue

A four-floor retail space, Belmont Army offers shoppers four distinctly different shopping spaces, plus a basement skate shop.

The first floor houses non-vintage apparel and includes many unique looking pieces. It has a cool, Urban Outfitters vibe.

The second floor is filled with all kinds of military and law enforcement style apparel. From police vests to camouflage and everything in between, shoppers will be able to find anything military-apparel related that they desire. My future-FBI-agent friend had a field day on this floor.

The third floor has a boutique feel, featuring just shoes, and offers some brands that may not be found in regular stores. There are a bunch of cool looking wedge-booties, which are a great break from regular boots for the winter.

Finally, for the true vintage experience, there is Belmont Army’s fourth floor. Filled with any type of apparel you could imagine, including prom dresses, leather jackets, and sweaters, this floor offers true vintage style at a great price.

Check out their blog at belmontarmy.wordpress.com for upcoming sales and new arrivals.

Hollywood Mirror

Location: 812 W. Belmont Avenue

It looks like a crazy place on the outside and, upon walking in, you’ll realize it is just that.

A colorful, eclectic space, Hollywood Mirror is filled to the brim with vintage and resale apparel.

To assist with what could potentially be an overwhelming experience, seeing as there are literally clothes and knick-knacks everywhere, the store is arranged into convenient sections by apparel type, which includes sweatshirts, dresses, and basic tees.

This is great place to explore if you’re looking for an interesting shopping experience. You never know what you’ll find here.

Ragstock

Location: 812 W. Belmont Avenue (Same building as Hollywood Mirror)

Located both above and below Hollywood Mirror and separated by men and women’s apparel, Ragstock combines both vintage clothes and new apparel from lesser-known brands.

Here you’ll find everything from graphic tees to crazy costume pieces in a wide variety of styles.

It’s a great place to look for both basic clothes and edgy-vintage finds, along with out-there accessories.

Visit their website at ragstock.com for a sample of some of the clothing and to do some effortless thrift shopping online.

There are even more stores like these in the Belmont area to explore, along with cafés for a post-shopping latte.

Kickstand

Location: 824 W. Belmont Avenue

Try the Loose-Leaf Vanilla Chai Latte if you’re a tea person at Kickstand.

Intelligentsia

Location: 3123 N. Broadway

Visit Intelligentsia for a change in atmosphere when studying on campus gets mundane.

Take a break from campus life and explore Belmont with some friends for a unique Chicago neighborhood experience.

Happy thrifting!

To contact Sarah, email her at smcbride@luc.edu.

News Brief Compiled By Kim De Guzman

Editor-in-Chief

Here’s what’s been making headlines during the past week:

Photo from telegraph.co.uk

A/E

According to BBC News, a play about late singer Amy Winehouse set to debut in Denmark in January 2013 has been canceled. The singer’s estate has blocked the use of her materials in the production.

Photo from veoverde.com

Green Scene

National Geographic claims that a rare species of giant tortoise (which was thought to have gone extinct) may still live on. DNA evidence from a Yale University study reveals the tortoise species Chelonoidis abingdoni may still have more of its kind located in a remote area in Ecuador’s Galapagos Islands.

Photo from nationstates.net

Culture Shock

The Standard, Hong Kong’s biggest circulation daily publication, reports that Hong Kong has been named a “superpower” in education, along with Finland and South Korea, by an international study known as the Global Index of Cognitive Skills and Education Attainment.

Photo from abcnews.go.com

The Hots

The Huffington Post reports that Florida’s Department of Health has sent out a survey inquiring about intimate details of the sex lives of 4,100 young women. But that’s not all. The state is offering survey participants $10 gift cards to CVS for use on “health-related items.”

Photo from bloomberg.com

Co-Exist

According to the Huffington Post, the Church of England faces a possible “major constitutional crisis,” after rejecting the possibility of women bishops. After the unexpected defeat, the church said the process to allow women bishops would need to begin anew, and couldn’t start again until a new General Synod (the Church of England’s legislative body) is seated in 2015.

Photo from guardian.co.uk

Liberation

The Guardian reports that a Swedish toy retailer is “arming children with the ability to question outdated gender roles.” The retailer, Top Toy, has released their annual holiday catalog with advertising designed to “confound every gender prejudice.” The catalog shows pictures of girls holding Nerf Guns, and boys playing with dolls.

Photo from Reuters

According to Reuters, Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras welcomed a debt deal agreed by lenders to unlock aid, promising skeptical Greeks a new dawn after months of haggling under the threat of bankruptcy. Euro zone finance ministers and the International Monetary Fund agreed to reduce Greek debt by 40 billion euros ($52 billion), opening the way for 43.7 billion euros of loans to be disbursed by early 2013.

Kim De Guzman is the editor-in-chief. She can be reached at editorinchief@luchameleon.com

Photo by Kevin Bautista/the Chameleon. Homemade holiday cards are a great way to cut down on paper. You also save money and the cards are more personal.

By Kim De Guzman
Editor-in-Chief

The holiday season has a tremendous impact on the environment. But the happiest time of the year doesn’t necessarily have to be the most wasteful.

Here’s how you can celebrate the season in a “greener” way:

 1.     Lights

Instead of the traditional incandescent holiday lights, choose light emitting diodes, otherwise known as LEDs, for outdoor lighting or Christmas tree lighting. LEDs use up to 95% less energy than larger, traditional holiday bulbs. These bulbs may be more expensive, but last much longer. The efficiency of LEDs is also not affected by shape and size, unlike fluorescent light bulbs or tubes.

It is also suggested that using a limited outdoor light display helps to conserve energy. Fancy and excessive Christmas lights may be impressive, but they do have a serious impact on the environment. Also be sure to turn off all outdoor and indoor holiday lights when they are not in use.

 2.     Gift Giving and Gift Wrap

When it comes to gifts, usually it’s the thought that counts. Do something different and don’t take the “store bought” gift route this holiday season. Instead of actually buying gifts this year, why not make them? For example, you can make your own jewelry and trinkets from aluminum cans. You can als give out baked goods. You could even donate to a friend’s favorite charity as part of their holiday gift.

When it comes to gift-wrap, you can use recycled newspaper. You can make funky designs out of the newspaper, or create your own gift bags and wrapping paper from cardstock. Although making your own “gift wrap” may not look as nice, it’s a fun activity to do. And who knows? Maybe your “homemade gift wrap” will become a signature staple of your future holiday traditions.

3.     Trees

Buy a potted tree (with the roots still attached) so it can be re-planted in your backpack or in a local park when the season is over. But if you prefer an actual cut tree, get one that is grown organically, without pesticides.

4.     Homemade Cards

Store-bought holiday cards use up vast amounts of natural resources. And let’s face it; the majority of holiday cards end up being “throwaway items.” Making your own cards will not only be an environmentally conscious effort on your part but also a more personal effort, to both the person making the cards and the person receiving them. Last year’s calendar is said to be a good source of paper for these cards.

5.     Decor and Ornaments

Christmas décor and ornaments also use up significant amounts of natural resources. Pick out ornaments that are made from recycled materials to go along with your organic (and real!) Christmas tree. Better yet, while you’re already making those holiday greeting cards, you can make your own Christmas tree ornaments and decorations.  Aluminum cans are a good material to use.

Kim De Guzman is the editor-in-chief. She can be reached at editorinchief@luchameleon.com.

Photo courtesy of Flickr/ KimonBerlin: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kimon/

By Jackie Gorman

Chameleon Environmental Blogger

Of the countries in Europe which focus on the craft of finer foods, France and Italy have been adding an ingredient which has elegantly increased the price of a meal for decades. The tradition of fine dining has been shaped by the ability to add this ingredient generously. Black or White truffles, fungi from underground, are harvested in these countries due to rich, intricate environmental conditions (soil conditions and normally found under oak trees). Unlike regular agriculture, neither farmers nor anyone else can help manipulate the growth of truffles. Considered a delicacy, truffles are left in the hands of a greedy business or otherwise referred to as a black market.

About a year ago, CBS 60 minutes threw together an investigation of this business and how the complexities of this market are affecting global stakeholders. The insecurity of this business is equal to the drug trade. Greedy thugs are using violence and political loop holes to obtain their precious truffles. There is no trust or transparency in this system of networks and in turn, is creating a dark side to the restaurant business.

So, where does the environment come in? Well, because of climate change the amounts of truffles found are lessening each year. Truffles grow best under specific conditions which the landscapes of France and Italy provide. Other countries such as China try to compete in this black market business by harvesting their own however it is not the same and the taste buds of the French and Italian people notice. The difference is how they harvest the product, in Europe they use dogs to sniff out each truffle individually based on how ripe it is. Meanwhile in China they comb their land with tools without worrying of how ripe it is. The difference in price and taste is magnificent however they look exactly the same.

The largest worry for those in the business is the implementation of the Chinese truffle. Producers and distributors of the trade are cheated by the middle man combining either French or Italian truffles with Chinese truffles and claiming them all to originate from European land. Besides the people involved, if the spores are exposed to European land it is expected for Chinese truffles to take over the once fertile land by a lower quality, invasive fungus.

In relation to the world drug supply, truffle traders have a lot more at stake. They need to protect themselves in the violence, their profits and protect the health of the land around them. The saddest thing about this trade is that the craft that goes into creating famous gourmet dishes in France and Italy is affected by the use of truffles, without them there is a cultural loss. Though the people in this business cannot remove climate change as a factor to their harvesting, they can improve the level of peace in their industry.

Learn more for yourself by watching the same segment I watched and got my information from, the 60 minutes segment from January 8,2012 with Lesley Stahl.

-STAFF REPORT-

This weekend, the LUChameleon celebrates its one year anniversary.

It’s been a whirlwind year for us.

We published our very first issue last November. We started this publication because we wanted to give a voice to the alternative students on campus.

We wanted to provide another student media opportunity on campus, as well as “talk about things that aren’t usually talked about publicly” on campus.

We started out with the half the number of staff members that we have now, with no resources whatsoever, and we started out as an online only magazine while we caught our footing.

Over the past year, we continued to grow. Our staff grew bigger, we added a new theme to our coverage, and we decided to publish a print magazine to compliment our online outlet.

We can only dream of what is in store for us during our toddler years.

Here’s a look back at some of the content during our memorable “first year in business”:

In October 2012, staff writer Stevenson Valentor explores the concept of “no soul” in his “Soul Reflection.”

One of our popular online features from the fall 2012 semester is our Wednesday sexuality blog, Wednesday Heartbeats. Entries include decisions on abstinence, dating conundrums, and a personal commentary from a date rape experience.

Back in February, copy editor Andrew Kletzien wrote an opinion piece entitled “A Letter to Catholic Apologists.” The piece was a commentary regarding several sexual assault incidents involving children in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. Andrew’s article invoked much discussion from Catholic students on campus.

Staff writer Nick Moutvic highlights what to look for in a potential roommate from the October 2012 piece, “Bedfellows: a modern checklist for finding a roommate.”

Just in time for Nov. 6, Chameleon national contributor Lauren Hannigan demonstrates how astrology plays a role in the 2012 presidential election.

Every Friday throughout the school year, our Friday Fashion Spectrumbloggers have kept you in the know with all the latest style tips, deals, and trends, as well as beauty/makeup/accessories advice, what NOT to wear, and where to shop on a college student budget.

Section Editor Sean Keenehan explores Chicago neighborhood Lincoln Square. He claims it has a “small town European feel steeped in German traditions.”

In honor of Election Day 2012, Editor-in-Chief Kim De Guzman discusses her thoughts on voting in her first ever presidential election in “My First Time [Voting, That Is].”

In September 2012, staff writer Michael Lechowitz offers his two cents about the “death of diversity.”

In one of the very first articles published in the Chameleon, staff writer Barbara Crowley interviews several anons about their feelings towards the taboo subject of sex in “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby.”

Staff writer Jill Kreider sits down with two Loyola students to explore the meaning of the hijab in “Hijabs Uncovered: the Truth About the Headscarf.”

Our very first print issue came out on September 25, 2012. Featured articles included summer study abroad stories from the John Felice Rome Center, a look at the environmentally friendly Cuneo Hall, and the Campus Movie Fest student film festival.

The Chameleon gives you an inside look at Hunger Week, and the significance of this series of week long events on campus in “What do you hunger for?”

In March, staff writer Erika Vigen offered her opinion about the prospective USGA bottled water ban on the Loyola campus in her “environmentally friendly” commentary entitled “Forever Thirsty.”

We’ve started using Storify as a creative tool to tell stories. Check out this one compiled in honor of Election Day.

Our second issue ever [October 2012], came out on October 30, 2012, just in time for Halloween. Featured stories include vegetarian awareness month, a look at Hunger Week, and a neighborhood guide to Chicago ‘hood Lincoln Square.

Our multimedia editors grab a camera and explore the diverse student organizations on campusand their various purposes.

Staff writer Barbara Crowley follows up with her “Let’s Talk About Sex” article by interviewing more anons for another article about the act of masturbation. Is doing the dirty with yourself really so dirty?

Staff writer Nick Moutvic sounds off on the latest developments of male birth control.

Blog and Social Media Director Hannah Lutz gives the rundown on Cafe Descartes, the new corner restaurant/coffee shop on campus.

Of course, there is more than this! Our archives are always up-to-date with previous stories, blog posts, features, and content!

Cheers to Charlie, our staff, and a year of publishing! Thanks for reading both in print and online, throughout the year!

Photo courtesy of Flickr/ nutrilover: http://www.flickr.com/photos/40994455@N06/

By Jackie Gorman

Chameleon Environmental Blogger

This week I wanted to continue the conversation touched up in my last post Food for thought, Water for Growth. Specifically, I did not fully elaborate on what I meant by changing the way we look at food in the statement “nutrients per calorie”. In my argument I said that the diet changes we can make, also help the environment by eating more vegetables then animal byproducts. According to Dr. Joel Fuhrman in his top selling book, Eat to Live, the American diet has transformed from receiving vital nutrients to excessive innutritious calories. In short, he has coined the term “nutritarian” to help solidify the idea of getting as many nutrients per calorie to provide a balanced diet eliminating many chances of disease. I believe that if we follow the idea to focus on eating as many nutrients per calorie we will eat more fruits, vegetables, whole grains and other healthy foods over fatty, sugary foods. Unfortunately, not everyone has the ability to eat this way.

Monday night I attended an interesting panel that was the kick off to Hunger Week. The panelists lead a discussion around the ideas of food uncertainty and food deserts. As college students when living on campus with a dining hall of guaranteed meals; we don’t question where we can get food, even for our fourth meal. It’s not until moments like this panel when eyes truly open to the justice issues within our food system. Doug Schenkelberg, vice president of public policy and advocacy of Greater Chicago Food Depository, stated some interesting facts along with this one, “1 in 6 individuals don’t know where their next meal will come from.” He explained that the reasoning of this high statistic is from poverty, income, race and unemployment.

Shortly after the panelist Martha Holstein, a professor here at Loyola, started elaborating on insecurity in how it is an “indicator of inequality.” The spectrum she was describing was food insecurity at one end and extravagance at another. Let’s face it fruits, vegetables, whole gains, etc. are more expensive compared to foods high in fat, calories, but not in price. The communal part of food is a factor to not forget in this equation, Ms. Holstein mentioned that what our family and peers eat influences the way we eat. These low nutrition excuses run inside a circle of many others. The heart of the problem is the money needed to pay for the high nutrient foods, at the same time having access to those foods.

Lane Vail, another panelist who is a research associate at CUERP, described environmental issues along with sustainable solutions that have been coming to the Chicago area over the past ten years to address these pressing issues. She began with how our diets have been effecting the environment, especially the push for commodity crops that will provide cheap calories and move away from hunger. Urban gardens and aquaponics were two solutions that she heavily talked about. Ms. Vail simply explained aquaponics as “a marrying of fish farming and vegetable gardening,” it is a solution to stop the divide of industrial commodity crops and restore the amount of healthy foods particularly in city settings that are part of food deserts (no grocery store within one mile or concentrated area of 20% unemployed).

All in all, we need change in our food system to protect our health and the environments health. Most of all we need to focus on changing our own diets, by focusing on Dr. Joel Fuhrman’s suggestion to eat high nutrient foods. We cannot advocate for change until we do it ourselves, then we can teach from experience.

Photo courtesy of Flickr/epSos.de: http://www.flickr.com/photos/epsos/

By Jackie Gorman

Chameleon Environmental Blogger

Water conservation is a term lightly thrown around in all professions. Whether it is an industrial company, policy makers or urban planners, many jobs and people interact with the world’s limited water source. In fact, everyone is affected daily by this limited resource. Though present, current water issues are hard to see when blinded by no complications besides costs. If instead you considered how much water you used throughout your day, you would be surprised how much is used and wasted.

As food for thought, virtual water is one of the largest non transparent sources of water we use daily. Virtual water is the amount of water it took to create the products around you. Since it is hard to produce all nutritional needs on your own its tough to see especially what amount of water it takes to create one meal. Depending on complexity of the food, water usage can be much higher when processes are more extensive. Red meat is a perfect example of having to use a lot of water in comparison to creating a tomato. Meat comes from animals which need to be fed requiring water along with necessary drinking water.

In the book When the Rivers Run Dry, Fred Pearce talks about the statistics of water in one meal. His example is truly eye opening.

Turn these statistics into meal portions and you come up with more than 25 gallons for a portion of rice, 40 gallons for the bread in a sandwich or a serving of toast, 130 gallons for a two-egg omelet of a mixed salad, 265 gallons for a glass of milk, 400 gallons for an ice cream, 530 gallons for a pork chop, 800 gallons for a hamburger, and 1320 gallons for a small steak. And if you have a sweet tooth, so much the worse: every teaspoonful of sugar in your coffee requires 50 cups of water to grow. Which is a lot, but not as much as the 37 gallon of water (or 592 cups) needed to grow the coffee itself. Prefer alcohol? A glass of wine or beer with dinner requires another 66 gallons, and a glass of brandy afterward takes a staggering 530 gallons.

It makes sense that eating a simple, healthy diet can bring smarter wellness choices for yourself and the environment. Considering a vegetarian diet is a choice that doesn’t just protect animals like its popular reasoning. A vegetarian diet provides you with a healthy lifestyle most Americans are looking to achieve. It actually provides you with water in your foods that can be used for nutritional purposes. In comparison to animal products, most water used for their production is lost in the process of animal growth and in turn, not getting as many nutrients per calorie.

Rethinking virtual water intake can facilitate reflection on our overall health. This would include direct dietary choices and what those choices effect in the larger community. As a whole, vegetarian thinking could be part of a belief in social responsibility: to not overuse our resources even in the smallest ways.

Photo By Kim De Guzman/the Chameleon. Cuneo Hall is one of the newest buildings on campus and has earned gold and silver LEED certification from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.

By Jason Rhein
Chameleon Staff Writer 

As the new school year rang in, students at Loyola noticed a few changes that occurred on campus in a continued effort by the university to save the environment and become an eco-friendly community.

Loyola stresses the phrase “go green” and strives to make a positive impact on its students and environment.

“I have seen more recycling bins and signs telling me where to go to recycle,” said senior Liz Esche.

Two of Loyola’s newest buildings, Cuneo Hall and Richard J. Klarchek Information Commons, have earned gold and silver LEED certification from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System respectively.

“Whenever I’m in class in Cuneo, I notice the shades on the windows automatically closing to help keep out the sun to control room temperature,” said freshman Livleen Grewal.

Also this year, Loyola has banned plastic water bottles on campus in an effort to increase the usage of reusable water bottles.

“There are many water-filling stations all around campus,” said junior Mitchell Fernandez, “so I don’t have to use any plastic bottles.”

For years, citizens of the world have dumped their wastes into the oceans and exhausted their carbon excess into the atmosphere. This has caused an obvious decline in our ecosystem.

Over the past few years, many countries around the world have become conscious of this and are working toward becoming more environmentally friendly. Many people believe that the Earth is improving now because of this.

We have developed more gas-efficient vehicles and energy-saving products.

Overall, humans are doing a great deal to save the ecosystem.

Humans are living longer than ever before and our quality of life remains excellent. It would seem that everything is going uphill now and we have little to worry about; however, this concept stands false.

The human population continues to rise, causing a continual decline of our natural resources and a dying environment. This is why the phrase “go green” will not become extinct any time soon.

Although it would seem that our planet is doomed, we must strive to prove this idea wrong. Our Loyola community is certainly doing just this.

To contact Jason Rhein, email him at jrhein@luc.edu.

Need a study break and want to catch up with the most popular articles, videos, and blogs we had this year? Here’s our mascot, Charlie, with his top 20 picks from this year! (In no particular order.)

Back in February, copy editor Andrew Kletzien wrote an opinion piece entitled “A Letter to Catholic Apologists.” The piece was a commentary regarding several sexual assault incidents involving children in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. Andrew’s article invoked much discussion from Catholic students on campus.

In March, staff writer Erika Vigen offered her opinion about the prospective USGA bottled water ban on the Loyola campus in her “environmentally friendly” commentary entitled “Forever Thirsty.”

Every Friday throughout the school year, our Friday Fashion Spectrum bloggers have kept you in the know with all the latest style tips, deals, and trends, as well as beauty/makeup/accessories advice, what NOT to wear, and where to shop on a college student budget.

In one of the very first articles published in the Chameleon, staff writer Barbara Crowley interviews several anons about their feelings towards the taboo subject of sex in “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby.”

In February, staff writer Audrey Kelley produced one of our most popular multimedia pieces featuring different Loyola students and their opinions about feminism and what it means to be a feminist.

Every Tuesday throughout the school year, Chameleon blogger Audrey Kelley produced “Tattoo Tuesday,” a blog featuring Loyola students and their tattoo art. In the blog, Audrey also explores different aspects of tattoo culture. Readers are encouraged to interact with Audrey using the comment section of the website and share their own tattoo stories.

In February, copy editor Brittney Rooney explored the hidden meaning behind the “LGBTQA” acronym, and what each label of the acronym personally meant to those people who identify as said label.

Staff writer Barbara Crowley follows up with her “Let’s Talk About Sex” article by interviewing more anons for another article about the act of masturbation. Is doing the dirty with yourself really so dirty?

In March, LIFT-Chicago, a student organization at Loyola held its annual “Poverty Awareness Week.” Photo Editor Kevin Bautista spoke with Nick Passarelli, Public Relations Manager of the LIFT Uptown office to get an inside look at Poverty Awareness programming and the LIFT movement’s significance.

Staff writer Audrey Kelly produced another “environmentally friendly” video this semester, in which she interviews different Loyola students and the different ways they practice “going green” on campus.

Back in November, copy editor Andrew Kletzien writes a commentary about the Bible and its origins in the early history and spreading of Christianity and why what you hear may not always be what you believe.

In February, Chameleon staff writer Dimitri Plikas profiled Loyola student organization Cru, and took an in depth look at how the students who are involved in Cru “go forth and set the world on fire.”

In March, after finishing the mandatory online e-Toke checkup program, staff writer Paul Gusiewski wrote a commentary piece concerning Loyola’s stance on marijuana and its “anti-marijuana message.”

Following copy editor Andrew Kletzien’s article about the recent outbreak of sex abuse scandals in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Loyola student (and Catholic) Emily Sammon penned this commentary.

In February, Photo Editor Kevin Bautista profiled The Center for Urban Environmental Research and Policy (CUERP). Kevin goes inside the heart of Loyola’s green initiative, and explores the different ways CUERP fuels the university’s drive for sustainability.

In March, Multimedia Editors Sarah Murray and Marie Janzen produced a video entitled “An Inside Look at Loyola’s Dining Cuisines and Services.” Several Loyola students were interviewed about their opinions of Loyola’s dining services.

In April, Editor-in-Chief Kim De Guzman wrote about her experiences using the popular new dating website, OkCupid. She explores the website’s different features and the benefits of online dating on OkCupid.

On Wednesdays throughout the school year, an anonymous Chameleon staff writer published the “Not-So-Whisper-Wednesdays” blog, a sex blog about…well, all things sex.

In honor of our namesake reptile, in February, Multimedia Editor Sarah Murray went on an adventure to a reptile store in Evanston to find a real live chameleon (YES, A REAL CHAMELEON) and learn about it.

In April, His Holiness the XIV Dalai Lama visited the Loyola campus to deliver a speech on “Interfaith Collaboration.” Editor-in-Chief Kim De Guzman recapped His Holiness’ speech and students’ reactions to it.

Photo By Anna Kebe/The Chameleon. A water bottle refill station is located in Simpson Hall for students to fill up their resuable water bottles.

By Erika Vigen
Chameleon Staff Writer

USGA has been trying to ban the sale of plastic water bottles on campus.

Despite what a large majority of students seem to think, I believe this is a stupid idea. I know that legislation was already passed last semester and is now waiting for administration to enforce the ban, but this cannot happen without support of student votes on March 27 and 28.

I’m crossing my fingers that these votes won’t support the ban so that administration cannot enforce it. With these dates approaching, I want the student body to know why I think this legislation should not be passed.

This ban is big news at Loyola. I have heard discussions about it at my job on campus. Many students support the ban because bottled water is “bad for the environment.”

The Phoenix quoted Dr. Robert Kelly, the vice president for student development, saying, “The ban is very much in line with our principles and our commitment to issues of ecology and sustainability.”

I’m sorry to inform you, but plastic water bottles are the same as pop bottles, juice bottles, and everything else that comes in some sort of plastic or glass container that is sold on campus. No one is moving to ban these!

That is not a suggestion, by the way.

I also don’t understand how banning bottled water fits into Loyola’s core values, because the “green” initiative isn’t in full effect here since not all plastic will be banned.

The other argument I’ve heard is that we are taking clean water from the third world countries to bottle it up and sell it here in the United States. Okay, can someone tell me where this information is coming from?

I literally looked through the first five pages of Google search and found nothing proving this. Maybe if someone showed me a legitimate source with this fact, I would MAYBE change my mind.

With this being said, it will be highly inconvenient for those students (like myself) who aren’t “green” or “environmentally friendly.” I don’t want to go out and buy a $30 filtered water bottle because, quite honestly, the tap water in Chicago is not the best I’ve ever tasted.

I know filtered water is better for you, but I still don’t care.

I also find water fountains revolting. Excuse me, how many mouths have been in/around that thing? It’s a breeding ground for germs.

And, yes, I’ve heard about the many water bottle refill stations. However, I’ve only seen them in Simpson Hall (maybe because I haven’t been looking for them) and, again, that would require a reusable water bottle.

I don’t even own one, because I take advantage of the ability to buy water in a recycled plastic bottle.

I’m going to attack this from a liberal standpoint: the government is desperately trying to control what we Americans consume nowadays.

I don’t know about you fellow students, but if bottled water was banned on campus, I would never drink it and neither would the people I eat lunch with regularly. I’d drink soda or other sugary drinks everyday for lunch instead.

Michelle Obama would faint at that statement.

I don’t agree with the regulation, but I do want healthy options.

Also, I want my right to buy bottled water if I please. I pay tuition at Loyola; I want to be able to do as I please.

I won’t be the only person to forget to bring my water bottle to class on any given day. Half of the time, I forget to bring a plastic water bottle from my fridge. What if I went to Halas and forgot to fill a bottle up on my way out? I’ve done this before. It would be nice to be able to visit the on-campus café or vending machine to grab a bottle AND use my meal plan, declining balance, or Rambler Bucks instead of going all the way to CVS or 7-Eleven.

Most importantly, I would also like to enjoy my right to be environmentally un-friendly. Was the recycling campaign not working or something? It’s almost unfair of Loyola to ask all of their students not to buy bottled water just because organizations or students think that it’s wrong and destroying our environment. Some of us actually think it’s doing no harm.

To contact Erika Vigen, email her at evigen@luc.edu.

http://youtu.be/1omoq77E-Wg

Video Produced and Words By Audrey Kelly
Chameleon Staff Writer

As the students interviewed state, maybe being green on a small scale isn’t so difficult.

However, they do sympathize with everyone out there who feels frustrated at the prospect of changing their lifestyles in small ways and then not being able to see the results in a timely manner.

As college students we feel even more powerless as we have to try to live as cheap and efficiently as possible. Sometimes personal budget cuts get in the way of buying organic or purchasing clothes made of recycled material.

The problem is that not enough people are doing these small things for a difference to be seen. Only when people come together in an effort to foster change to improve the environment will we see how much of an impact small lifestyle changes can make.

To contact Audrey Kelly, email her at akelly11@luc.edu.

Photo By Kevin Bautista/The Chameleon. Loyola aims toward making the smallest impact on the environment as possible.

By Kevin Bautista
Photo Editor 

The Center for Urban Environmental Research and Policy (or CUERP) is the heart of Loyola’s green initiative. Believe it or not, many things happen behind the scenes at CUERP. They fuel the drive for sustainability at the university, and that drive helped us earn an A- grade on our 2011 “green” report card.

Gina Lettiere, Loyola’s Sustainability Specialist, says that the mission of CUERP is ”to advance our understanding of our connection to the natural environment in an urban setting and how that natural environment responds to our actions.”

The center fosters the development of the Biodiesel Program, Loyola Farmers’ Market, Solutions to Environmental Problems (STEP) courses, Artificial Stream Lab, and a handful of sustainability research projects and initiatives that push Loyola to be as green as it can be.

Lane Vail, Research Associate and STEP Program Coordinator, summarizes CUERP: “CUERP is a place (one of the driving forces) of environmental action and sustainability at Loyola. Students can come and get involved through fellowships or volunteering on projects that promote environmental awareness, research, and outreach… and I think we’re a cool bunch of people.”

The center entered the university in a contest called RecycleMania, a contest that pits participating universities against each other to see which one can collect the most recyclables. The contest decides on a winner based on the total weight of recyclables collected throughout a ten-week period. This contest not only poses as an incentive for students to recycle, but also to recycle smartly.

Pretty much every trash and recycling receptacle on campus features an accompanying “Pitch In” sign that tells people what they can recycle and what they can’t. This, ideally, reduces mix-ups in the collection process.

RecycleMania and the “Pitch In” signs represent CUERP’s most direct form of engaging students to think and act with an environmentally conscious mindset.

Of course, the “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” mantra applies. However, Loyola reminds us that “Reduce” should always come first; we wouldn’t have nearly as much of a need to recycle if there wasn’t any waste to recycle.

Zach Waickman, Biodiesel Lab Manager, says, “‘Reduce, Reuse, Recycle’ is in that order for a reason,” further enforcing that idea. “Reduce” doesn’t exclusively apply to recyclables, however.

Loyola challenges its students to take on less-wasteful habits and practices, such as turning lights off when leaving a room unattended.

Photo By Kevin Bautista/The Chameleon. Refill water stations encourage students to refrain from using disposable, plastic water bottles on campus.

“Reuse” both subtly and assertively presents itself on Loyola’s campus through bottle refill stations. Alongside the recent refill station additions, students assert their concerns with plastic bottles to the Unified Student Government Association (USGA).

Many students, staff, and faculty members endorse a water bottle-less campus and encourage others to use bottle refill stations to get water.

Finally, labeled recycling bins and litter bins cover the “Recycle” part of the mantra.

Sustainable practices exist not only on campus, but in the office, as well. Lettiere says she challenges herself and her officemates to fit all of their trash in a fairly small vase located in her office. It’s pretty comical, but I think it’s an interesting way of getting others to reduce the amount of trash they procure.

CUERP offers students ways to get involved with sustainability practices, whether through student-led organizations like the Student Environmental Alliance (SEA) or Growers’ Guild, fellowships, research internships, volunteer opportunities, or even the new lineup of STEP courses, as well as general signage around campus to get them thinking in a more sustainable mindset.

The center previously offered the STEP course as a class about biodiesel and then food systems. This year, the class teaches students about water conservation issues, water policy, contaminants, and history of water, to name a few.

Essentially, STEP provides students with an opportunity to learn about and tackle real-life environmental issues through “education… hands-on labs, and projects.”

From the straightforward practice of reducing, reusing, and recycling to the involved programs that CUERP offers, the university puts out a solid effort to make as small of an impact on the environment as possible.

On the university level, CUERP encourages students to take sustainable practices with them everywhere they go, whether it be as simple as recycling a plastic bottle or as involved as continuing the biodiesel legacy; Loyola is the first university in the nation to have a license to sell biodiesel fuel.

Loyola still doesn’t require bathrooms to have high-efficiency water fixtures (think sensor-activated, time-based faucets and water-sipping toilets). Also, there are definitely places where we can add or incorporate “green” elements, such as adding more water bottle refill stations.

Kevin Bautista is the photo editor. He can be reached at kbautista1@luc.edu.

Photo Courtesy of Creative Commons, flickr.com/photos/art_es_anna. President Barack Obama rejected the Keystone Pipeline.

By Brittney Rooney
Copy Editor 

It is that wonderful time that comes once every four years: the time when everyone grows a political opinion overnight and screams it from the rooftops.

Last week, President Barack Obama rejected the Keystone Pipeline.

The Keystone Pipeline was a potential 1,700-mile pipeline that would have transferred the oil in Alberta to refineries near the Gulf Coast, costing seven billion dollars.

President Obama claims that the construction of this pipeline would increase domestic production, creating more jobs for Americans.

It will also decrease our dependency on Middle Eastern oil, which is something many people would like to see.

However, there were many who were excited that President Obama rejected the pipeline.

The pipeline would have had enormous environmental implications. Aquifers and grasslands would have been destroyed, impacting the thousands of people who depend on them.

Especially in a time when global climate change is a real threat, humans should not be doing anything else that could lead to an ecological disaster.

Not to mention, I believe the United States should be investing in renewable energy sources instead of nonrenewable ones. The United States currently has a 15 trillion dollar national debt. Increasing the debt for the Keystone Pipeline would solve a temporary problem now, that is, the scarcity of oil.

However, when the oil runs out or prices are so high that the United States can no longer use it to fuel the entire country, the government will have to develop new technologies for energy anyway. I think if we plan to increase that debt, it should be for decreasing its dependency on dirty energy instead of increasing it.

Therefore, on the surface, I was ecstatic that he rejected the pipeline. However, I think it was a reelection stunt.

Congress gave President Obama a very short, 60-day deadline, and Obama could have easily rejected it, making liberals happy and having a good excuse (that the plan could not be adequately reviewed in that short time) for those who criticized his decision.

In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama mentioned, “I’m directing my administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes,” implying a commitment to renewable energy. Still, I predict that he will allow for the building of the Keystone Pipeline. He will simply put the decision off until after he is reelected.

I think if he is reelected, or if a Republican candidate wins the election, the pipeline will be approved in late 2012 or early 2013, which is not cool, Obama, not cool.

 Brittney Rooney is a copy editor. She can be reached at brooney@luc.edu.

Photo Courtesy of Creative Commons, flickr.com by photologue_np. The use of "greener" technologies has the potential to stunt our progress in the future.

By Aviana Willis
Chameleon Staff Writer

In today’s enlightened society, we are constantly barraged with the idea that our natural resources are finite.

We are told that we have a duty to mother earth to reduce waste in any way that we can.

“Green” is that new tag word that seems to always be floating around. It also seems that sustainability is an especially big issue to the college community.

We are being educated by our peers and instructors that there are many simple changes we can make in our everyday lives to reduce our carbon footprint.

Because of this, environmentalism has become one of the biggest movements in our country.

Sustainability is a big issue amongst the whole college generation, but it has an important significance at Loyola. Because Loyola is a Jesuit, Catholic University, it has the reputation for instilling the importance of service in its students.

This ideal is often seen in our dealings with the Roger’s Park community and our environment. If going green is the right thing to do spiritually and morally, how can it possibly go too far?

Is it possible to have too much of a good thing?

Part of the green message is to save our planet before it is too late. There is an urgency to make the right decisions before our reality consists of un-breathable air, infertile land, and no space because of landfills, among other horrible things.

What is seen as an inevitable crisis makes some proponents of the green-movement propose radical ideas. One of these initiatives that is gaining momentum in America and the U.K. is the natural burial movement.

Supporters of this movement are turning away from Western burial practices in favor for a natural, chemical-free process that depends on 100% biodegradable materials.

Natural burials are not only gaining popularity because traditional burials use natural resources, but because the “markers” for these graves are often trees and flowers. It is seen as a way to give back to the planet at the end of life.

A book written on the subject by C.A. Beal is called “Be a Tree, the Natural Burial Guide for Turning Yourself into a Forest.” These forms of burials are hard for some to swallow because often times there is no specific point to mark graves once plant life has grown over them.

Having a visual place to memorialize our loved ones has become part of our culture of grieving. This practice and other extreme practices like it sometimes go against our cultural norms and the technologies that evolved around them.

There is a part of the green agenda that encourages us to go back to the basics and abandon parts of contemporary life. But in humanity’s evolution, technologies like washing machines were invented to add ease to our lives and have helped progress us as a people.

The move from hand washing to machine washing changed the lives of many women. We don’t know all of the consequences for going back there.

The same could be said for the use of embalming fluid in the burial industry. The emphasis on extremely simple, “greener” technologies has the potential to stunt our progress in the future.

To contact Aviana Willis, email her at awillis5@luc.edu.

Photo By Hannah Lutz/The Chameleon. Bottled water is not only an environmental injustice, but also an economic and social injustice.

By Brittney Rooney
Copy Editor

Imagine you walk into a store and lined up by the counter are small containers. You go to look at the container, and you see a beautiful depiction of white clouds in a clear blue sky.

The label says it is the cleanest, smoothest, and freshest oxygen available, and it only costs $2.50!

Later you research it on the internet and find out that this company sucks the air you breathe everyday and sells it back to you. “What a waste of a few dollars!” you think.

Then you read that the area in which the company takes all of its air is in major shortage. Because they don’t have enough clean air to breathe, they are forced to buy it from the company that took it from them originally.

This seems absurd. It would never happen. Regarding oxygen, maybe not. However, it happens everyday with the privatization and sale of bottled water.

Often the biggest argument against the sale of bottled water is the plastic. However, plastic water bottles are not just about the plastic.

Although in itself, it is not great for the environment, but that is not the biggest problem. The biggest problem is the privatization of water.

The problem is that large companies are going into areas, taking the community tap water supply, and selling it back to them. They are making billions of dollars every year by taking what was already free to them.

The university chooses not to sell cigarettes on campus. This choice is not a restriction of rights of students but rather a decision in sales the university makes.

Loyola’s campus is not non-smoking. Just as no one forces smokers to put their cigarettes out, no one would chase anyone with a plastic water bottle off the campus.

The Student Environmental Alliance is currently encouraging Loyola to end its sale of bottled water on campus.

Steve Polaskey, the SEA co-president said, “Bottled water is an injustice. It is an economic, environmental, and social injustice.”

“By supporting the bottled water industry, you are supporting a system that says it is okay to take what is not yours and make money off of it—a system that says you can make a mess and not worry about cleaning it up. And Loyola should not support that kind of system.”

Because of Loyola’s Jesuit foundation and commitment to justice, selling bottled water is hypocritical. An amendment to Loyola’s contracts with Armark and Coca Cola needs to be made.

As Loyola strides to make big green steps toward sustainability, in a sort of competition with other universities, the biggest strike it has is its bottled water sale. Seattle University, Portland State, Macalester, Oberlin, and Washington University in St. Louis, to just name a few, have already successfully stopped the sale.

The entire student environmental alliance needs to convince the administration that they have the support of the university in order to successfully stop the campus sale of bottled water.

As Polaskey put it, “Save your money, save your souls, and sign our petition!”

Click here to show your support: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/luc_water/ or here to learn more: http://uncapluc.org/

Brittney Rooney is a copy editor. She can be reached at brooney@luc.edu.

Photo By Anna Kebe/The Chameleon. Loyola provides many opportunities for students to recycle.

By Anna Kebe
Chameleon Staff Writer 

Loyola has drilled the concept of green into my mind as a freshman this year. Green is good.

From giving out aluminum water bottles during the first week of school, to the convocation presentation on the documentary No Impact Man, to the “green meal,” one would think that Loyola just might be the greenest university in the country. Loyola even made The Princeton Review’s Guide to 311 Green Colleges again.

But sometimes the awarded greenness of the campus is hard to detect. Rumors of the recycling being dumped into normal trash bins concern students.

What about Loyola’s Water Tower Campus? According to Loyola student Liz Greiwe, “The plates and silverware are not reusable at the Water Tower Campus like at the Lake Shore Campus.”

And the promised state-of-the-art water bottle fountains? Well, there are only two located on this campus, and they do not seem to be put to much use. There are plans to put in many more in all the new buildings being built on campus.

After doing some extensive investigation on the Loyola website, many doubts of Loyola’s green factor dissipates. Loyola has made a commitment to serve the community through transforming Loyola into a green university past academics.

A variety of options for sustainability actions have been put into place with the help of students, faculty, and staff.

Many learning opportunities to “think green” in academic programs are available, such as Solutions to Environmental Problems  (STEP) courses. These classes emphasize all aspects of global environmental problems while encouraging students to become leaders in their fields of study.

The university’s Richard J. Klarchek Information Commons, or better known as the IC, has been a green project on campus since 2005.

The U.S. Green Building Counsel’s Leadership in Environmental Design (LEED) has environmentally engineered the building, keeping in mind the vision of the building’s form, space, function, materials, and construction kept in mind.

Energy consumption is reduced by about 50 percent. Even the five billion pounds of carpet is made of recycled old carpet and soda bottles.

Freshman Arielle Mendoza said, “I didn’t even know the IC was as eco friendly as it is!”

And yet, there is more to come. The LEED green group is not finished.

A new project is in the air just waiting for the Aldermanic support on construction, possibly beginning November 2011 and finishing fall of 2013.

On Kenmore Avenue, two new first year student residence halls and a greenhouse were proposed; construction is planned to begin on those projects in the spring. It is a commitment to sustainable operations and education.

Each facility will contribute to improving Loyola’s green status. Both new resident halls will feature unique green technology that will help reduce Loyola’s footprint on the earth.

So it turns out there is a lot more going on around campus than expected. There is much more we can expect to be energized in the future.

To contact Anna Kebe, email her at akebe@luc.edu.

Photo By Hannah Lutz/The Chameleon. The ecofeminist movement has women everywhere hugging trees.

By Brittney Rooney
Copy Editor 

“Going green” is a fad that we see spreading rapidly. The younger generation, whether they are following their values or the style of the time, are asking for reusable mugs and t-shirts with recycling signs on them. I noticed in my environmental clubs or environmental classes, in general, the population tends to be predominately female.

Ecofeminism is a new movement combining the efforts of feminists and environmentalists. Women who believe the environmentalist movement lacks a feminist viewpoint and that the feminist movement disregards the environmental crusades started this new movement.

Wangari Maathai and her green belt movement in Kenya, the Akwesasne Mother Milk project, and Bernadette Cozart and her Greening of Harlem in Harlem are a few examples of some ecofeminist movements happening currently.

Ecofeminists deem patriarchy as the root cause behind both movements. They claim it is male-dominated societies that kept women in the home with the resources of the earth at their fingertips.

Something unique about the ecofeminist movement is that there is no specific demographic or goal.

Ecofeminism is not about a particular group of women fitting a particular environmental issue in one area. Instead, it is the idea that women have a special conceptual, empirical, symbolic and political connection to environmental issues. Therefore, placing these women as heads of environmental movements is empowering.

There is much resistance towards the ecofeminist movement, particularly by feminists themselves. The feminists claim that it is not progressive to remind people of the past connection between a woman and a home environment.

The term “mother nature” is an example of this connection. The connection encourages people to believe that women are innately nurturing, gentle or delicate.

This stereotype is what feminists have been fitting. The feminist movement always asked how to pull women out of the inferior situations they are found in.

Are the appropriate solutions between giving women the power within the situation they currently are stuck in or pulling them out through some other means?

The stereotype that women belong in the house to care for the family (while the man’s job is to bring home the bacon) is obviously one worth fighting.

If one was promoting the equality of women, getting the woman out of the home, away from nature and into the mainstream work force, would be the first step.

However, this change cannot happen overnight.

Before we can persuade our culture to change its belief that women are capable of the same things as men, women, unfortunately, must be able to show it.

Women must first be given some power so they can prove what change they can make in the world.

By giving women a chance to fight environmental issues, it also gives them the chance to fight other issues in the future.

Hopefully, after proving their intelligence and ability, they will be given the respect and opportunity to break out of the home and fight issues in other spheres.

Brittney Rooney is a copy editor. She can be reached at brooney@luc.edu.

Illustration By Matt Gillis/The Chameleon. Recently, the ship Rena collided with a New Zealand reef, causing a massive oil spill.

By Harrison Hayes
Chameleon Staff Writer 

New Zealand has been experiencing the effects of an oil spill as of October 2011.

Off of the country’s northern coast, a large, multi-ton container ship named Rena collided with the Astrolabe Reef, known for its abundance of wildlife and attraction for scuba diving. The collision resulted in Rena becoming stranded atop the reef (which can be seen above water when tides are low enough), causing oil leaks from numerous severed pipes.

Rena was less than fifteen nautical miles from her final destination, New Zealand’s Tauranga Harbor, when she collided with the monstrous reef, which has led investigators to question how and why the crash occurred. Early BBC news reports confirm that the crew was safe, but the same cannot be said for the surrounding marine life.

The most startling discovery to the crew was the large oil slick that had formed due to the severed oil pipes of the ship. According to a BBC news interview with the on-site controller, the size of the oil slick had doubled after just one day.

Nearly a week later and with over 200 tons of oil leaking into the water, it was clear to officials that this was by far the worst disaster the country has seen in years, even decades. To make matters worse, the ship had begun to lean to one side due to the crashing waves, forcing several large containers into the water.

The reason behind the New Zealand incident has yet to be discovered, but blame is starting to be placed on human error in terms of these recent oceanic incidents.

The most recent examples are the Exxon disaster in Alaska, the British Petroleum disaster in the Gulf of Mexico (or the BP oil spill, as its known) and now, this New Zealand incident.

The latest BBC coverage of the incident reveals that the existence of Astrolabe Reef is well known to not only the inhabitants of the area, but also to major fishing lines.

On the night of the accident, the waters were calm and the weather was ideal.  Because there are little natural factors that could cause such an accident, it is becoming more likely that fault lies with the crew of Rena.

This is an unfortunate truth for several reasons.  For starters, this incident shows that although the shipping industry has become an invaluable resource to business and entire economies, a new method of shipping is perhaps needed.

The “destruction” man has brought to this ecosystem should not befall onto others. Marine life is too delicate to jeopardize for the good of the corporate world.

It also shows just how ill-prepared we are when faced with such devastating circumstances.

The BP disaster in 2010 took far too long to control; entire ecosystems, economies and natural resources were destroyed.

It would appear that the smaller New Zealand incident is just as difficult to control.

A new method of clean up and recovery is needed before havoc is wreaked on other delicate ecosystems.

To contact Harrison Hayes, email him at hhayes3@luc.edu.