At what age did you get eyeglasses?

I got new lenses in my eyeglasses last week. I had been noticing that distant signs weren't quite as sharp as they used to be, so I wasn't surprised that at my annual eye exam, the doctor said my prescription had changed. It wasn't a big difference, but enough to warrant new lenses. I've been through many such adjustments since junior high, when I began wearing glasses.

As I drove away with my newly improved vision, I was thinking about how amazing it is that someone figured out such a simple way to make vision possible. Without my glasses, I can see clearly only about a foot or two away. Beyond that, things get blurry. But by putting some glass in front of my eyes, wah-lah! Such a significant problem so easily fixed. Things snap into perfect focus and I can see the individual leaves on the tree across the street. And the lettering on street signs. And, back in junior high, the chalk board at the front of the room.

At which point it occurred to me: I don't know how I would have made it through school without glasses. Indeed, so important is vision to school that our kindergartners are required to have an eye exam as part of their enrollment in public school.

If education is a critical component in combating poverty, so too is optometry. I'm fortunate on several counts. First, I live in a country with plenty of eye doctors, and I grew up in a family that had the means to take me to see one. I also was part of an education system that had plenty of books. Being nearsighted, even without glasses I still could have read anything up close. Without glasses, school would have been harder and I surely would not have done as well. But as long as I had access to books, I could have gotten the information I couldn't see on the board.

But what of children in places that lack both optometrists and text books? Or children who simply lack access to those things? Or children who are farsighted and can't see their books? I don't know the percentage of children who need vision correction, but I'm guessing it's not insignificant. I've seen plenty of pictures of children in one-room schools around the world, with or without text books, often without desks or even chairs, looking at a teacher and a board at the front of the room. But how many of the children in those pictures were wearing glasses? One more obstacle I've never really considered.

-Nancy Michaelis

The Trouble with Coal Mining

As a nation, we love coal. Over 50% of our electricity comes from coal, and it's a natural resource that we have lots of. It's an abundant energy source right here in our own country. Each time we flip the light switch, turn on the TV, or warm up dinner in our microwaves, we should be grateful for coal.

But it's not all happiness and lights. The trouble starts from the very beginning, when you have to get the coal out of the ground. Traditionally, we have engaged in underground coal mining and strip mining. But more recently, we've moved to mountaintop removal mining. The name is just as it implies. The top of the mountain - up to about 400 feet of it - is blown off, exposing the seams of coal, which are then extracted and hauled away. The benefit of this method is that it's cheap. And theoretically, cheaper extraction means cheaper power for us consumers. Compared to digging deeply into the mountain, structurally supporting the tunnels, sending people in to dig out the coal, and then hauling it out of the mountain, it's pretty easy to blow off the top of the mountain. It also takes many fewer people to accomplish, which is not only cheaper, but puts fewer lives at risk.

But what a toll it takes! The video clip below shows the scope of it - sort of. I filmed it from an intact mountain (hence the trees in the foreground) overlooking an area that has been mined and is no longer active. Note how far there are no trees, and how much lower the ground is in the mined areas. And this mine actually goes quite a bit farther to the right than the video shows. It was sobering to see.

Here are a few of the problems with mountaintop removal as a means of extracting coal: the explosions to remove the mountain are enormous, rattling everything and causing structural damage to homes and buildings. It also takes a while to blow up that much mountain, and over time the ongoing explosions rattle nerves as well as structures. They fill the air with dust, creating air pollution that people and animals breathe, and that coats everything. Then there's all the earth that is displaced that isn't coal. Where to put it? Much of it gets dumped into nearby valleys. The environmental impact of it all is enormous. Flora and fauna have been blown up, animals flee, and earth is exposed which causes erosion. Ecosystems are disrupted both in the direct path of the mining and also under the discarded rubble. Waterways are polluted. Toxic minerals and metals are exposed. And it takes decades for the landscape to recover. And these are just some of the problems with the extraction process. It doesn't begin to take into account things like the CO2 emissions from burning coal, or the health care costs of people who live in the region.

On the flip side, the nation's demand for electricity continues to grow. As long as we keep asking for power, companies will seek ways to supply it. And we aren't exactly docile if our lights don't turn on when we want them to. What's more, coal is one of two major industries in West Virginia. Mining provides much needed jobs (though not as many as it used to), and a tax base that supports education, hospitals, and infrastructure. We met State Senator John Unger, who explained that without coal mining, there would be a serious shortage of tax funding for necessary services. As a result, the legislature and government give mining companies the benefit of the doubt. Indeed, we heard the ambivalence of citizens, who live with the trade-offs between employment and environment every day. Senator Unger commented that it often feels as though it's a choice between economic justice and environmental justice. What impossible choices to make.

-Nancy Michaelis

At long last!

One of my ongoing frustrations in trying to be a better consumer is that it's pretty much impossible to judge what the best choice is without spending hours of research on every little purchase. I've blogged about this before. Try this: pick up something around you right now. Anything. What is it made out of? Where did the component parts come from? What inputs went into manufacturing it? Does it contain any chemicals? How were the people who made the item treated? What is required to maintain the item, and what are the impacts of that maintenance? The questions are endless and unanswerable, and apply to nearly everything. So we do the best we can with the information we have and hope for the best. Or we quit trying and just buy whatever we want.

Enter Good Guide! Imagine my delight when I read on their web site,

"GoodGuide strives to provide the world's largest and most reliable source of
information on the health, environmental, and social impacts of products and
companies. GoodGuide's mission is to help you find safe, healthy, and green
products that are better for you and the planet. From our origins as a UC
Berkeley research project, GoodGuide has developed into a totally independent
"For-Benefit" company. We are committed to providing the information you need to
make better decisions, and to ultimately shifting the balance of information and
power in the marketplace."

It's a new organization. Apparently they're aggregating all of this data and summing it up into product ratings. They seem to be working hard to ensure their data sources and evaluating teams are credible, and they're considering not just health, or environmental, or social impacts, but all of them. Exactly what I need! My own extensive research is not practical, but looking stuff up on a web site is. This one has a long way to go; there are lots of products in the world in need of ratings. But it's a start, and I'm sure glad to see it.

-Nancy Michaelis