greener restaurants

 For my research prospectus I will be exploring the options of making a greener restaurant. I am a hospitality management major so this topic is of great importance. I have been in the industry for six years now and have dealt with every position from dishwasher to chef and from busser to manager. I’ve worked with many different pieces of equipment and have seen how recycling is done in different establishments. When it comes to going green there is definitely room for improvement. Many restaurants are very accustomed to old techniques in result using up energy and wasting things that can be recycled.

            The first thing I will be researching is recycling. Although it is very easy to recycle, the way kitchens are setup, they may not be able to fit extra recyclable trashcans. Chefs and owners are also very stubborn and are not necessarily willing to change. Employees are used to old ways so it will take time for things to become in affect and followed through.

            The second thing I will be looking up is the options of alternative energy and equipment. An alternate to oil and coal energy can have a great affect. But again, changing a restaurant around to go green is very expensive and in this economy may not be smart. Looking on the bright side, new restaurants being developed could utilize new energy when developing their kitchens.

The third thing I will be looking at is food sourcing. I great way to help out the environment and economy is by using local produce and meats. Knowing where your product came from really helps. Also, in making a menu, you must be able to know the food you are using. Many new seafood items are popping up in menus because many fishes are getting close to extinction. By consuming so much food, many people have forgotten that they must have time to procreate or else they will eventually disappear. For example cod used to be extremely abundant but is now diminishing. 

            This is going to be a very interesting topic for me and I am very happy to have the opportunity to increase my knowledge on going green. Seeing that I will be in the industry for quite awhile, hopefully what I learn will help me in the future and possibly bring the establishment that I work at closer to being an environmentally safe place of business. 

Bibliography

Horovitz, B. "Can restaurants go green, earn green?." USA Today 19 May 2008: n. pag. Web. 26 Jan 2010. 15-green-restaurants-eco-friendly_N.htm>.

"Conserve: Solutions for Sustainability." National Restaurant Association. National Restaurant Association, Web. 26 Jan 2010. .

"Going Greener." Environmental Law and Policy Center of the Midwest. 2010. Web. 2010. .

"Get Educated." Green Restaurant Association. 2010. Web. 2010. .

Breeden, Jeff. "Lower Your Energy Bills Now." Restaurant Hospitality 93.8 (2009): 20.             Hospitality & Tourism Complete. EBSCO. Web. 27 Jan. 2010.

third part of lost mountain

Wendell Berry discussed the "rational" and the "sympathetic" mind. The difference between the two are quite easy to understand. The "rational" mind is very one sided and selfish. It is based off the feelings of one whereas the "sympathetic" mind is looking at the feelings of many. the "sympathetic" mind is looking for a conclusion appropriate to help everyone. Sympathetic uses logic and reason while rational looks at just logic.

Reece exhibits a sympathetic mindset quote a few times in the third part of the book. One example in the book is when he gets the inspectors to come and check the water. Although he has been very passive throughout his trips to Lost Mountain, you can see that he knows he needs to help in some way. He did not argue, preach and yell at these inspectors and operators. Instead, he used the system to get them to acknowledge that there is something wrong and that the fills need to be tended to and checked. His ways of action were through the system and not disrespectful. He realized logically and reasonably that if he acted appropriately, there would be a better chance of people being helped and the waters getting cleaned. The second "sympathetic" mindset that he showed was when he was explaining the option of reforestation. He has taken a bad situation that he was unable to affect and found the most reasonable solution to the problem. He recognizes Wangari Maathai's attempt to replenish her land. The reasoning behind his thought is that it can produce citizens to work with the forest and live with each other in a sustainable environment.

The quote I wanted to do part B on comes from page 203 and it goes "I think, for this reason that former Czech president Vaclav Havel said we must 'reconstitute the natural world as the true domain of politics.' Ideology and arbitrary borders mean little when the roofs won't stay on houses anywhere and people die of bronchial infections everywhere. It is time we stopped thinking like those who conquer mountains and started thinking like the mountain itself." This quote really made me think of the lives that we are living. Everyone is battling against each other and wondering about what everyone else is doing when inside our borders we have so many troubles. America is concerned at Iraq's government when in fact ours is tainted as well. We fight each other not realizing that we are fighting and hurting mother nature. If we thought like the mountain, we would work in harmony and live in a sustainable environment. The world would live with each other and we would leave natural selection up to nature instead of leaving it up to coal companies and war. People have thought too much about their own needs instead of realizing how to live in harmony with everyone. 

Lost Mountain part 2

Reece starts the second part of the book with an observation of explosions and “flyrock.” It made me feel like it was kids playing with explosions when they really shouldn’t be. These inspectors regulate but when they are not there they breach the limits in which they are allowed to go.

The flying squirrel chapter depicts people fighting at something they cannot fix. These students and Krupa are chasing after this diminishing creature. I find this to be quite similar to these communities trying to catch their nature but in all reality although they can catch some now, it will soon be long gone. I found the end of the chapter to be a rude awakening when Reece ask Krupa for his prognosis of human condition and he responded with “I think were doomed… it’s a matter of time before we kill ourselves off.”

As I read along, I found myself frightened of the people running our government. Although I have always thought we were pretty corrupt, listening to the cold hard facts brought it back home. Bush reduced the superfund down to 50%. The carelessness of the coal industry ruined a town even though there were countless warnings of the pond. The most selfish of it all was the neglect of a much safer filter press system to save a dollar per ton. I feel pity for these small towns that have to deal with such corruption and greedy companies.

Reece’s writing has made me picture this battle of nature vs. the coal mining industry. There is one side saying that if we help nature, nature will help us. The other side is saying we are the coal mining industry and nature is for our taking. The coal mining industry backs itself up by saying that it is helping us by putting prisons, campsites and new trees up for everyone, what did this mountain do to help anyone? In reality, they are ruining agriculture, species and homes. Reece mentions natural selection on page 141. I think nature is now in a struggle with the coal industry selection. 

Lost Mountain: p. 1-85

Erik Reece in the first 85 pages does a great job bringing his point across to the audience. He is not preachy or completely one sided. The I’s are prevalent in his writing but he is able to use it appropriately. His facts and knowledge is mostly expressed through the nature he observes, the experiences he observes and through the words of the people he communicates through his journey.

 

The best source he has so far in this book is Teri Blanton. Through her, the reader is introduced to many different aspects of the argument. She leads Erik Reece through a cemetery of people who died too soon due to the coal industries effect. She pointed out how nobody lives passed 55. Blanton informed Reese about the “killer well,” where anyone who lived around it died. She also introduced the government and business side to us. In her stay in Dayhoit, she has dealt with many coal companies harassing her because of her strong say in meetings and her successful plea to have the EPA check their contaminated waters. She successfully made Dayhoit a superfund site in 1992.

 

Reese’s explorations through the forest have painted an awesome picture. His comparison of the view prior to the strip mining to during the mining makes the audiences have to pity nature and the community surrounding. Words like “nasty orange syrup” describing water and the coal company having no “conscience or constraint” makes me picture a page out of “The Lorax” by Dr. Suess.

 

But, as compelling of an argument, the solution is not as simple as he sometimes puts it. Million dollar corporations put up a pretty good fight when there business is put at risk. And as far as jobs go, until people stop thinking of coal as a great place of employment nothing will be done. Lost jobs need to be replaced with new jobs. There are solutions but there are many stubborn people in the way of people learning that.

 

I have realized where I fit into this book. I am the consumer of coal that hasn’t opened my eyes to the coal industry. I am a typical American who is blinded by these issues because they are not my day-to-day problems. This book is made for a person like me to open my eyes and realize that, even though I don’t see it happening before my eyes, it is a problem. 

Brian Lachman: "Clean" Coal

            When I first opened both of these websites I found an immediate difference. The site backing “clean” coal had a look of professionalism. The colors are mellow, light blue and green with a simple white background. The layout did not have fancy colors and cartoons, but charts and simple paragraphs expressing their argument. From the first impression, it seems to attract the regular Joe businessman. The top of the front page shows three people in casual business attire. They seem like the everyday businessperson. The slideshow quotes each person saying it is affordable and needed to run his or her business. In their arguments they seem to be quite repetitive. Every page seems to emphasize the fact that it is 77% cleaner and it is working on getting better. In only one section, it says that CO2 emission is not at regulation but quickly changes the subject. The argument looks very one-sided when you look at the members list and realize it is all coal-based industries. Its main argument is that America can rely on America because we have the coal. We use it in our day-to-day activity and it produces more than half of our electricity today. They are making the viewer ask themselves, “why find something else when we have an abundance of something we use everyday that can become cleaner?” They give us the feel that Americans love, let them take care of it, let us go on with our daily lives and they will let us know when they solved it.

The site protesting “clean” coal, however, had a completely different look and demographic. It is very clear the website is seeking younger adults. The background is black with yellow font and an immediate cartoon of a bird flying into a big bold quotation. At first impression, the view of the website is much catchier to the eye. This website is full of quotes and quick facts. The flaw in this website is that it seems as if that is all it is. It took me a second glance at the website to find the section on all the details. The argument they are expressing is that coal is still not clean. There is technology already that is clean, safe and already in use. They mainly talk about how coal is bad and leave it up to the links to explain solutions. The supporters are people trying to better the environment, not solely “clean” coal protesters. The argument does not seem as one-sided as the other website. They explain that if coal were truly clean it would be part of the solution. But the big “however” is that it is not and there is technology already there. The job of this website seems to get peoples feet wet in the subject, hoping that they will dive in.

Brian Lachmans first blog

My name is Brian and am a senior in Hospitality Management. Basically that means I will be working in restaurants and hotels. I am 21 and graduating on time. I'm from Cleveland Heights, Ohio and been there my whole life.