4 - Friday, January 23, 2009
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
A420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles
and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Training the humane way
'U' needs to re-evaluate training policy that harms animals
E ach year, the lives of approximately 20 dogs end because
of an Advanced Trauma Life Support course at the Uni-
versity. The class, which operates under the supervision of
Dr. Richard Burney, a professor of surgery in the Medical School,
allows medical students to practice surgery on live dogs. Because
of recent allegations by the Physician's Committee for Responsible
Medicine that Burney withheld information from the University
to get permission to use canine test subjects, though, this practice
has come under fire. Though the situation is complex, if using live
dogs for surgery practice is to be continued, the University has a
responsibility to demonstrate that it is a superior teaching method
with no adequate alternative. If it can't do that, a more humane
teaching method should be used.
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
Celebrity magazines and cocktail party chatter
don't build support for senators."
- Democratic National Committee member Robert Zimmerman, commenting on Caroline Ken-
nedy's failed campaign for Hillary Clinton's vacant Senate seat, as reported by CNN.
JASON MAHAKIAN E-MAIL JASON AT MAHAKIAJ@UMICH.EDU.
DL ~ -T 8 )ae vWATEA. MAIN B~K
m or.M OP AsoQT^ tiv 4. ' /
4
S--
The heat beneath your feet
4
The allegations about the University's
practice came last week by the PCRM in a
complaint to the U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture. Though the complaint recognizes that
the University's practice is technically legal,
it claims that Burney failed to disclose in his
request to the University's Committee on
Use and Care of Animals that other, superior
testing methods exist for this surgical train-
ing. The author of the complaint, Dr. John
Pippin, a senior medical and research advi-
sor to the PCRM, asserts that failing to men-
tion the equally sufficient and more humane
methods of surgical training could have been
illegal.
Since the complaint was filed, the Univer-
sity has responded by questioning the cred-
ibility of the PCRM and standing behind the
choice of its professor. In a statement, the
University described the PCRM as an ani-
mal rights group receiving substantial fund-
ing from People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals. It also claimed that less than 10
percent of PCRM's members are physicians.
In the light of these criticisms, the Univer-
sity has said that it will leave the decision
about whether to continue the practice up to
Burney.
That response was insufficient. Though
it may not be necessary to turn this situa-
tion into an ethical debate about whether
it is right to euthanize dogs for the sake of
medical training, the University must bet-
ter justify why it allows this testing. As the
PCRM pointed out, the Medical School has
an anatomical human mannequin called
TramaMan that is capable of simulating real
surgery. The Medical School could also use
the more traditional option of operating on
human cadavers. If the University wishes to
condone the ethically questionable use of live
animals as training subjects, it should first
certify that there are no better alternatives.
Certainly, there could be good reasons the
University allows this type of animal test-
ing to occur. For one, operating on live dogs
might provide a very different psychological
experience compared to operating on a man-
nequin. But the University hasn't provided
reasons like that. Instead, it has left this
weighty decision to one professor and subtly
dismissed the PCRM's concerns as animal
rights propaganda.
If the University truly believes that its
current method is the only way to train
these students, it must demonstrate this -
rather than leaving it up to one teacher's
opinion. The University has a clear respon-
sibility to ensure that its practices are both
ethical and useful.
W ith record-low tempera-
tures locking students in
a deep freeze, heating our
houses and apart-
ments is becoming
costly. Summer
price hikes in nat-
ural gas have led.
DTE Energy to sig-
nificantly increase
gas bills despite
more recent drops
in market prices, BEN
further adding to CALECA
the woes of cash-
strapped students.
The answer to this
dilemma - and perhaps the answer
to the dilemma of usable clean energy
altogether - may rest below our feet.
That answer is geothermal heating
and energy generation.
Geothermal heating and electrical
generation are two different processes,
but both carry enormous potential for
a greener future for people across the
country. To generate electricity, geo-
thermal power plants use heat from
hot underground sources to power
electrical generators. Geothermal heat
pumps, on the other hand, use pipes
beneath a building to regulate temper-
atures of the building and the ground.
Since underground temperatures
remain constant all year, geothermal
heat pumps heat buildings in the win-
ter and cool them in the summer.
But what makes this technology
so special? Since geothermal sources
don'trequire fossil fuels to extract heat
energy and take up a relatively small
area, emissions and damageto the local
countryside are minimal. Geothermal
heat pumps are between 25 and 75 per-
cent more efficient for heating and cool-
ing than traditional systems depending
on where the system is set up and the
scale of the heating system.
The best part is that geothermal
heating and electricity aren't beholden
to global markets, weather patterns or
the time of day. Regardless of what's.
happening on the surface of the Earth,
the constant underground tempera-
tures mean more stable heating bills
for consumers and more clean baseline
electricity that can be provided at any
time, night or day.
Of course, as with any seemingly
perfect solution, there are a few catch-
es. These geothermal heating systems
have been around for decades but cost
twice as much to install as traditional
heatingunits. Their expense has scared
off consumers who don't want to wait
a decade to recoup their investment.
But with rising energy prices, geother-
mal heat pumps are now much more
attractive and companies specializing
in them have reported significant sales
growth. ClimateMaster, the nation's
largest manufacturer of ground-source
heat pump equipment, saw a revenue
increase of 200 percent between 2005
and 2007.
Another question is where geother-
mal power plants could be placed. For
a geothermal plant to work, it's neces-
sary to locate hot rocks in the earth.
The only way to locate them is by drill-
ing, which can wreak environmental
havoc if done irresponsibly. Drilling
also isn't cheap, making the fixed cost
of setting up a plant much higher.
The Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and the Department of
Energy (DOE) estimate the potential
for geothermal power in the U.S. to
be enormous. The DOE estimates that
within four decades, 10to 20 percent of
our electricity can come from geother-
mal plants if there is enough interest
to encourage large-scale investment.
Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS)
currently under development will open
up much of the country to geothermal
power generation. An investment of
around one billion dollars over the next
two decades could make this possible.
The call is being answered by an.
unlikely source. Google recently
announced a $10 million initial invest-
ment in EGS technology because the
company feels the technology is the
answer to the green energy. crisis.
Google has also announced it is work-
ing with General Electric and taking
advantage of its steam turbine exper-
tise for the initiative. The U.S. Depart-
ment of the Interior has also opened up
millions of acres of land in 12 western
states for geothermal energy explora-
tion.
Why investing in
geothermal heat is
a wise decision
This is a fantastic start, but the tech-
nologyneeds more funding and careful
stewardship. Drilling is a very risky,
exercise for the environment, with sol-
vents and lubricants possibly threaten-
ing groundwater. It's great to reduce
carbon emissions,but it shouldn't come
at the cost of the local environment
where a geothermal plant is placed.
With energy prices riding a perpetu-
al roller coaster and greenhouse emis-
sions remaining a huge threat to the
environment, part of the answer comes
from the ground we walk on. Savings
in geothermal heating and electricity
would reduce carbon emissionsby mil-
lions of tons per year and bringthe U.S.
closer to having a viable, sustainable,
clean electrical grid. Now, it's up to
private and public investment to make
this possible.
Ben Caleca can be reached
at calecab@umich.edu.
4
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca,
Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Matthew Green, Emma Jeszke,
Shannon Kellman, Edward McPhee, Emily Michels, Matthew Shutler,
Jennifer Sussex, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder
BRIAN FLAHERTY VIE I
A bus ride that didn't happen
4
During the blizzard-like weather last week-
end, I went to the bus stop by the Michigan
Union and ran into a nasty surprise - there
weren't any buses coming anytime soon. That's
because on weekends, University buses don't
drive to South Campus, where I had parked my
car earlier. So I spent the next half hour trudging
through a whiteout in my new sneakers, which.
were pretty stylin' but not as warm as I would
have hoped. When I finally arrived at my desti-
nation, there was a fresh clod of snow roughly
the size of Antarctica on my head. And I wasn't
the only one disappointed that day. Walking to
South Campus, I saw a slew of students making
similar treks with expressions that implied their
hamsters might have just died. The situation left
me wondering why my bus in shining armor had
abandoned me.
Now, all bus addicts have horror stories about
the cold winter night when their ride drove right
past their stop or the time they were thrown onto
the lap of the stranger sitting nextto them due to
some wild driving. Those I can dismiss as infre-
quent events. But my walk through the blizzard
had its root in a more endemic problem - the
unavailability of public transportation during
weekends. Just ask someone living on North
Campus what they think of public transporta-
tion on the weekends. If their response doesn't
contain "sucks," "blows," or some sort of exple-
tive, they're probably being too polite. The bot-
tom line is that students shouldn't have to wait
30 minutes for a bus that might not take them to
where they want to go justbecause it's Sunday.
That being said, I haven't given up on public
transportation. Most of the time, the bus is still
a great way to get around. As a third-year com-
muter, I have thanked local drivers at least 500
times because proper bus etiquette requires
that you always thank the guy or gal behind the
wheel, even if that person is dead sick of hear-
ing it. And aside from a few mishaps on nights
and weekends, I've found my experiences with
the bus to be overwhelmingly positive. The-bus
is easy, cheap and (generally) reliable. It also has
some more sweeping benefits.
For one thing, public transportation has a pos-
itive impact on the community. It cuts down on
traffic, reducing the number of cars on the city's
wacky one-way streets. Public transportation
also boosts the local economy. According to the
American Public Transportation Association,
every dollar invested in public transportation
puts six dollars into the economy. Not to men-
tion that mass transit saves a lot of gas money for
impoverished students.
Because being green is in style these days, the
bus is getting sexier all the time. The APTA esti-
mates that public transportation reduces U.S.
carbon emissions by 37 million metric tons annu-
ally - that's roughly equivalent to the amount of
electricity used in every household in New York
City, Atlanta, Denver, Los Angeles and Washing-
ton, D.C. combined. In the fight against global
warming, every little bit helps, and public trans-
portation helps more than a little bit. Getting
cars off the streets also cuts down on air pollu-
tion, so we can all breathe a little easier thanks
to the bus.
Public transportation is wonderful when it
works, and there are a lot of things the Universi-
ty does right to keep it working well. That's why
I did exactly what I should have - parked my
car off campus and planned to take the bus. This
particular time, I ended up cold, wet and covered
in snow because there are also some things the
University does that are ill-advised, like dras-
tically reducing weekend bus availability. But
public transportation works for the city and it
works for the environment. There's no reason it
couldn't work more consistently for students.
Brian Flaherty is an associate
editorial page editor.
Repairing racism
Last month, I worked on a col-
umn for the Daily that explored
affirmative action - one of
America's infa-
mous racial stale-
mates. I learned
that some Uni-
versity students
were so reluctant
to talk about race,
they would only
comment anony-
mously. MATTHEW
While affirma-
tive action may HUNTER
make some people
fraught with anxi-
ety, reparations are affirmative action
to the 25th power.
Reparations involve the Ameri-
can government offering some form
of compensatory justice to African-
Americans for infractions that include
the three-fifths clause in 1787, insti-
tutional slavery, decades of Jim Crow
laws and the blind eye that many
courts have shown vigilante groups
such as the Ku Klux Klan.
Research has shown that Ameri-
cans don't like discussing reparations.
The idea controversial and highlights
a disparity between whites and blacks.
A 2002 CNN/USA Today Gallup poll
reported that 90 percent of whites
believe the government should not pay
cash reparations to slave descendants,
while 55 percent of black respondents
said the government should.
Aetna, an insurance company that
was sued in 2002 for "their corpo-
rate predecessors' roles in the slave
trade and conversion of the value
of the slaves' labor into their prof-
its," responded, "We do not believe
a court would permit a lawsuit over
events which - however regrettable -
occurred hundreds of years ago. These
issues in no way reflect Aetna today."
The courts dismissed, the case against
the company.
Some criticsofreparationsmaywon-
der: What exactly do we give African-
Americans who are the descendants of
slaves? Whatdowegive biracialblacks?
What do we give Oprah? Furthermore,
who pays? Or, more bluntly, who is
punished? The fact is, all black people
living in America right now experi-
ence the social dysfunction that has
resulted from America's sordid racial
past and deserve compensatory justice
from the American government.
As for payment and punishment,
I don't believe that many of my white
classmates who shiver beside me as I
walk to class are the same people who
constructed the peculiar institution of
slavery. In fact, I believe a majority of
my white peers would stand in solidar-
ity with me if explicitly racist policies
emerged today. However, for whites
today to believe that a vast majority of
them have not benefited economically
from these past incidences of racism is
to believe a fairy tale.
To be clear, it is the responsibility of
both whites and blacks to seek justice
where there is injustice. Many blacks
have been active in their own recovery
from past injustices by taking respon-
sibility for their present socioeconomic
statuses. And many of the racial poli-
cies that have been forged in America
have been the result of black, brown
and white coalitions. It is our respon-
sibility as Americans to better under-
stand the nature of the social status of
the oppressed and not simply blame
them for something that is inextricably
linked with white oppression.
To answer the harder question, that
ofwhat togive,Ipropose somethingwe
are all too familiar with: a government
stimulus package. It would consist of
money dedicated toward repairing
damage dealt to African-Americans.
The money should not simply be given
to individuals -.it should be allotted
to state governments to rebuild their
oppressed communities. With this,
we could see drastic improvements for
schools, jobs, rehabilitation programs,
community infrastructure and Afri-
can-American morale.
A 2003 New York Times article
titled "The Cost of Slavery" estimates
that, after inflation, payment for lost
wages to slaves would be between $2
Reparations are
necessary to right
past injustices.
trillion and $4 trillion. Would a $4 tril-
lion stimulus package be an appropri-
ate allocation to make up for the past?
Either way, it should serve as a number
that reminds us of the seriousness of
slavery and lasting oppression. And,
if this is a stretch, what public policy
measures could mitigate the oppres-
sive damages of more than 300 years?
What can the government do to help
heal the wounds and correct the dys-
function?
Perhaps the words of President
Obama are fitting in this.case: "I con-
sistently believe that when it comes
to whether it's Native Americans or
African-American issues or repara-
tions, the most important thing for the
U.S. government to do is not just offer
words, but offer deeds."
I hope he lives up to his words - we
need big deeds.
Matthew Hunter can be reached
at majjam@umich.edu.
4
4
4
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300
words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. Letters are edited
for-style, length, clarity and accuracy. All submissions become property of the Daily.
We do not print anonymous letters.
Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu.
4