I
4A - Wednesday, September 14, 2011
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
BRUNO STORTINI
E-MAIL BRUNO AT BRUNORS@UMICH.EDU
K~jPIIZHTF
s Z5
ti+N , f r, a+ ryu .t:ar,. ,+ c+1r aa ec w .. . HA~t" u, ~fA,4 vr~dw~tiA A 1MAv+ lt'<Ta~~a,
STEPHANIE STEINBERG
EDITOR IN CHIEF
MICHELLE DEWITT
and EMILY ORLEY
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS
E
NICK SPAR
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.
An eco-friendly ban
MSA's bottled water resolution shows promise
T he Michigan Student Assembly recently made another
effort to rid bottled water sales from campus. A
resolution, passed last week proposes Michigan to stop
the sale of bottled water in University convenience stores, the
Michigan League, the Michigan Union and Pierpont Commons,
in addition to snack vendors at various campus events.
Stepping up to stereotypes
The petition, which is currently seeking
student support, has the potential to bring
positive change to campus. The University
sold nearly 600,000 bottles of water in 2009,
and according to the Graham Environmental
Sustainability Institute's Campus Sustainabil-
ity Integrated Assessment, the bottled water
ban could prevent the emission of more than
80 tons of carbon dioxide and 40,000 gallons
of water waste. The environmental benefits of
the ban are clear, and the action by the Univer-
sity would likely inspire other institutions to
follow suit, further reducing the environmen-
tal impact of bottled water.
Aside from being wasteful and energy inef-
ficient, bottled water is an expensive alterna-
tive to tap water. In some cases, bottled water
is less clean than available tap water. Addition-
ally, the use of reusable water bottles is better
for the environment and would also benefit
students financially.
In spite of the clear advantages of the plan,
there are several factors that impede the suc-
cessful implementation of the proposal. The
most significant problem is the issue of clean
refill stations for reusable water bottles. For
reusable water bottles to be easily refilled
throughout campus, more drinking fountain
attachments need to be installed. Currently,
these attachments onlyexist on a few drinking
fountains in University facilities and would
not meet the demand that would exist in the
absence of bottled water.
There's also the concern that students and
others on campus will turn to less healthy
and unsustainable options to replace bottled
water, such as bottled sodas and fruit juices.
To make the ban successful the University
would need to ensure that clean water was
equally available at events without selling
bottled water. University officials would also
need to market the ban in a way that encour-
ages students to make the easy, healthy choice
of reusable water bottles and tap water.
While a ban on bottled water sales in Uni-
versity Housing and campus buildings where
classes are held is feasible, banning it from all
University events could have negative con-
sequences. It's unrealistic to expect every-
one who attends special events on campus,
for example sporting events and concerts, to
bring their own reusable water bottles. Since
bottles are not currently permitted in the Big
House for football games, there needs to be an
alternative for people seeking drinking water.
Continuing the sale of bottled water at special
events would be an appropriate exception to
the otherwise campus wide ban.
It's commendable that University offi-
cials and MSA are working toward making
the campus a more sustainable environment
with a smaller carbon footprint. The bottled
water ban, if properly implemented, has the
potential to further these efforts and estab-
lish the University as a leader in eco-friendly
practices.
As a social psychology stu-
dent at the University, I've
dedicated myself to learn-
ing a lot about
race and class in
the United States
and how to com-
bat the stereo-
types that shape
our society. But
I had a chance
this May, thanks NORA
to grants from STEPHENS
the University,
to put my ivory
tower learning to the test when I
became a one-woman, 20-some-
thing ambassador for the U.S. to a
group of international volunteers in
South Africa. I went there to teach
kids in the Nomzamo Township,
but it turned out I had alot to teach
my fellow English, Irish, Canadian,
Swedish and Australian volunteers
and myself.
"Oh you're American?" theysaid in
a tone laden with assumptions when
I opened my mouth for the first time.
Previous travels with my family had
prepared me for the reactions people
have toward Americans abroad but
since I was alone on this journey,
this was the first time I had ever felt
solely responsible for representing
an entire nation. I took less food in
an attempt to not seem greedy, spoke
quieter in an attempt to not seem
boisterous and spelled words the
British way in an attempt to notseem
uneducated. I was sofocused on try-
ing to prove that my country was not
all bad that I lostsight of who I was. I
had become the token American, and
it was when I came to this realization
that I began to connect the theories
I'm learning in college with actual
practice outintheworld. I turned my
discomfort into dialogue.
For example, while on dinner
duty with a fellow volunteer from
Southern England, I asked her what
she thought of America. She said she
thought most of it was great but that
all the Southern people are dumb. I
pushed her to consider what would
make a whole group of people seem
unintelligent and what she actually
knew about those states south of the
Mason Dixon.
With another British volunteer,
we jokingly asked one of our South
African students, "Who do you like
better - the U.S. or England?" The
child promptly responded, "USA!
England messed up our country."
This led to a powerful discussion
about what the student knew about
history and the inherited guilt the
British volunteer felt about that his-
tory even though he obviously had
nothing to do with the colonization
of South Africa.
These and many other experi-
ences taught me in a way books and
lectures couldn't about how stereo-
types work both ways when we let
ourselves take the easy road and buy
into them rather than do the hard
work of finding out who we really
are. These ideas of stereotypes are
not necessarily new to me. As a
facilitator and research assistant
with the Program on Intergroup
Relations I have thoroughly delved
into how my social identities.affect
my life, ald I find myself constantly
scrutinizing the role social identi-
ties play in our society and on our
campus.
What was different about this
experience was the particular
social identity that was brought to
my attention: my nationality. I real-
ized I had spent thoroughly less
time thinking about my nationality
as a social identity. I felt like I was
caught between being the evil, war-
obsessed American to my fellow
volunteers and the perfect, noth-
ing-is-ever-wrong-with-my-nation
American to the South Africans.
I tried to prove
America was
not all bad.
This experience was a reminder
that until we step out of our com-
fort zones and talk with people who
are different than us, we are unable
to understand who we and others
really are. How can we as Univer-
sity students*learn about nationality
when most of us are American citi-
zens? I challenge us, myself includ-
ed, to make more of an effort to get
to know and talk with students from
other countries. Talk about the ste-
reotypes that face us abroad and
the stereotypes that face University
students who are not originally from
the U.S.
The volunteer from England who
thought all Southern people were
dumb recently wrote on my Face-
book wall that she had stopped ste-
reotyping the South. I'm not sure if
her comments would ever have hurt
my fellow Americans, but her Face-
book post is still a small victory over
ignorance.
-Nora Stephens can be
reached at norals@umich.edu.
NIRBHAY JAINI
We need Ohio State
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Aida Ali, Michelle DeWitt, Ashley Griesshammer, Patrick Maillet,
Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Emily Orley, Teddy Papes,
Timothy Rabb, Seth Soderborg, Andrew Weiner
Squeezing water from a rock
40
When the new Wolverines step onto this
glorious campus in Ann Arbor, one thing is
always deep inside their minds: They hate
Ohio State. They want to see Ohio State bleed.
When OSU coach Jim Tressel was fired, Mich-
igan fans across the world rejoiced. The vest
was gone - Michigan will win again!
This deep-seated hatred, although well-
founded, obscures a greater point - Michigan
needs Ohio State, just as much as Ohio State
needs Michigan.
Coming from Toledo, I've seen both sides of
the rivalry. That game defined not only what
team you rooted for but who you were. To this
day, the most divisive and passionately talked
about game is that epic No. 1 v. No. 2 2006
matchup. We all know what happened, but
it still was one of the high points of the past
decade. Why? Because it's OSU.
As Wolverines, we compare ourselves to
the Buckeyes, not only athletically but also
academically. We take pride in being a better
academic institution than Ohio State - being
more reputable, more widely known, higher
ranked by every single system imaginable.
Why? Because it's OSU.
When Tattoogate broke, we laughed and
jeered. Why? Because it's OSU.
When Rich Rod left, we were happy not
only because he destroyed the program but
because he could not beat the Buckeyes. Why?
Because it's OSU.
When Tressel quit, we were happier,
because he went 9-1 against us. Why? Because
it's OSU.
Everything we do always comes back to
none other than OSU.
We have great rivalries with other schools
such as Michigan State, Notre Dame and a new
one coming with Nebraska. Yet we will never
care for those games this year as we will for
Nov. 26, despite that thrilling win over Notre
Dame under the lights. Why? That's when
OSU comes up to the Big House.
A win over OSU would mean so much more
to usthan sneakingpast Notre Dame with two
seconds left.
OSU is a mess. Current OSU coach Luke
Fickell is no Woody Hayes, but we aren't
much better. Sure, we finally got our Michigan
Man in Michigan coach Brady Hoke. When
was our last bowl win? Bowl Championship
series?Ourtlast Big10 championship? National
championship? National championship game?
When was our last win over OSU?
None of this would hurt as much if OSU
hadn't been so damn successful lately.
Michigan's last bowl win: 2008. OSU wins
since then: 2.
Michigan's last BCS Bowl: 2007. OSU since
then: 5.
Michigan's last Big10 Championship: 2004.
OSU since then: 6.
Michigan's last National Championship/
National Championship game: 1997. OSU since
then: 3 games, 1 win.
Michigan's last win over Ohio State: 2003.
OSU since then: 7.
Our football program is the one that is in
shambles, not the Buckeyes'. We shouldn't be
gloating over how much the pride of the Big
Ten has fallen over the past months. In fact,
we should be, in a way, ashamed.
OSU has been the poster team of the Big
Ten for the past decade. It has been easily the
most successful team over that time period.
We need them to stay strong. By doingso, OSU
shows that the Big Ten is not a weak confer-
ence.
The reason why the Southeastern Confer-
ence can stay so consistently powerful lately is
because the conference seems to be the stron-
gest conference, attracting the best recruits.
Meanwhile, the older, plodding Big Ten can't
even beat mid-major Texas Christian Univer-
sity. How do you think that helps our image?
I understand why people were so happy
that OSU made such a mess of itself. It was
probably the happiest moment of my summer.
We shouldn't hope that their football program
becomes worse than Minnesota's though. We
need OSU to stay strong, to show that the Big
Ten is not a weak conference, so that we can
get those players that we need to succeed.
I believe in Brady Hoke. I believe inthe Uni-
versity of Michigan football team. But I also
believe that we need to defeat a strong OSU
team this year, notcjust any team.
After being down so long, will anybody
believe the legitimacy of our win over this
team if OSU does awfully the whole season?
No, it'll be called a product of circumstances.
What if we lose this year? Our program will
be set back even further.
- We need Ohio State to stay undefeated this
year. That'll make Nov.26 all the more sweeter.
Nirbhay Jain is an LSA freshman.
Thank god for the Great
Lakes. Aside from the,
treacherous rip currents,
the current and
looming threats
of invasive spe-
ties and the
many toxic pol-
lutants that have.
poisoned regions
of five lakes -
aside from that, JOE
they're a bless- SUGIYAMA
ing. The few
problems associ-
ated with having 21 percent of the
world's surface fresh water supply
is well worth the benefits. Fish-
ing like you wouldn't believe, fluffy
lake-effect snow and droughts that
occur about as often as a Congres-
sional compromise are just the tip of
the iceberg. The sweltering summer
months have reinforced one thing:
Michigan may not have a booming
economybut damnit, we havewater.
Our counterpart? Texas. They
have some of the fastest grow-
ing cities in the United States, and
according to a May 5 Forbes article,
the best job markets in the country.
Comparing the state of Michigan to
Texas on an economic level is like
comparing the coaching resumes of
Rich Rod and Bo Schembechler -
it's not even close.
In spite of a booming economy,
Texas is faced with one of the worst
droughts on record. Since January,
Texas has recorded a record-low
six inches of rain. How these two
events can coincide is somewhat
of an anomaly when looking at the
history of mankind. Throughout
time, droughts have driven man to
adapt and evolve. When lush ter-
rain turned arid and barren des-
erts, nomads were forced to pick up
and move shop, or shrivel and die.
Though we're a .far cry from our
hunting and gathering ancestors, at
some point we need to evaluate the
logistics of having so much of our
population in an area that doesn't
provide the necessities for life.
Looking at the climatic history
of the Southwest will certainly
not ease any of our fears. During
the past couple thousand years,
droughts have spanned decades.
The dustbowl of the 1930s and the
droughts of the 1950s are not even
the worst examples of dry times in
the South. The devastation that a
10-year drought would have on our
country will force us to look at our
infrastructure and see where it can
be improved.
Stopping 7 billion gallons of
water from being wasted through
leaking pipes each year might be
a start. But with a budget deficit in
the trillions, the money to fix the
leaky pipes might be hard to find.
As a civil engineer, it pains me to say
that fixing our infrastructure may
not be the immediate answer to our
prayers. Perhaps fixing our attitudes
is the remedy we need to avoid a
catastrophe.
The attitude of Americans is one
of the driving forces behind the
South's current predicament. We
have always been the type to throw
caution to the wind when it comes
down to the location of our popula-
tion. There are native tribes defend-
ing their terrain in the Great Plains?
Well, we've got Winchester rifles for
that. That city is being built below
sea level in hurricane ally? Nothing
a couple levies can't fix.
Each example has proven to be
costly and dangerous, and that same
haphazard train of thought can be
applied to the population growth
in the South. Though we eventually
conquered the whole of our country
- and have somewhat rebuilt New
Orleans - the countless lives that
were shattered or ended by our stub-
bornness should have taught us a les-
son. But then again, this is America,
and we can't let a couple bad experi-
ences bring us down. Though history
can often predict outcomes before
we have a chance to second guess it -
just ask Hitler if he thought invading
Russia would turn out the same as
Napoleon's attempt - some lessons
must be learned first hand.
I'm not predicting an apocalyp-
tic ending for Texas - we have the
Mayans for that - but I am say-
ing we need to seriously reevaluate
where our population to expand to
in the future. If we continue to try
to squeeze water from a rock - pun
intended - we might find ourselves
in a situation that cannot be fixed
without serious detriments done to
I
6
Texas drought is
one of the worst
in state's history.
surrounding environments.
Only recently has water not been
considered the deciding factor for
where a population decides to settle.
I propose that we go back to think-
ing like our nomadic ancestors and
settle where available resources
- namely water - are plentiful. A
place like, say, Michigan has these
resources in excess, and if we ever
decide to stop defying nature, we
could end up with the majority of
our population living somewhere
that can actually sustain life.
Things may be bigger in Texas,
but they're wetter in Michigan.'
- Joe Sugiyama can be
reached at jmsugi@umich.edu.