Sydney Brownstone

Sydney Brownstone

Senior Editorial Fellow

Sydney used to cover things like music, environmental justice and Occupy for The L Magazine in Brooklyn. She has also contributed to the Washington Square News, Brooklyn Magazine and NPR's All Songs Considered. Outside of writing, Sydney is an ardent fan of sunflower seed butter and the old version of Final Cut Pro.

Get my RSS |

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Don't Feel Bad About Getting an Xmas Tree

| Wed Dec. 12, 2012 4:03 AM PST

Adam Langley remembers starting his high school summer days at 5 a.m. to work on Harry Yates' Christmas tree farm. In a fertile, North Carolinian corner of southern Appalachia, he and his friends would pack into a decrepit truck and roll up remote mountainsides armed with clippers, shears, and knee guards. At the top, in a plot where Yates specialized in Fraser fir, Langley and his crew spent their formative years pruning trees destined for hundreds of living rooms across the country that winter.

Langley, now an ecologist and professor at Villanova University, has worked over the past four years with his wife and fellow professor Samantha Chapman through a USDA grant to examine how North Carolina Christmas tree farms might mitigate climate change. Their results, taken from 27 sites across nine farms and published in a paper in November, show that certain techniques can allow the tree plots to act like natural sponges for atmospheric carbon. The potential, they say, lies in the dirt.

Tree farm soil, Chapman says, can absorb 10 times as much carbon as the wood itself. Cutting down on herbicide use and providing groundcover between rows of firs can double that concentration of carbon in the soil. The researchers' goal is to see if carbon sequestration could potentially be profitable for struggling Christmas tree farmers who want to sell offsets, or amounts of carbon dioxide emissions avoided. If legislation is passed to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, these kinds of offsets could be sold to polluters who want to make up for their emissions elsewhere.

"The carbon builds up in the soil over time," Chapman told me over the phone. "Some is sugar that's eaten quickly, and some of it sticks around for thousands of years. And that's the kind of soil we're interested in capturing."

xmas tree
Chapman collecting soil samples at Yates' Christmas tree farm. Courtesy of Samantha Chapman

In September, Langley presented the team's findings to a conference of North Carolina Christmas tree growers. "They were very receptive," he said. "Farmers are often operating on a very thin margin. What they can do to increase carbon sequestration is in line with what they could do to improve the long term profitability of their farm."

It was only a few decades ago Christmas tree farming, as opposed to harvesting naturally-occurring forests, emerged as a relatively new and promising industry. Harry Yates, Langley's former employer who owns 200 acres of Fraser firs in Boone, North Carolina, took up the trade in 1979 when farming was beginning to boom. But the industry today is facing a significant challenge from plastic imports. "The fake trees from China, as we call them, are a major competitor," Yates told me in a gruff drawl.

Doug Hundley, an integrated pest management technician who's worked with North Carolina growers like Yates to better environmental practices for over 20 years, estimates that growers could increase tree sales by upwards of 30 percent if it weren't for the fake imports. And while natural tree sales nationwide have decreased by 6 percent over the last half-century, fake tree sales have skyrocketed. "I think that real trees are not in nearly the number of households that they could be," Hundley said.

Yates and Hundley, both of whom were in the audience during Langley's presentation, say that they're all for exploring the carbon sequestration capability of their trees, but that a profitable carbon market still seems a long way off. "We were making this green production system for plenty of other reasons besides that," Hundley says. "If it turns out that it's benefiting climate change then that's great too."

In the meantime, Langley and Chapman continue to work with a North Carolina extension agent to hammer out the mechanisms behind carbon sequestration on Christmas tree farms. Existing market or not, they're hopeful. "Especially with the current administration and the fact that extreme climate events have happened recently," Chapman says. "I think the impetus to do something is closer now."

Why Do We Tolerate Sexist Jerks in Show Biz?

| Mon Dec. 3, 2012 4:03 AM PST
Chris BrownChris Brown, looking ready for a foot-in-the-mouth.

R&B pop star and convicted felon Chris Brown is no longer MIA on Twitter. In case you missed last weekend's lurid social media drama, it kicked off with Brown posting a picture of himself and tweeting, "I look old as fuck! I'm only 23." To which comedy writer Jenny Johnson (who describes herself in her Twitter profile as "Writer, wife, asshole and owner of 2 dogs") tweeted back, "I know! Being a worthless piece of shit can really age a person."

Thus began the crossfire, with Brown boasting of the various graphic sexual and scatalogical acts he would impose on his antagonist "hoe," and Johnson, who'd been baiting him on Twitter for a while, jabbing back with a sense of humor that made Brown look like even more of an asshole. The singer eventually took himself out of the game by deactivating his Twitter account, whereupon Johnson received death threats from Breezy fans. Six days later, Brown's Twitter account reappeared with all his old tweets obliterated.

At first, Brown's absence seemed to indicate that Johnson had won the duel. I had intended to write about how the episode was an exception to the rule—the rule that says misogynistic pop stars can get away with treating women horribly because we're willing to look the other way when celebrities do bad things. But now I wonder if it's not just going to end up in the archives as yet another case of, "Oh, there goes Chris Brown being Chris Brown." 

It's not just that the music industry has cheerfully supported Brown throughout his probation for felony assault on singer Rihanna, his former (or possibly-on-again?) girlfriend. I'm also talking about how things like this get shrugged off by music critics, or play out in conversations over hoppy beer with progressive, liberal arts types. The conversation usually goes something like:

"Have you heard so and so's new album? He's a genius."

"Yeah, but he's a terrible human being."

"Does that matter?"

My gripe isn't just that Brown got off with zero jail time after pleading guilty to violently assaulting his girlfriend. It's that we have a habit of endorsing, defending, and even rewarding artists (and athletes and radio hosts and movie stars) who display harmful behavior toward women, occasionally express a little remorse, and then go on reinforcing their destructive messages.

Remember Tyler, the Creator, the "art rap" guy who used to spit about gory rape fantasies? It was bad enough that music writers at one point were wiping drool off their keyboards over the dude; but it was actually being a thoughtless shock-jock that landed him his own TV show—much like Glenn Beck. Then there's old-school Oakland rapper Too $hort, who in February offered "fatherly advice" in an XXL magazine video to boys on how to pressure middle school girls into sex. Last Tuesday, Pitchfork rated Too $hort's new album a glowing 7.8, writing, "Nothing keeps you young like a persistent hard-on and a filthy sense of humor." The piece neglected to mention the rapper's struggle with comedy and paternal instincts earlier this year.

Andrew W.K. Still Aims to Be Party Ambassador to Bahrain

| Mon Dec. 3, 2012 4:03 AM PST
Andrew W.K. on the cover of his 2001 album I Get Wet.

If you have a passing familiarity with rocker philosopher Andrew W.K., this is probably what you see: A guy with long hair in a uniform of scrubby white jeans who has a penchant for puking and bleeding regularly. If you're into the deeper W.K. cuts, you'll know that his appearance belies a quest to spread his message of relentless existential positivity (a.k.a PARTYING) far and wide. Last week, though, W.K. surprised many with the announcement that the State Department was sending him to Bahrain as a cultural ambassador.

One problem: The State Department claimed otherwise (as reported here by MoJo's Asawin Suebseang). And while W.K. now says US officials cancelled on him last minute, that doesn't mean he's ready to quit. We caught up this past week with W.K., who insists he's still looking to get to Bahrain on his own—and isn't taking the State Department's snub too personally.

Mother Jones: What would your Bahraini itinerary have looked like if the trip weren't called off?

Fracked Beef: It's What's for Dinner?

| Thu Nov. 29, 2012 4:14 PM PST

From a tainted water supply in Wyoming to toxic air pollution in Colorado, there are concerns aplenty about the public health effects of hydraulic fracturing. While many communities investigate what we drink and breathe for answers, one new report from The Nation and the Food & Environment Reporting Network highlights a key yet overlooked complication—fracking chemicals could affect our food.

For the cover story in the magazine's December issue, journalist and author Elizabeth Royte visited a North Dakotan cattle farmer living smack in the middle of the Bakken oil boom. The rancher, Jacki Schilke, decided to largely stop selling her cows for Black Angus beef after several died or started displaying mysterious symptoms, like rapid weight loss or tails that would simply drop off. Schilke, Royte writes, is surrounded by 32 fracked oil and gas wells within three miles of her 160-acre ranch. The author continues:

Ambient air testing by a certified environmental consultant detected elevated levels of benzene, methane, chloroform, butane, propane, toluene and xylene—compounds associated with drilling and fracking, and also with cancers, birth defects and organ damage. Her well tested high for sulfates, chromium, chloride and strontium; her blood tested positive for acetone, plus the heavy metals arsenic (linked with skin lesions, cancers and cardiovascular disease) and germanium (linked with muscle weakness and skin rashes). Both she and her husband, who works in oilfield services, have recently lost crowns and fillings from their teeth; tooth loss is associated with radiation poisoning and high selenium levels, also found in the Schilkes' water.

According to Royte, the state's health and agriculture officials told Schilke this wasn't cause for concern. Another state air quality official told OnEarth magazine that in investigating Schilke's health complaint, tests never revealed pollutants above "normal background" levels. Of course, it doesn't help Schilke that there's scarce research into the connection between food and fracking. Earlier this year, an Ithaca veterinarian and Cornell professor published a peer-reviewed study (the first of its kind) examining health problems in animals from 24 farms across six drilling states. The authors, Michelle Bamberger and Robert Oswald, looked at several frack-heavy areas, and found that animals exposed to chemicals in fracking fluid or wastewater often died, couldn't reproduce, or had offspring with birth defects.

Still, much remains unknown—or disputed. Critics accuse the Cornell study of being un-scientific because of its use of anonymous sources, and also because the researchers didn't test the effects of specific chemicals on cows directly; instead, the authors relied on events they didn't control. Of course, controlled testing of the direct effects of particular chemicals is made all the more difficult because of legislative loopholes that allow companies to keep the identities and concentrations of fracking chemicals guarded. Bamberger and Oswald, for their part, attributed the report's reliance on anonymity to industry non-disclosure agreements.

The potential fracking-food connection is especially important to consider as New York's heavily delayed decision on how to regulate fracking approaches. In her interviews with concerned upstate New York farmers and Brooklyn gourmands, Royte shows how citizens' taste for locavore beef, dairy, and other meat products could come into direct conflict with a landscape compromised by drilling. If Governor Cuomo does decide to end the state's fracking moratorium, that could be a lot of 'splaining to do for New York's DIY-or-die foodie communities.

Mon Mar. 25, 2013 3:00 AM PDT
Mon Feb. 25, 2013 4:12 AM PST
Wed Feb. 20, 2013 12:23 PM PST
Wed Feb. 20, 2013 4:01 AM PST
Fri Feb. 15, 2013 4:25 PM PST
Thu Jan. 31, 2013 4:06 AM PST
Mon Jan. 7, 2013 4:01 AM PST
Wed Dec. 12, 2012 4:03 AM PST
Mon Dec. 3, 2012 4:03 AM PST
Thu Nov. 29, 2012 4:14 PM PST
Mon Oct. 15, 2012 11:37 AM PDT
Mon Oct. 15, 2012 3:03 AM PDT
Mon Sep. 17, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Mon Sep. 10, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Mon Sep. 10, 2012 3:00 AM PDT
Wed Aug. 29, 2012 2:12 PM PDT
Tue Jun. 26, 2012 12:15 AM PDT
Mon Jun. 25, 2012 9:30 AM PDT
Fri Jun. 15, 2012 11:08 AM PDT
Wed Jun. 13, 2012 3:00 AM PDT