Can the Environment be turned into a game?

Talking about the environment in class today got me thinking about doing an interesting blog about the environment, so here it is:

"Eco Creatures," a flabby but somewhat child-cute game for the Nintendo DS, caught my attention just as it was intended to: It's "an eco-friendly adventure," said the press release from publisher Majesco Entertainment. And how is that? Well, it "promotes awareness of the perils of over-industrialization, deforestation, pollution, extinction and global warming, as well as their effects on various life forms." The age rating is Everyone, which means the game is recommended for anyone 6 or older. The controls are poor. You find out early, for instance, that you can't fight effectively without making yourself stupidly vulnerable to attack. Even little kids know that makes the game a dubious value at $30, regardless of any environmental merit. You're supposed to nurture your creatures, but it's hard to get in the mood when the clunky game play is making you crazy.

This little bit comes from a Mercury Review of the game. I think that it is a great idea to incorporate the idea of saving the environment into a game, but does it seriously have to be so lame? It's an interesting topic and what's your take on it?

haha:

Garbage Woes

In the San Francisco Chronicle, catering company owner Ari Derfel was profiled for his unusual quest to collect a year's worth of his personal trash to demonstrate how much waste a person creates in one year.

Derfel is now in his last month of collecting trash and ended up with about 96 cubic feet of waste.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Americans generate about 250 million tons of solid waste a year. As Derfel points out, "When we throw something away, what does 'away' mean?...There's no such thing as 'away.'" because "Each thing we throw away has been produced somewhere, shipped to a store, entered the home, and then is sent somewhere else - using up water, oil and land."

Do you think pollution and the subsequent event of global warming is a legitimate and/or looming threat? If you harbor concerns about the environment, will this affect who you vote for in the elections (based on their environmental platforms, rather than other factors)?

New Energy Legislation Passed by Senate, but Watered Down...

New energy legislation has been cleared through the Senate! It's good news, but the legislation was cut and stripped of many provisions that would cost the oil industry billions and billions of dollars before finally receiving its wide margin of approval.

This legislation includes an increase in fuel-economy standards for motor vehicles and boosts for alternative fuel. However, the 13 billion dollar tax increase on oil companies, and a requirement that 15% of electricity be from renewable sources were cut in order to secure Republican votes in the Senate.

To end debate on the bill, Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, announced the removal of tax provisions, allowing for passage with a vote of 86 to 8.

The oil industry's own voice was clearly heard in their own campaigns to oppose tax increases; they argued that paying the government more money would get in the way of developing new sources of energy in terms of funding.

Do you think that the bill should have been watered down? What does this say about the power of the oil industry in Congress? Do you think the tax provisions should have been passed? Will they ever be able to make it through Congress?

Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/13/washington/13cnd-energy.html?ref=washington