
Environmental issues have always been of interest to me. These interests have led me to my current living arrangements in the "Green Quad" dorm at USC, a living community for students who have a particular affinity for our Earth and how we can better it. My experiences before college were also a large part of motivating me to care about the environment. All throughout elementary, middle, and high school it seemed every year there was a new initiative trying to cut down on energy consumption or some other measure to better the environment, all of which they taught all of us about. Through living in my building, my previous experience in school, and some of my own recent research I have only become more fascinated with the concept of sustainable living. My research question affects my values by giving me a more detailed idea of the steps we can take to help reduce the amount of unnecessary trash that ends up in landfills every day. I truly believe that in my lifetime, provided no positive environmental change in enacted, we will see the detrimental effects of the world we currently live in and take advantage of, and I am motivated to enact change that will prevent, and maybe even reverse, all of that. I hope to one day have a career where I can put in motion positive change for our environment and researching the basics of a problem threatening our environment and potentially our lives is a good place to start. I am qualified to write about this topic because of my experiences in school before college, living in a green community this year, and past knowledge regarding sustainability. My current research has led me to some specific examples but the sources I have looked into have been helpful in compiling a reliable base of information that I can later build on. I intend to look deeper into specific solutions to come to a more concrete claim, something my base knowledge will help me understand fully.

The first source I used to research my question was an article from The New York Times called "The Reign of Recycling". This article discusses both the benefits and drawbacks of the recycling industry, but mainly focuses on the fact that recycling, while good for the environment, remains an imperfect system. It compares the environmental, economic, and personal effects of recycling, and why the system needs to improve if it will truly fulfill its intended purpose. The values and stakes of the general population are shown in this article in a few ways. The values are the well-being of the environment, the economic well-being of people, and the well-being of businesses involved. These all need to be maintained if actions concerning the environment are to take place. Money, the environment itself, and people are at stake here. Waste reduction plans will not have any support if they cost too much money or harm people in the process, or if they are ineffective in actually helping the environment. The article is also more of a general overview rather than focusing on a specific area or method of recycling. While this umbrella-like article may seem unhelpful in the search for a specific solution, it has certainly been a good starting place for me, giving me more of the general knowledge I need to answer my research question. While it is informative and covers a broad range of topics, it does seem to take an argumentative stance on the issue, highlighting the issues with modern recycling. One example of this is that the energy it takes to rinse out one can of soup to recycle is more than the amount of energy produced by the recycled can. The author, John Tierney, is a regular columnist for the New York Times making him a credible source for the type of critical information he provides.

The second source helping me answer my research question is an academic journal article titled "Alternative Waste Solutions for the Pacific Region: Learning from the Hawai'i Experience". This article examines how islands like Hawai'i have effectively handled the problem of increasing amounts of waste and how similar solutions can be applied to other regions of the country, specifically other islands in the Pacific. It discusses characteristics of the islands as well as trends affecting their inhabitants, and how their conditions must be handled in order to achieve the most out of their recycling process. Since they are island, they have limited space on land so large landfills aren't really an option for them and they must be careful not to let the surrounding ocean become contaminated with garbage which could hurt wildlife. Because of these restrictions, they have turned to solutions such as burning garbage, recycling most of what they dispose of, and implementing facilities that can turn waste into energy which can be used to help power the islands. The values and interests at stakes are those of the Pacific islands and other island communities and how they can most effectively handle their waste. They value where they live because they know the lifespan of the island could be cut short if wasteful habits continue. They also value the people of the island and their solutions are all ones that don't harm the inhabitants. Because of their unique characteristics, their situation regarding landfill waste must be personalized to fit the resources they have available to them. The biggest problem they have is isolation and little room for landfills, so their recycling needs to cater to these specific needs. Jordan P. Howell, the author of this article, is a professor at Rowan University with many published articles focusing on environmental issues. His professional opinion can be valued and trusted when it comes to my research question. This is an informative article and shows little to no bias when presenting the argument. Mainly facts are stated and solutions are proven through statistics and the case study of Hawai'i and their waste management solutions. 

My third and possibly most specific source was another article from The New York Times entitled "Recycling the Leftovers". This article highlights the advantages of composting and recycling food waste. It cites Austin, Texas and the steps the city is already taking to combat the problem of excess food waste. Other concrete examples include restaurants and college campuses encouraging diners to not waste food through waste collection and prevention methods. The author mentions the positive financial impacts these measures have had on these establishments, saving them money through a little extra human effort and brainpower. Even though this source uses specific examples, the values and interests of the article are still mainly of the general population. They discuss monetary advantages which tells you that they value the economy, they discuss the effect these measures have on people which tells us they value the lives of those involved, and they value the environment, otherwise there wouldn't be any efforts made to put these measures into place. At the end of the text, it talks about how these solutions could be the start to a country and possibly world-wide reformation in the way we perceive and handle waste management. Stephanie Strom, the author, earned her bachelor's at Northwestern University and her Master's at Columbia University, making it hard to discredit her work. Adding in 14 years of writing for The New York Times, and she is a fantastic resource for evidence to back up my research claims. However, the work for the most part fails to acknowledge the negative effects of the measures mentioned, giving the article a positive bias. The statistics come from relevant, reliable sources, but without any mention of opposing sides, it's hard to accept this argument wholesale. That being said, this source is a good place for concrete examples for my research. 

There are several stakeholders that make this question controversial and arguable. As I have mentioned before, perhaps the most pressing and complicated are the economic effects that large waste management projects could have. Moral and personal interests must also be taken into account; people need to care about the environment if you have any hope of getting their help. People don't value the environment at the current moment as much as they should, otherwise we wouldn't be in a situation where the well-being of the Earth is at stake, an idea that is reflected in all of my articles. People must become aware of this situation and begin to take steps to fix it, which is what I will focus my final paper on. One aspect that may worry some is the effect that it will have on the individual; how will every person have to contribute to make this effort worthwhile. Some of my views on the topic have been changed simply because the sources I am reading are written by experts in the field, and I am presented with issues and alternatives that had never crossed my mind before. I am learning about how recycling is often done incorrectly which has caused me to reflect on my own behaviors. I am also learning just how bad the problem is in the United States which again causes me to reflect on the scope of the entire problem. My question can be revised to focus on a specific area of the United States, rather than the country as a whole or potentially a specific area of waste that is worse than the others. Whether or not I choose to condense my area of focus, I believe I have established a solid enough base of knowledge about this issue, and can delve into more specific articles and begin to form my own conclusions much easier now. I can also now begin to look at sources that combat my main focus unlike the ones I have just examined and use them to make my argument even stronger. All of this will help me craft one, solid argument that covers all the bases of my research question.

