If you pay attention to the biofuels efforts in the Bay Area or read online science magazines such as Wired or New Scientist, it’s likely you’ve heard of Synthetic Biology. More of a movement than a field, Synthetic Biology envisions biology as an engineering discipline waiting to happen. Essentially, Synthetic Biology aims to circumvent or control the complexities in biology in order to build novel, effective biological systems reliably and quickly for such applications as diesel production and tumor killing bacteria. For example, imagine you want to engineer yeast to make red beer that tastes like lemon. Synthetic biology would have you pick up a “red” gene and a “lemon” gene, plug them into the yeast in a standardized, programmed way, and presto: Red lemon hefeweizen! Unfortunately, the realities of biology require much more than that. In reality, biology is so complex, few things we do ever work as expected or intended. Because of this, most synthetic biology projects quickly run into difficulty and often take years to hack together. But this hasn’t stopped synthetic biologists from making broad claims about the potential of their approaches. It’s been said that cheap biofuels, cures for diseases, and fantastic new biotechnologies are in the pipeline. Recently, however, Synthetic Biologists are encountering resistance as reality has begun to catch up to the hype.

A recent news feature in Nature Biotechnology asked some of the most prominent synthetic biologists how they define their field. The diversity and vagueness of the responses highlighted the difficulties the community has had centering itself on a set of focused objectives. Because Synthetic Biology is such a new field with no central discovery to mark its launch point, and because the application of systematic engineering to biology is so fraught with problems, the Synthetic Biology community has had trouble defining itself in concrete terms. This comes despite such efforts as the Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center (SynBERC), an NSF-funded consortium of faculty across various universities that is intended to facilitate joint research efforts within Synthetic Biology. Some responses in the article suggested that Synthetic Biology had become more of a buzzword meant to garner federal research dollars than a productive field. For those of us in the field at the moment, this hit painfully close to home. Read the rest of this entry »

The Graduate Minority Students’ Project is hosting a Graduate Students of Color Beginning Meditation Workshop this evening. The workshop is geared toward beginners and will be led by Mushim Ikeda-Nash, who teaches at the East Bay Meditation Center. Dinner will also be provided.

  • When: Wednesday, February 3, 2010 from 5:30-7:30 pm.
  • Where: Anthony Hall

Photo by brianwallace

L.A. has a reputation for being a cultural and intellectual wasteland, but at the 8th Annual West Coast Law and Literature Conference, held January 13 by USC’s Center for Law, History and Culture and Department of Comparative Literature, I found a welcome oasis. I came across it by accident; I happened to be in town, I knew one of the professors participating, and parking was provided (probably the deciding factor). Since the papers were accessible online, I already knew that the panelists – Bernadette Meyler of Cornell Law School, Julia Lupton of UC Irvine, and UC Berkeley’s Victoria Kahn – would be presenting work on topics ranging from England’s 1660 Act of Oblivion to joint-stools, Hannah Arendt, and Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew. I was anxious to find out just how all this (most pressingly, the joint-stools) could be connected under the proclaimed theme of “Early Modern/Post-Modern: Inventing the Political Subject.”

For some, the field of Law and Literature is symptomatic of the American university’s fetishization of interdisciplinarity, geared more towards marketing appeal than genuine intellectual inquiry. Depending on your perspective, it’s a way to make literature more relevant by relating it to the outside world, or a way to pretend to be engaging with the outside world while still remaining comfortably ensconced in academia. Debates over intellectual jurisdiction often ensue.

To my relief, the presenters at the one-day, single-panel conference didn’t waste time making the case for Law & Lit, opting instead to close-read and cross-examine each other’s arguments. All three panelists questioned the emphasis placed on “historicism” – briefly, the idea that texts should be understood in their historical contexts – and what the over-determined and often undermined term even meant. At one point, Kahn wondered whether “thinking with Shakespeare,” the project proposed in Lupton’s book of the same name, could really be called “historicist,” or if it could better be called simply “thinking.”

The relevance of this particular disciplinary intersection – between early modern law and literature and post-modern law and literature – was perhaps most aptly articulated by Kahn, who, in discussing her paper on “Political Theology and Liberal Culture: Strauss, Schmitt, Spinoza and Arendt,” posited that because early modern texts created the conditions for modernity, looking back on these texts can help us diagnose contemporary problems and give rise to alternative modes of thinking about the present. We might not be so flummoxed by current crises of political theology, from Islamic jihadism to Christian fundamentalism, if we paid better attention to how influential writings on the topic have been read and misread in the past.

The event’s format deviated from the norm of scholars reading their papers and fielding audience questions. Each of the three papers, copies of which were available at the conference, was introduced by another panelist’s commentary, to which the author could then respond; additional comments from other legal and literary scholars followed before the forum was opened up for questions. While feedback was delivered mostly as prepared remarks, the proceedings were enlivened by a spirit of collaborative openness. Kahn’s discussion of Lupton’s paper noted the early modern simultaneity of common law – in which the wife was considered her husband’s property – and canon law, under which a suitor must earn a woman’s consent through courtship. Using this legal lens, Kahn proposed, could lead to an alternative conception of Kate’s personhood in The Taming of the Shrew. Lupton said she found this idea useful, but pointed out that canon law didn’t necessarily endow women with any real agency: a “woman’s consent” to marriage often had little to do with the woman herself, but was instead used as a rhetorical strategy by men (like when Capulet waxed moralistic about his daughter’s consent in Romeo and Juliet).

I didn’t quite follow all this, and I’ve probably grossly misrendered whatever problematic was being (re-)problematized. But I did get the impression that the attendees were really, for the most part, engaging with each other. As someone new to the conference circuit and still at sea in my own field, I found the conversational, mutual-presentation format extremely conducive to, well, not zoning out during talks. No matter how eminently readable, the most riveting arguments can be difficult to follow when recited in monotone; by the time a paper is deemed worthy of sharing, I’ve sensed, the author is already weary of it. Having someone else explain, or question, what the papers were about kept things fresh for both the authors and the audience. For those who hadn’t read the material beforehand, the co-panelists’ commentary – which included both summary and critique – helped both focus the articles’ salient aspects and make them accessible to a diverse audience. I study French and English literature, and I attended the conference with my mother, a recent American History PhD and recovering lawyer, and we both came away invigorated by fresh ideas – this despite her wariness of Comp Lit jargon and my usual response of catatonia when confronted with legalese.

I hope to attend more conferences that work like this: interactive and well-organized, interdisciplinary but intellectually focused on the timely and the timeless, putting literature in conversation with politics without putting it on trial. Though I admit, I never quite figured out how the joint-stools fit in.

I tore open my copy of Food Rules, the slim new eater’s manual by Berkeley journalism professor Michael Pollan, with an appetite well whetted by his earlier In Defense of Food. The fun-sized Food Rules packaging suggested the literary equivalent of a bag of chips, but I was glad to see Pollan better targeting his intended audience; the kind of person unwilling to turn on the stove is unlikely to commit to a full-length book on eating better. In all his work, Pollan supplements a no-nonsense attitude towards food with investigative rigor and a dash of wit, a recipe that appeals to any graduate student with a culinary conscience.

Food Rules elaborates and expands Pollan’s pithy food protocol – “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants” – into 64 “rules.” Pollan’s goal is less to chastise than to serve up advice in bite-sized pieces (“Pay more, eat less”) and offer mnemonic devices (“The whiter the bread, the sooner you’ll be dead” – yikes!). Pollan recognizes that the standard American diet, invested by corporate money and government policy with an aura of natural inevitability, is a hard habit to break, and complicated criticisms of the food industry’s fourberie can be difficult to digest. Exposing our diet’s absurdities – and offering appetizing alternatives – makes the case better than just telling us over and over that we really shouldn’t be eating those Cheetos.

Pollan is most convincing when he plays the bricoleur, taking useful tools for thinking about food from both nutritional science and traditional wisdom (which, as he demonstrates, is often eventually backed up by science). He counsels us to “eat our colors” because, as mothers have known for centuries, brightly-colored vegetables are good for you (or because, as scientists have recently found out, they contain polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotenoids). His appeal to simplicity helps counter the notion that only well-educated elites have the time and means to enjoy good, healthful food. Not everyone can afford organic, and busy working moms might scoff at “slow food,” but we can all agree to spend less money on soda and stop obsessing over antioxidants. Pollan wants to suggest that, if we just consult our common sense, we can have our occasional local, grass-fed, organic beef and eat it too.

With its piecemeal approach, Food Rules is more concerned with making eating better easy on an everyday basis than with tackling the deeper issues that make eating well so hard. But Pollan does plant the seeds for how our food choices can help restore ethical and economic balance, on a personal and a societal level. Yes, farmers’ market produce can cost more; but cutting back on meat, restaurant meals, and mindless snacking is good for your body, your bank account, and the planet, and that’s no coincidence. In The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Pollan outlines how traditional agriculture’s perfect economy – cows eat grass; cow manure fertilizes grass; cows eat grass – has been ruptured on both ends: cows eat processed corn; toxic cow manure requires fiscally and environmentally costly storage. It’s easier to see how absurd, unappetizing, and inefficient our diet is by looking not only at multiple pictures, but also at a single bigger picture, by situating our alimentary attitudes in a larger social, political, and economic context.

Some readers of Food Rules may find it not quite substantial enough to satisfy their hunger for nutritional information. The book’s breezy tone, and its reluctance to address its premises, are understandable: publishers, like snack-food manufacturers, push products that require minimal processing on the consumer’s part; we want things that melt in our mouths, not stick in our teeth or wedge stubbornly in our brains. After all, if you suggest too strongly that the way we eat has everything to do with the way we work, sleep, play, medicate, produce, and consume – in short, with the very fabric of our society –  you’ve far exceeded the bounds of a snack-sized airplane read. But for those whose tastebuds are tantalized by Food Rules, Pollan offers up heartier fare in books like The Omnivore’s Dilemma, with analysis that, for all its density, is surprisingly easy to swallow (if you’re willing to chew a little first).

Pollan’s philosophy can only become a staple in our cultural cupboard if we abandon the notion that our bodies can be hermetically sealed off from the body politic. Just as we should aim to eat whole foods, not polysyllabic nutrients or numbers of calories, and adopt whole diets (like that of the French) instead of just their most appealing aspects (more red wine, anyone?), we need to live whole lives, choosing diets that make sense in our own social, political, and economic contexts. The fact that “food cultures are embedded in societies and economies and ecologies” requires further consideration than the passing acknowledgment Food Rules affords it. Italian cuisine, driven in large part by fresh seasonal produce, may translate better than the Inuit reliance on seal blubber, but even European eating strategies are incompatible with many Americans’ workaday lives. After all, you can only “After lunch, sleep awhile. After dinner, walk a mile,” as rule #54 prescribes, if your schedule allows for siestas.  If Professor Pollan’s students take his advice, he might end up with some sleepy afternoon seminars.

If this is the second semester of your first year, a belated welcome to the Bay Area!  If you have been here a little while, chances are that you have filled out your paperwork to become a California resident, giving up your old state driver’s license and gaining the requisite tuition reduction.  Even if you have been here your whole life, how much do you really know about the ground beneath your feet? Who lived in your apartment before you did?

I have to admit that I didn’t feel much of a connection to the Bay Area until relatively recently.  I missed my home, where I was familiar with the local history, geology, and native plants and animals.  Did you know that nearly half of trees species you see around Berkeley and San Francisco are originally from Australia and New Zealand?  I didn’t, until I had a look inside Mike Sullivan’s The Trees of San Francisco, available for check out from the Bioscience and Natural Resources Library.  The blue gum eucalyptus grove, native to Australia, contains the tallest trees on campus, indeed the tallest stand of hardwood trees in North America.

If you don’t have a lot of interest in the not-so-local plants, take a look at Oakland Geology, a blog dedicated to local geology.  Andrew Alden highlights the rocks around town.  According to Alden, “every neighborhood in Oakland with a “mont” in its name has bedrock exposed.”  You’ll know you’ve got it when you can tell the difference between serpentine and blueshist.

An old Sanborn fire insurance map showing the lay of the land along Shattuck Avenue in 1894

Finally, how old is the building you live in?  Was your aging south-side Victorian always chopped up into 12 tiny apartments with hallways for bedrooms?  You can do a little detective work by looking up the old Sanborn fire insurance maps, available digitally through the UC Berkeley library.  It helps to click on the index first to locate the pages containing the street nearest to you.  I found out that my old apartment was built right next to Strawberry Creek before the city moved the stream underground.  Also, most street margins on the major thoroughfares around town have trolley tracks underneath them—the Key Route system served most of the East Bay until it was dismantled as part of the General Motors streetcar conspiracy.  If you happen to live in Oakland, Michael Migurski has done a lot of the heavy cartographic lifting for you at Old Oakland, where you can select and overlay different historical layers.

Welcome to your new home!

Photo by John-Morgan

Photo by John-Morgan

Since I’ve been home after my first semester as a Comparative Literature graduate student at Berkeley, I’ve spent a lot of time fielding questions from friends and relatives about what, exactly, I’ve been doing. My usual response – “Oh, you know; comparing the literatures, to see which one is the best” – tends to elicit nervous, confused laughter, and only thinly veils what I’ve actually spent all semester doing: wondering what, exactly, I’m doing.

As an undergraduate, I regarded graduate students with a certain baffled admiration. Their language was both idiosyncratic and predictable, as if codified in some dictionary whose existence it was their duty to deny. They all talked with the same calculated haltingness, in the contained cadence of seminar-speak. Where did they all learn to discreetly smirk at Lacan, question whether violence was being effaced on the level of the text, and wonder about the role of “affect”? Where did they learn to speak as if everything was in quotation marks (and/or parentheses)? And where could I learn to do that too? (This is a good place to start.)

As much as I rolled my eyes at this kind of academic posturing, I had an overwhelming desire to crack the code and join the ranks of this secret society. I also really liked reading things and writing about them. So I applied to graduate school, struggling to frame my questions of purpose as statements, awkwardly incorporating snippets of that foreign grad student language and hoping that by the time I got there, I would be problematizing, historicizing, and reifying with the fluency of a native.

Berkeley’s Comp Lit students, however, turned out not to be the jargon-spouting aliens I had feared. Worse: they were human, and spoke English, and were perfectly nice and friendly, and I still didn’t understand what was going on half the time. I felt like there were certain unsaid assumptions shared by everyone else about how to approach texts, assumptions too obvious to put into words and thus impossible to ask about. I became quite sure I didn’t know how to read, and wondered what it was I had been doing to books all these years, since it certainly couldn’t be called reading. The areas I thought I was interested in now seemed like they weren’t “areas” at all. I realized I didn’t know what “area,” or any other remotely abstract word, even meant. After stumbling through my first few seminars, never sure if I was saying what the professor wanted to hear or exactly the opposite, I took some solace in the fact that the rest of my cohort seemed as lost as I was. Second-years, third-years, and even seasoned dissertators assured me that they still didn’t know what they were doing, but I didn’t believe them; their claims of confusion were suspiciously coherent. They dutifully asked me if I had any questions about the program, and if they could offer any guidance, but I was too confused to even know what questions to ask.

Sitting around wallowing in a vortex of self-doubt, and dragging my peers in with me, turned out not to be much help in figuring out what I was doing in graduate school. What did help was actually doing stuff: immersing myself in texts, trying to work through them, tentatively venturing ideas about them. A professor’s advice to consider seminar papers as works in progress, potential springboards for further exploration on a topic, helped quell my anxieties about my general lack of direction. It also reminded me why I wanted to go to graduate school in the first place: I think literary analysis is really fun.

Starting graduate school at Berkeley just as the university was hit with budget cuts and their fallout both amplified and helped refine my existential woes. I started to wonder more and more about the economic value of intellectual labor, especially in the ostensibly insolvent humanities. How do we assign a monetary value to the pricelessness of literature, and why should I be getting paid to study it? (That last one I didn’t want to question too rigorously.) These questions ended up informing my academic interests, and both of my seminar papers touched on the relationship between literature and money. Graduate school, for better or for worse, turned out not to be as isolated from the “real world” as I had imagined.

Though I’ve tried not to think too much about school since I turned in those seminar papers, I do feel like I have a little bit of a better idea of what I’m doing than when I started. I’m starting to understand how my more-experienced peers could express their confusion with such calm countenances, and that a lot of graduate school is realizing that we don’t know what, exactly, we’re doing, but that trying to figure it out – by reading, by writing, by exploring, by interacting – is a worthy and rewarding goal in itself. And if all else fails, I can always say that I’m engendering the linguistic construction of the specular economy with an eye to the historicization of desire.

Looking for last-minute holiday gifts? Enjoy handmade stuff? Then check out the Renegade Craft Fair at Fort Mason in San Francisco this weekend. Free admission.RenegadeHolidaySaleSanFranFlyer

For 50 million people living in South Asia, arsenic-contaminated groundwater poses a serious health problem. Case van Genuchten, a PhD student in Civil and Environmental Engineering, is working to see if rust can be part of the solution.

This problem is most severe in Bangladesh, where more than 40 million people drink arsenic-laden water. In some places, arsenic levels are more than 100 times the World Health Organization’s recommended upper limit of 10 parts per billion. Already arsenic poisoning is evident among 40,000 Bangladeshis. And without some kind of intervention, it is expected that arsenic poisoning will eventually cause 10% of deaths in this country of 140 million.

100L Electrode Assembly, the assembly of sheets of iron that generate rust. This assembly will be used in a prototype settler that the team will be field testing this summer in West Bengal, India.

100L Electrode Assembly, the assembly of iron sheets that generate rust. This assembly will be used in a prototype that the team will be field testing this summer in West Bengal, India.

Conventional arsenic treatment methods are too expensive for nearly half of the people drinking arsenic-contaminated water. To address this need, the Berkeley Arsenic Alleviation Group (BAAG), of which Case is a part, aims to provide affordable, sustainable technologies that remove arsenic from groundwater. Their goal is to develop a technology that removes arsenic efficiently and cheaply and that can be easily operated and maintained by local communities. One of the two techniques for arsenic removal developed by Professor Ashok Gadgil at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is ElectroChemical Arsenic Remediation or ECAR. In this process, iron is placed in water with high levels of arsenic, then electricity is used to dissolve the iron which produces rust. Arsenic is known to bind very strongly to the surface of rust particles. Consequently, rust — along with the arsenic bound to its surface — can be removed from the water through filtration or settling. ECAR requires only small quantities of iron—iron nails for example are sufficient—and such low amounts of electricity that it can be powered with a car battery or solar cells.

Standard ECAR Batch Test. This how most of Case's ECAR tests are done, on a much smaller scale and with much smaller electrodes.

Standard ECAR Batch Test. This is how most of Case's ECAR tests are done, on a much smaller scale and with much smaller electrodes.

The goal of Case’s research is to understand ECAR’s reaction products; in other words, the formation of rust and its interaction with arsenic. The information he generates will reveal the mechanism for arsenic removal on rust and enable members of BAAG to determine the long-term stability of the waste generated through ECAR. To assess the arsenic-laden particles made in ECAR, Case uses Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Absorption Spectroscopy, which provide information on particle morphology, structure, and composition. Case’s research is driven by concern for the millions of people lacking access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation as well as a fascination with the chemistry of metals in aqueous systems. Fortunately, he’s found a project that satisfies both these interests.

This project has proved fortuitous in other ways too. An accidental discovery in the lab has added a promising new dimension to Case’s research. Although we’re most familiar with common orange rust, there are actually several different kinds of rust.  When he began the project, Case’s focus was on orange rust. But one day in the lab, he noticed that instead of the typical orange rust his experiment was producing a rust so dark green it appeared almost black. His fear that he’d damaged the power supply wiring soon turned to curiosity when he saw that this new particle settled much faster than orange rust. Further testing revealed that Green Rust, which has a much larger particle size, settles in under an hour, a huge improvement over orange rust which takes several days to settle out.  If this discovery pans out, it could eliminate the need for a filter or coagulant in future ECAR prototype designs, further reducing costs for this potentially life-saving technology.

Related:

Photo by Jeremy Farmer

Photo by Jeremy Farmer

Suspense is key to a well-told story. So it should have come as no surprise that Ira Glass, host and executive producer of This American Life, began his performance at Zellerbach Hall in a way at once surprising and amusing. Reproducing the invisibility of the radio, he started speaking in the dark.

Eventually the lights went up and Glass wove together stories from his life with clips from the show to present a funny and moving picture of some of what goes on behind the scenes at This American Life. While the audience learned about fact checking and creating the show’s themes, stories were Glass’s real subject. He has spent his professional life honing the craft of telling a good story.  Though the stories on This American Life often address serious issues, the show’s staff seek out stories that at their core contain humor, surprise, a sense of discovery, and hopefully joy. Ultimately, Glass hopes stories will build empathy and awaken the listener’s sense of curiosity about the world in which we live. Not only did Glass’s performance leave me thinking about how to tell better stories, but in a time of often gloomy economic news, I also found it inspiring to hear someone speak so passionately about his career.

***

Cal Performances offers many other entertaining shows, although not all are as uplifting as an evening with Ira Glass. Earlier this fall, I had the opportunity to see Druid Ireland’s production of The Walworth Farce. Not being a theater buff, I picked this play because the name suggested a comedy. Dark comedy, with an emphasis on the dark, was closer to the truth. As the performance progressed, I realized that the farce was the play (within a play) that the three main characters enacted daily. While the folly of the story they rehearsed became apparent early on, it wasn’t until the final moments that the full extent of its tragic power was revealed. Although nothing like what I expected – owing to my failure  to do my homework – The Walworth Farce demanded my full attention and was an engaging and challenging experience as a result.  I also enjoyed the novelty of watching a performance in the Zellerbach Playhouse, a campus space that was previously unknown to me.

***

Early this summer, I sent out an email soliciting advice for incoming graduate students to be published in the Orientation Issue of The Berkeley Graduate.  The first response I received was from a graduate student (Hi, Sarah!) who wrote that she wished she would have known years ago that UCB students and graduate students get 50% off tickets to Cal Performances events. As the campus center for the performing arts, Cal Performances features dance, music, theater, and the occasional speaker, a wide enough variety to offer something for most tastes. If you haven’t been yet, there’s still time to sneak in a performance before the semester ends.  The Hard Nut, Mark Morris’s reinterpretation of the Nutcracker, is playing this weekend.

Berkeley students interested in studying water are lucky that we have on campus one of the few libraries in the country devoted to water: the nationally acclaimed Water Resources Center Archives (WRCA). Begun in 1958, WRCA’s one-of-a-kind collection is devoted to recording water development in California and throughout the arid West.  Because struggles over water have shaped so much of the state’s history and landscapes, it is hard to underestimate the significance of these materials. The libraries rich holdings include technical reports from sources such as local water agencies, consultants and engineering firms; specialized newsletters; maps; videos; and an extensive photograph collection that captures the construction of California’s major water projects and much more.

The Whitney Siphon, Saugus Division, 1909, from the WRCA's Lippincott Collection

The Whitney Siphon, Saugus Division, 1909, from the WRCA's Lippincott Collection

WRCA pulls together a wide array of water-related materials that are difficult to find elsewhere, let alone all in one place. Their ongoing efforts to collect and preserve water-related information have recently focused on capturing electronic data, as more reports, meeting minutes, and information appear only online.  Using web archiving tools, librarians are able to save and make searchable otherwise ephemeral data from websites, for example those run by water and irrigation districts, or federal, state, and local water agencies.

For those interested in exploring further, WRCA’s collection can be accessed through both Melvyl and Oskicat. One element of this collection that Head Librarian Linda Vida suspects is underutilized by graduate students are WRCA’s archival materials, which must be searched with finding aids.  Fortunately, these finding aids are now available online. WRCA also participates in the eScholarship Publishing program, which makes the full-text of scholarly publications available online for free. The recordings of the California Colloquium on Water lectures are another online resource that students may find useful. WRCA also sends one student each semester on a Water Education Foundation tour. During these 2-3 day tours, you will learn more about state water issues and meet other water professionals. Join WRCA’s mailing list to find out how to be considered for this opportunity by sending an email to waterarc@library.berkeley.edu. To keep up-to-date on the latest WRCA news you can also follow them on Facebook.

Men working with water jets, 1912 from the Lippincott Collection

Men working with water jets, 1912 from the Lippincott Collection

Sadly, the future of the WRCA on Berkeley’s campus is in jeopardy. Although WRCA is located at Berkeley, it is funded by the Office of the President for the benefit of the UC system as a whole. In October, Dan Dooley, the Vice President of the Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources (ANR) announced that to save money ANR would seek a UC campus to adopt the library and its $230,000 annual cost.  Berkeley risks losing this unique resource. This would be a serious loss to the campus community and water professionals who regularly consult WRCA in their work. WRCA is truly a public resource; a UC library card is not needed to check out or use their materials, and the library would like to maintain its liberal lending policy. For now, the library will remain open in its current location (410 O’Brien Hall) until June 30, 2010. If you’re interested in supporting WRCA’s bid to stay at Berkeley, you can send an email to Linda Vida (lvida@library.berkeley.edu) expressing your interest in helping their cause. WRCA librarians are compiling a list of people who are willing to take part in a letter writing campaign and will send out an email to the group once they’ve decided on a course of action. However things end up – and WRCA is definitely a campus resource worth fighting for – I highly recommend that you stop by WRCA, either to become acquainted with their collection or to enjoy a peaceful place to study.

Related:

Research highlights: Water

« Older entries § Newer entries »