Author: Brian Merchant
Publication Date: 4/27/11
Link: http://wwww.treehugger.com/files/2011/04/half-america-regular-breathes-unhealthy-polluted-air.php?campaign=th_rss
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://earthtrends.wri.org/images/Effects-Chart.jpg&imgrefurl=http://earthtrends.wri.org/updates/node/325&usg=_7317MjmsXB7o8rI1bem-aImSDOA=&h=470&w=450 This shows a chart of all the pollutants commonly released by air pollution and their sources and health effects. Also, if you click on the link that says website for this image on google, the website is very helpful and has good information on air pollution.
Summary: Can you really wrap your mind around the fact that more than half our population lives in places where it is unhealthy to breathe?This statistic is mindboggling and the major sources of this pollution are the same sources there have been for the last decade. Those sources include: auto emissions, oil refineries, and factories, just to name a few. Despite the fact that our air quality is getting better and there is a trend of improvement, we still have 154 million Americans that routinely breath in air that is detrimental to human health. Something needs to be done in order to improve the health and safety of our country. The Clean Air Act is one of the most powerful laws that has helped us keep air pollution levels decreasing, but in addition, something must be passed or created.
Opinion/Reflection: I think that this is a very concerning statistic and article. Not only are millions of Americans, being put at high risk for asthma, lung cancer, and possibly death, but the air is still being polluted and climate changes are happening. The same sources have remained for the past 10 years, yet scientists and others have yet to come up with a solution. Sure, there are alternative energy sources, but those sources have some downfalls and are usually expensive, whereas fossil fuels can be cheap and can produce a lot of energy. The way that this ties in to my life is that my relatives live in California and if they were to die of lung cancer, it would probably be related to the terrible air pollution there. All in all, this is a serious problem and hopefully this study will raise awareness about the dangerous situation we are in.
3 Questions:
1. Are you concerned about this statistic?
2. Should there be another law in adddition to the Clean Air Act? If so, what would the law say and prohibit/regulate?
3. Do you think that Horsham and areas around Philadelphia are part of the 154 million Americans breathing in unhelathy pollutants?
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
To Cut Smog, Navistar Blazes Risky Path of Its Own
Author: Tom Zeller Jr. and Norman Mayersohn
Publication Date: Tom Zeller Jr and Norman Mayersohn
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/business/energy-environment/05truck.html?_r=1&ref=airpollution
Summary: Navistar, truck maker company, has come up with a new engine to release less Nitrogen oxide. Nitrogen oxide is a main cause of smog to occur. In 2o10, all truck companies had to make all new engines being made to release nearly zero limits of nitrogen oxide levels. Navistar decided to go a different route and make an engine that releases a nuetralized level of nitrogen oxide. They claim that the new add on technology that has be required is so flawed that it does not meet clean air requirements. However, even this newly developed engine has a flaw of its own. Reducing the temperature combustion will reduce nitrogen oxide emissions, but doing this will increase soot. Soot levels can be reduced by alternating the timing of combustion, but that raises fuel consumption. If this new engine is approved by the EPA, then it will be up to other truck companies to buy this product to reduce smog from occuring.
The picture shows the new engine being tested in Navistar.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/04/05/business/Truckjp.html
Opinion: I think this is a great idea to lower the chances of smog occuring. Not only will this engine benefit to less smog but it will also help the environment be less polluted. Also this engine is like a new alternative engery to keep our environment clean. Using this engine can help decrease the chances of a smog as bad as the one in Denora from ever happening again. I remember learning in class that the Denora smog happening from too many pollutants being released in the air from factories and vehicles. This new engine can be a very big step to reducing air pollution.
Questions:
1) Do you think this engine is a good idea?
2) If you were another truck company would you buy this engine from Navistar?
3) Do you think the increased release of soot could be a problem to our environment?
Publication Date: Tom Zeller Jr and Norman Mayersohn
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/business/energy-environment/05truck.html?_r=1&ref=airpollution
Summary: Navistar, truck maker company, has come up with a new engine to release less Nitrogen oxide. Nitrogen oxide is a main cause of smog to occur. In 2o10, all truck companies had to make all new engines being made to release nearly zero limits of nitrogen oxide levels. Navistar decided to go a different route and make an engine that releases a nuetralized level of nitrogen oxide. They claim that the new add on technology that has be required is so flawed that it does not meet clean air requirements. However, even this newly developed engine has a flaw of its own. Reducing the temperature combustion will reduce nitrogen oxide emissions, but doing this will increase soot. Soot levels can be reduced by alternating the timing of combustion, but that raises fuel consumption. If this new engine is approved by the EPA, then it will be up to other truck companies to buy this product to reduce smog from occuring.
The picture shows the new engine being tested in Navistar.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/04/05/business/Truckjp.html
Opinion: I think this is a great idea to lower the chances of smog occuring. Not only will this engine benefit to less smog but it will also help the environment be less polluted. Also this engine is like a new alternative engery to keep our environment clean. Using this engine can help decrease the chances of a smog as bad as the one in Denora from ever happening again. I remember learning in class that the Denora smog happening from too many pollutants being released in the air from factories and vehicles. This new engine can be a very big step to reducing air pollution.
Questions:
1) Do you think this engine is a good idea?
2) If you were another truck company would you buy this engine from Navistar?
3) Do you think the increased release of soot could be a problem to our environment?
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Breast Cancer Possibly Linked to Air Pollution
Title: Breast Cancer Possibly Linked to Air Pollution
Author: Michael Graham Richard
Date: 10.12.2010
Publication: Tree Hugger: A Discovered Company
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/10/breast-cancer-possibly-linked-to-air-pollution-study.php
Summary:
A study that was recently done by researchers in Montreal, Canada. The study that was done discovered that air pollution could possibly be one of the linking factors to causing breast cancer. Across the city, the researchers found Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) varied between 5 ppb to over 30 ppb. It was discovered that the risk of contracting breast cancer increased by about 25 per cent with every increase of NO2 of five parts per billion. This is not saying that nitrogen dioxide causes cancer, but it is twice as likely to contract it when you are more exposed to it. Further study is required because there is not that much research done about it.
Opinion:
This was pretty shocking. I'm not that worried about it, because it mentioned in the article that it is not certain and there is still more research to be done. However, if this is actually is a problem, we DEFINITELY need to do something about it. Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of death in women these days. If something as easily fixed as air pollution is going to cause it, we need to do something about it. The way that this connects to me personally is that my grandmother has breast cancer, and although I doubt that air pollution caused it, that could be a reason for it.
Graphic:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.treehugger.com/pink-ribbon-breast-cancer-air-pollution-photo.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/10/breast-cancer-possibly-linked-to-air-pollution-study.php&usg=__jBwEBIvEA0mp4K3wSDSl2Ls1sFE=&h=352&w=468&sz=26&hl=en&start=0&sig2=6mXXxPIXaI_7VgRL2BavDw&zoom=1&tbnid=CzEEmsoZ_dc5ZM:&tbnh=161&tbnw=213&ei=L4LdTbH1PITZgQfC0sUN&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dbreast%2Bcancer%2Bair%2Bpollution%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1045%26bih%3D484%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=312&sqi=2&page=1&ndsp=8&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=68&ty=99
This is just the picture from the article, but it's just a picture that shows how they are connected.
Questions:
1. Do you think something needs to be done about this? (Do you think it is a big problem since there isn't that much research on it?)
2. How can we as a country prevent this?
3. Do you think this is a problem in our area?
Becca :)
Monday, May 23, 2011
EPA Releases Final Report on Toxic Air Pollution Near Manhattan
Title: EPA Releases Final Report on Toxic Air Pollution Near Manhattan I.S. 143 School Finds Pollutants Below Levels of Concern
Author: Elias Rodriguez
Date: 5-19-2011
Link: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/98C3CCB88141C48885257895004FEEA5
Summary: The EPA tested the Intermediate School 143 of Manhattan, New York, a middle school for several air pollutants. They started testing in April and it lasted for two months. The main pollutants the EPA was testing for was 1,3-butadiene and benzene which come primarily from mobile sources such as; cars, trucks and buses. Since Manhattan is filled with transportation, it was the perfect representative for this study. It was revealed that there are no huge amounts of pollutants to cause much harm.
Opinion: I think this is great. I like to see people actually doing something to make sure, even if the situation is fine. The EPA showed that by testing the air quality of Manhattan. They could have said, “Eh, what’s the point of testing for if it will just give us results and no improvement.” I’m happy to see the air is not extremely toxic (yet) and that some people are doing their job in this country.
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.petaflop.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/broadway-corner-w72-street-downtown-manhattan-nyc-new-york-city-usa-dscn8509.jpg&imgrefurl=http://blog.petaflop.de/2008/02/02/day-113-new-york-city-2/&usg=__f456cG4bn5SjMSwyBXM2qbeNNgY=&h=331&w=400&sz=55&hl=en&start=0&sig2=M7M4k_aXWVkrZ70P_sgMEw&zoom=1&tbnid=rBg3M-WmTCYzqM:&tbnh=126&tbnw=154&ei=mbnaTeqwKor1gAfx9qxY&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmanhattan%2Bnew%2Byork%2Bstreets%2527%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1020%26bih%3D558%26gbv%3D2%26tbm%3Disch&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=412&vpy=74&dur=187&hovh=204&hovw=247&tx=153&ty=158&sqi=2&page=1&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&biw=1005&bih=558
This picture is a good visual of the streets and how much pollution can be given off in just that tiny little second the picture was taken.
Questions:
1) Should our school have the same tests done?
2) What other tests could our district do?
3) Are you glad to see stuff is being done?
4) What is another representative for a different type of test?
5) If their tests came up that they did have excessive pollution, what might of that done to their future lives?
Author: Elias Rodriguez
Date: 5-19-2011
Link: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/98C3CCB88141C48885257895004FEEA5
Summary: The EPA tested the Intermediate School 143 of Manhattan, New York, a middle school for several air pollutants. They started testing in April and it lasted for two months. The main pollutants the EPA was testing for was 1,3-butadiene and benzene which come primarily from mobile sources such as; cars, trucks and buses. Since Manhattan is filled with transportation, it was the perfect representative for this study. It was revealed that there are no huge amounts of pollutants to cause much harm.
Opinion: I think this is great. I like to see people actually doing something to make sure, even if the situation is fine. The EPA showed that by testing the air quality of Manhattan. They could have said, “Eh, what’s the point of testing for if it will just give us results and no improvement.” I’m happy to see the air is not extremely toxic (yet) and that some people are doing their job in this country.
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://blog.petaflop.de/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/broadway-corner-w72-street-downtown-manhattan-nyc-new-york-city-usa-dscn8509.jpg&imgrefurl=http://blog.petaflop.de/2008/02/02/day-113-new-york-city-2/&usg=__f456cG4bn5SjMSwyBXM2qbeNNgY=&h=331&w=400&sz=55&hl=en&start=0&sig2=M7M4k_aXWVkrZ70P_sgMEw&zoom=1&tbnid=rBg3M-WmTCYzqM:&tbnh=126&tbnw=154&ei=mbnaTeqwKor1gAfx9qxY&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dmanhattan%2Bnew%2Byork%2Bstreets%2527%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1020%26bih%3D558%26gbv%3D2%26tbm%3Disch&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=412&vpy=74&dur=187&hovh=204&hovw=247&tx=153&ty=158&sqi=2&page=1&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&biw=1005&bih=558
This picture is a good visual of the streets and how much pollution can be given off in just that tiny little second the picture was taken.
Questions:
1) Should our school have the same tests done?
2) What other tests could our district do?
3) Are you glad to see stuff is being done?
4) What is another representative for a different type of test?
5) If their tests came up that they did have excessive pollution, what might of that done to their future lives?
Saturday, May 14, 2011
New Jersey an unlikely leader in solar energy
Title:New Jersey an unlikely leader in solar energy
Author: Ronda Kaysen
Date: 5/13/11
Link:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110513/us_nm/us_solar_newjersey;_ylt=AoHYg6c_gxM0jOnrncvg3r8S.MwF;_ylu=X3oDMTJwZjB2Z3Q3BGFzc2V0A25tLzIwMTEwNTEzL3VzX3NvbGFyX25ld2plcnNleQRwb3MDMTYEc2VjA3luX3BhZ2luYXRlX3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDbmV3amVyc2V5YW51
Summary:
This article is about how the state of New Jersey is the U.S.'s second highest producer in solar energy. The first highest state producing solar energy is California, where it is sunny over half of the time. In New Jersey it is only sunny 3 out of every 8 days. Some people are upset because New Jersey does not get a lot of sun, but they are wasting money on solar panels. In New Jersey all energy suppliers must get 20% of their energy from "clean sources", but only 2% from solar energy. Some of New Jersey's solar panels are on lights, rooftops, and farms. Rutgers university 60% of their campus is expected to be powered by solar energy in the upcoming years! Although the state leads the way in solar energy, it is expected that the amount of solar panels being built in New Jersey slows down very soon due to people thinking that the state has "Strict laws" on alternative energies.
Graphic: http://solar.calfinder.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/nj-rooftop-solar.jpg
This is a picture of a typical New Jersey roof top with solar panels on it.
Opinion:
I think that it is great that New Jersey has the second most amount of solar panels in the United States. With our reliance on fossil fuels causing us problems, I think that we should encourage other states to produce more solar energy. I do not understand why people are mad that New Jersey has a lot of solar panels because it is cloudy. Solar panels still work in the clouds, and they are good for the environment. My house's power is off of fossil fuels, and I realize that it is very bad for the environment. I hope that in the future my house, and other houses will be running off of alternative energies. I hope that there is a rise in the amount of solar panels placed in New Jersey because it is good for the environment. I don't think that laws can ever be too strict when it is dealing with alternative energies because we NEED to switch our energy power soon! I hope that more people realize that in the years to come.
Questions:
1) Is it good or bad that New Jersey has so many solar panels?
2) Would you buy a house that is powered by solar energy?
3) Do you think that other states will put in more alternative energies soon?
4) Do you like solar energy, or would you rather a different type of energy?
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Trash Sorting Robot Could Reduce Waste Going to Lanfill by 50%
Title of Article: Robot Could Reduce Waste Going to Landfill by 50%
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Publication Date: 4/20/11
Link: www.treehugger.com/files/2011/04/trash-sorting-robot-could-reduce-waste-going-to-landfill-by-50.php?campaign=th_rss
Summary: I think that this is a great invention for our world and could be very beneficial to our community. Many times items that can be recycled are thrown out and this new robot may be the key to preserving those recyclabes from going to landfills. This robot would use metal detection, weight measurement, and 3-D scanning, just to name a few of the ways the robot would be able to detect these recycables. If this robot is succesful it could both help recycle more items and lower the trash amount and at the same time can help the health and safety of workers who have to sort through hazardous trash such as construction trash. All in all, this robot was a great invention and will shortly play a major role in our world.
Opinion: I am fascinated by how advanced our technology is that we are able to have a robot sort our own trash for us. However, it is a shame that this robot needed to be invented and we in the first place should be aware of what to recycle and what not to so we would not be sending recyclabes to landfills. Despite this, this robot is a great opportunity for us to conserve more space to store our trash and to reuse more products. The way that this connects with my personal life is in a bad way. Usually, I have the terrible habit of throwing out my water bottles and gatorade bottles into the trash instead of recycling them. I hope to improve and grow out of this habbit. Hopefully, if my trash was on a conveyor belt, the robot would be able to pick out my recyclabes and reuse them. Overall, this robot was a great idea and will benefit many people in the near future.
3 Questions:
1. Do you think that this robot is a good idea? Why or why not?
2. Should we use this robot to replace workers who sort trash?
3. Would you use this robot at your home for your own personal trash if you could?
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Publication Date: 4/20/11
Link: www.treehugger.com/files/2011/04/trash-sorting-robot-could-reduce-waste-going-to-landfill-by-50.php?campaign=th_rss
Summary: I think that this is a great invention for our world and could be very beneficial to our community. Many times items that can be recycled are thrown out and this new robot may be the key to preserving those recyclabes from going to landfills. This robot would use metal detection, weight measurement, and 3-D scanning, just to name a few of the ways the robot would be able to detect these recycables. If this robot is succesful it could both help recycle more items and lower the trash amount and at the same time can help the health and safety of workers who have to sort through hazardous trash such as construction trash. All in all, this robot was a great invention and will shortly play a major role in our world.
Opinion: I am fascinated by how advanced our technology is that we are able to have a robot sort our own trash for us. However, it is a shame that this robot needed to be invented and we in the first place should be aware of what to recycle and what not to so we would not be sending recyclabes to landfills. Despite this, this robot is a great opportunity for us to conserve more space to store our trash and to reuse more products. The way that this connects with my personal life is in a bad way. Usually, I have the terrible habit of throwing out my water bottles and gatorade bottles into the trash instead of recycling them. I hope to improve and grow out of this habbit. Hopefully, if my trash was on a conveyor belt, the robot would be able to pick out my recyclabes and reuse them. Overall, this robot was a great idea and will benefit many people in the near future.
3 Questions:
1. Do you think that this robot is a good idea? Why or why not?
2. Should we use this robot to replace workers who sort trash?
3. Would you use this robot at your home for your own personal trash if you could?
Friday, May 6, 2011
Futuristic Laptop Concept Features Solar Panel Cover, Charger
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Date: 5-4-11
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/futuristic-laptop-concept-features-solar-panel-cover-charger.php?campaign=th_rss_science
Summary: Developed by Laura Karnath and Carl Burdick, the Lifebook Leaf is a great idea that may solve many issues with the environment's energy problem. It is an overall nice design. The flexible screen can be folded into a flat surface (almost like an iPad) or like a laptop. There is a rubber interior to prevent screen-scratching. There is also an exterior shell so the device can become waterproof. There are even three cameras for the use of 3D photography and depth sensing is possible. That is for the use of gestures to operate the system or you can use the touch screen. On top of all of that, the exterior is a giant solar panel so it can be charged without the use of electronic plug-ins.
Opinion: This is a great thing to have been made. Personally, last year my sister left home. She left her Mac computer behind and let me use it. The battery drained out a lot and I felt like it always had to be charged. If the computer was solar powered, I could have had light hitting it during the day and I would not have wasted so much energy. These new computer could save time, money and energy. I believe if everybody used one of these, we could waste tons less fuels to get electricity to charge the batteries. Hopefully the new technology is open and affordable to enough people.
Graphic: Well, the graphic I had in mind is on the article itself. So here’s the link again...
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/futuristic-laptop-concept-features-solar-panel-cover-charger.php?campaign=th_rss_science
Questions:
1) Would you use this?
2) Do you think it might look dorky or cool?
3) How often do you usually charge you laptop now (or other electronic device) and would it be beneficial to not have a low battery?
4) Do you think you would leave your laptop outside to charge while you are doing something else inside, or would that be too much of a risk?
5) On a comparison scale, how much electronic energy could schools across the world if they all switched to solar powered devises?
Date: 5-4-11
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/futuristic-laptop-concept-features-solar-panel-cover-charger.php?campaign=th_rss_science
Summary: Developed by Laura Karnath and Carl Burdick, the Lifebook Leaf is a great idea that may solve many issues with the environment's energy problem. It is an overall nice design. The flexible screen can be folded into a flat surface (almost like an iPad) or like a laptop. There is a rubber interior to prevent screen-scratching. There is also an exterior shell so the device can become waterproof. There are even three cameras for the use of 3D photography and depth sensing is possible. That is for the use of gestures to operate the system or you can use the touch screen. On top of all of that, the exterior is a giant solar panel so it can be charged without the use of electronic plug-ins.
Opinion: This is a great thing to have been made. Personally, last year my sister left home. She left her Mac computer behind and let me use it. The battery drained out a lot and I felt like it always had to be charged. If the computer was solar powered, I could have had light hitting it during the day and I would not have wasted so much energy. These new computer could save time, money and energy. I believe if everybody used one of these, we could waste tons less fuels to get electricity to charge the batteries. Hopefully the new technology is open and affordable to enough people.
Graphic: Well, the graphic I had in mind is on the article itself. So here’s the link again...
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/futuristic-laptop-concept-features-solar-panel-cover-charger.php?campaign=th_rss_science
Questions:
1) Would you use this?
2) Do you think it might look dorky or cool?
3) How often do you usually charge you laptop now (or other electronic device) and would it be beneficial to not have a low battery?
4) Do you think you would leave your laptop outside to charge while you are doing something else inside, or would that be too much of a risk?
5) On a comparison scale, how much electronic energy could schools across the world if they all switched to solar powered devises?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)