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?
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Solar-Powered UAV Can Stay Aloft for Years
Title: Solar-Powered UAV Can Stay Aloft for Years
Author: Ned Smith
Publication: LiveScience
Date: September 22nd, 2010
Link: http://www.livescience.com/8649-solar-powered-uav-stay-aloft-years.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+%28LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Summary:
Boeing, a company that makes Commercial Airplanes and Integrated Defense Systems, recently came up with a new air craft that runs on solar energy. It has the same features of an orbiting satellite, but at a much lower cost. The aircraft can fly as high as 60,000 feet at a speed of 70 to 80 knots while performing communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions. This device is called the SolarEagle. During the day, the SolarEagle will collect solar energy and store it in fuel cells for use at night, like most solar powered things do. It is said to make 30 to 90 day missions and it is scheduled to take its first flight in 2013.
Opinion:
I think this is quite interesting. Its pretty cool that they can do the same thing as a satellite while saving money and saving the environment. I remember seeing a commercial for the US Army or something, where they had to stop a satellite collision. With the SolarEagle, this will not happen. The highest an airplane can fly is about 40,000 feet, so it is very likely that nothing too bad will go wrong. I am interested to see how well this works out when they launch it in 2013.
Graphic:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2010/09/17/boeing-solareagle_CelfM_24429.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.greendiary.com/entry/boeing-solareagle-high-altitude-uav-will-stay-aloft-for-five-years/&usg=__q0IFpvZ6A4Z8zWlUYBVuUBwyTpU=&h=308&w=550&sz=15&hl=en&start=0&sig2=dkXUWhcAMvRk93nfsrajyw&zoom=1&tbnid=HMq19X5r50wxGM:&tbnh=112&tbnw=200&ei=wQvCTcvrIYPQgAf98KDLDg&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dboeing%2Bsolareagle%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26nfpr%3D1%26biw%3D1045%26bih%3D484%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=531&page=1&ndsp=8&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0&tx=119&ty=52
I believe this is a picture of the SolarEagle. I'm not sure, but it would make sense. It is pretty new, so it's hard to tell.
Questions:
1. Would you rather keep our original satellites, or try out the SolarEagle? Why?
2. Do you think this will get people around the US to reconsider alternative energy resources?
3. Do you think this is going to work as well as our original satellites?
~Becca~ :)
Monday, May 2, 2011
The Drive Toward Hydrogen Vehicles Just Got Shorter
Title: The Drive Toward Hydrogen Vehicles Just Got Shorter
Author: Science Daily Staff
Publication Date: March 21, 2011
Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110321093701.htm
Summary: Hydrogen possess a high energy content per unit mass compared to petroleum, it can be used to run fuel cells, which can then be used to power a very clean engine. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and other companies have been working on trying to get hydrogen to be used to power cars. Ammonia borane is a chemical hydride that can store hydrogen. Scientist like this chemical because it can store up to 20% which can permit hydrogen-fueled vehicles to travel over 300 miles on one tank. The problem was that scientists had no way of recycling ammonia borane. However, scientist have found a simple way to regenerate ammonia borane from a hyrdrogen depleted spent fuel form back into usable fuel, reactions taking place in a single container. Researchers see vehicles with interchangable tanks so people can hand in their used tank to be recharge in a factory and then to be used once again when the recharge is complete. Many scientist see this process becoming closer and closer to being used.
Graphic: This graphic shows how ammonia burane is transformed into hydrogen fuel.
http://www.google.com/imgresimgurl=http://images.sciencedaily.com/2011/03/110321093701.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110321093701.htm&usg=__Pcmuo4FA6xqcqcVGdxVba8aMBfI=&h=387&w=300&sz=22&hl=en&start=0&sig2=i2qM0s5DZBPTorQo1mWi9w&zoom=1&tbnid=vhpbl4xF_2uXoM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=101&ei=BD2_TeD5CY_pgQe5hdyTBw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtransforming%2Bammonia%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26biw%3D1345%26bih%3D528%26as_st%3Dy%26tbm%3Disch&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=562&page=1&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&tx=61&ty=55
Opinion: I think that could be very helpful to out environment to not cause air pollution. If cars were powered with hydrogen, then carbon dioxide would not be released from gas in cars thus lowing the CO2 releases in the atmosphere. Using hydrogen powered vehiciles could lower the amout of gas being used. With gas being nonrenewable, and with scientists predicts we will eventually run out of it, hydrogen powered cars could be the answer to powering cars in a new way with out gas. With the cost of gas prices going up because it is nonrenewable, using hydrogen powered cars could save people money. I know that when my parents go to get gas and I'm with them, we watch the meter as the price increases every gallon. By the time our tank is full, my parents are paying $60 to $70 for a full tank of gas. I know that when I start to drive, I will not be able to pay that much money every time my car needs to refilled with gas. Hydrogen powered cars would be a great help to save money for people with cars.
Questions:
1) Do you think hydrogen powered cars are a good idea?
2) Would you buy a hydrogen powered car?
3) Do you think hydrogen powered cars could be the solution to replacing gas powered cars?
4) Do you think that is recharge able tank could work in cars?
Author: Science Daily Staff
Publication Date: March 21, 2011
Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110321093701.htm
Summary: Hydrogen possess a high energy content per unit mass compared to petroleum, it can be used to run fuel cells, which can then be used to power a very clean engine. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and other companies have been working on trying to get hydrogen to be used to power cars. Ammonia borane is a chemical hydride that can store hydrogen. Scientist like this chemical because it can store up to 20% which can permit hydrogen-fueled vehicles to travel over 300 miles on one tank. The problem was that scientists had no way of recycling ammonia borane. However, scientist have found a simple way to regenerate ammonia borane from a hyrdrogen depleted spent fuel form back into usable fuel, reactions taking place in a single container. Researchers see vehicles with interchangable tanks so people can hand in their used tank to be recharge in a factory and then to be used once again when the recharge is complete. Many scientist see this process becoming closer and closer to being used.
Graphic: This graphic shows how ammonia burane is transformed into hydrogen fuel.
http://www.google.com/imgresimgurl=http://images.sciencedaily.com/2011/03/110321093701.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110321093701.htm&usg=__Pcmuo4FA6xqcqcVGdxVba8aMBfI=&h=387&w=300&sz=22&hl=en&start=0&sig2=i2qM0s5DZBPTorQo1mWi9w&zoom=1&tbnid=vhpbl4xF_2uXoM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=101&ei=BD2_TeD5CY_pgQe5hdyTBw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dtransforming%2Bammonia%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26biw%3D1345%26bih%3D528%26as_st%3Dy%26tbm%3Disch&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=562&page=1&ndsp=25&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&tx=61&ty=55
Opinion: I think that could be very helpful to out environment to not cause air pollution. If cars were powered with hydrogen, then carbon dioxide would not be released from gas in cars thus lowing the CO2 releases in the atmosphere. Using hydrogen powered vehiciles could lower the amout of gas being used. With gas being nonrenewable, and with scientists predicts we will eventually run out of it, hydrogen powered cars could be the answer to powering cars in a new way with out gas. With the cost of gas prices going up because it is nonrenewable, using hydrogen powered cars could save people money. I know that when my parents go to get gas and I'm with them, we watch the meter as the price increases every gallon. By the time our tank is full, my parents are paying $60 to $70 for a full tank of gas. I know that when I start to drive, I will not be able to pay that much money every time my car needs to refilled with gas. Hydrogen powered cars would be a great help to save money for people with cars.
Questions:
1) Do you think hydrogen powered cars are a good idea?
2) Would you buy a hydrogen powered car?
3) Do you think hydrogen powered cars could be the solution to replacing gas powered cars?
4) Do you think that is recharge able tank could work in cars?
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Does Organic Food Need a Marketing Campaign?
Author: Rachel Cernansky Publication Date: April 5, 2011 Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/04/does-organic-food-need-marketing-campaign.php?campaign=th_rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+treehuggersite+28%Treehugger%29 Summary: In this article, the author talks about a issue that could go either way and could be debated about for hours on end. So called natural products, which actually have synthetic fertilizer and chemicals added, are harming the sales of organic products. Most Americans assume that when they see natural on a label, the food is automatically organic and they purchase it, when it is really not. Many people do not understand organic farming and what it is and the organic farming industry needs to either label or educated their customers or else their sales will continue to plummet. All in all, the organic farming industry needs to act quickly to prevent falling to "natural" products. Opinion/Reflection: I think that all of this GMO and organic stuff is very interesting. Here is another article talking about education. Yes, the organic industry needs to get out and educate the customers about what they are eating and what the difference is between natural and organic foods and get the assumption out of their heads. In order for the organic industry to succeed, not only do the people need to be educated, but marketed too as well. There should be more labelling of organic foods in grocery stores and convience stors. The way that this connects to my life, is that sometimes I feel that my own family has the assumption that because something says it is natural it is organic. I will admit that whenever I see a can of corn that says naturally grown I automatically think of a corn stalk and corn on the colb being naturally grown. In the end, I though this was a very interesting article to read and share and I hope that we can correct people's way of thinking, including myself. Questions: 1. Why are people not educated about what organic means? 2. Why don't organic farmers and sellers label their products saying what organic means and not what people assume it to be? 3. Why do people think that when they see natural on a label of food they think it is automatically organic when most of the time it is really a GMO? 4. How can we fix this problem to help the organic industry? Graphic: http://pursuehealthyyou.blogspot.com/2011/01/organic-foods-are-they-worth-it.html
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Why Aren't G.M.O Foods Labeled?
Title: Why Aren't G.M.O Foods Labeled? Author: Mark Bittman Publication Date: February 15, 2011 Link:http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/why-arent-g-m-o-foods-labeled/?ref=geneticallymodifiedfood Summary: The F.D.A and the U.S.D.A will not require any food to be labeled as a G.M.O because they do not want to imply that these foods are different than the non-genetically modified food. A good variety of people are not very keen on the amount of G.M.O's used in their food which is the reason they will not be labeled. All of Europe has strict policies on G.M.O's there allowance for G.M.O's in their foods are low; around .9% of G.M.O in food must be labeled. This is making an influence on people in the U.S. to not buy foods that are said to be genetically modified. However, another reason people do not trust genetically modified food is because their potential to cause allergic reasctions to poeple and the transfer to humans of antibiotic-resistant properties of G.M.O's have not come to pass. Graphic: I thought this image would be a good example of how easy it is to label a product that is genetically modified. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/GM%2520label.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.treehugger.com/2007/10/14-week/&usg=__rpkjhTeOutSJxQFgOpn3R-j9L3o=&h=332&w=500&sz=70&hl=en&start=0&sig2=HLSahgXODQg2Qo1I0nXLhQ&zoom=1&tbnid=hgK5A56e2ll6xM:&tbnh=115&tbnw=173&ei=wlSiTea1DMPIgQfw1IzaBQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3DG.M.O%2Blabels%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D528%26gbv%3D2%26tbm3Disch&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=115&vpy=194&dur=5162&hovh=183&hovw=276&tx=184&ty=118&oei=wlSiTea1DMPIgQfw1IzaBQ&page=1&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0 Opinion: I think that G.M.O foods should be labeled. The picture above shows a simple way of adding that the food is genetically modified by putting it in the ingredients part on the product. It also does not attract a lot of people from seeing it unless they decide to read the ingredients. It is important for people to know what has been done to their food. By labeling G.M.O products it gives the people their choice to decide if they want to eat genetically modified food. I know that when my mom goes to the super market and gets fruits like strawberries, she looks for the box that has the biggest and reddest strawberries. Genetically modified foods grow faster and bigger than non-G.M.O products, so I could have been eating genetically modified strawberries but I have no way of actually knowing if I did or not. I would like to know the amount of genetically modified foods I have eaten. Questions: 1) Would you buy a product that has been labeled as genetically modified? 2) Do you think the F.D.A and U.S.D.A are doing the right thing by not permitting G.M.O products to be labeled? 3) Do you feel comfortable buying products that could be genetically modified but have no way of knowing if they are?
Friday, April 8, 2011
Drug-Resistant 'Superbug' Found in New Delhi Water
Title with link :Drug-Resistant 'Superbug' Found in New Delhi Water
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Date: 4-7-11
Summary: An antibiotic resistant organism was found in New Delhi’s water. This organism, metallo-beta-lactamase 1 (NDM-1, is a superbug. Many tests of India's water supply have been done to prove NDM1 is there. Nearly one third of the samples of surface water came up positive, and four percent came up positive in tap water. These numbers dont seem big now, but they most likely aren't getting lower. Due to the warmer months, and monsoons in India, the chance of this superbug spreading is exceptionally high. The bug is mostly transferred to India and Britain tourists getting medical surgery.
Opinion: I think this is bad. About 8 months ago, I read about this superbug. The only information on it was that it was resistant to nearly all antibiotics and it originated from plastic surgery through India and Europe. I thought nothing of it because nobody was talking about it and the few people I talked to were very confused and almost mockingly acting when I told them. Now that I see it is making bigger headlines, and a bigger commotion, it may be the new H1N1 virus, (Which I also had heard about before the big talk happened.) This ties into class really well because we were discussing how things become drug resistant. I hope we can get this superbug from spreading too far around the world.
Graphic: Right on the website if you click on the title, there is a picture of somebody getting water in India, even though it might be not clean.
Questions:
1) Have you heard of NDM1?
2) Do you think we can find a different antibiotic for NDM1?
3) Do you think this will affect exports from India like rice?
4) What protective measures would you take?
5) Do you think this is dangerous?
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Date: 4-7-11
Summary: An antibiotic resistant organism was found in New Delhi’s water. This organism, metallo-beta-lactamase 1 (NDM-1, is a superbug. Many tests of India's water supply have been done to prove NDM1 is there. Nearly one third of the samples of surface water came up positive, and four percent came up positive in tap water. These numbers dont seem big now, but they most likely aren't getting lower. Due to the warmer months, and monsoons in India, the chance of this superbug spreading is exceptionally high. The bug is mostly transferred to India and Britain tourists getting medical surgery.
Opinion: I think this is bad. About 8 months ago, I read about this superbug. The only information on it was that it was resistant to nearly all antibiotics and it originated from plastic surgery through India and Europe. I thought nothing of it because nobody was talking about it and the few people I talked to were very confused and almost mockingly acting when I told them. Now that I see it is making bigger headlines, and a bigger commotion, it may be the new H1N1 virus, (Which I also had heard about before the big talk happened.) This ties into class really well because we were discussing how things become drug resistant. I hope we can get this superbug from spreading too far around the world.
Graphic: Right on the website if you click on the title, there is a picture of somebody getting water in India, even though it might be not clean.
Questions:
1) Have you heard of NDM1?
2) Do you think we can find a different antibiotic for NDM1?
3) Do you think this will affect exports from India like rice?
4) What protective measures would you take?
5) Do you think this is dangerous?
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Title: U.S. Approves Corn Modified For Ethanol
Author: Andrew Pollack
Publication: February 11, 2011
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/business/12corn.html?_r=1&ref=geneticallymodifiedfood
This article was about how the U.S.Department of Agriculture recently approved a type of genetically modified corn to make it easier to turn into ethanol. As always on this topic, it is reported that many people are against the department's decision to allow this. Other farmers do not want the pollen of this corn cross-breeding with their corn. The North American Millers Association stated,“If this corn is commingled with other corn, it will have significant adverse impacts on food product quality and performance." This modified corn contains an enzyme that breaks the corn down into sugar, which is the next step of turning it into ethanol. Supporters say that this corn will use less water, chemicals, and work, but produce more ethanol. Syngenta, the company that owns this crop, has been told to work with protesters to make them more happy. Syngenta says that as much as 40% of last years corn production went towards ethanol production, so this is another step forward. It is unclear at this time if there are any bad things about GMO's , but I hope that the Department of Agriculture made the right decision.
Opinion:
I think that genetically modified corn is a great idea. I eat a lot of corn during the summer, and I am not concerned with possible negative affects of this corn. I hope that scientists can modify corn so that it is always sweet so that I can always enjoy my summer corn! Because 40% of corn is used towards ethanol I think that genetically modified corn will be a good way to make ethanol at a faster rate. As time passes by I think more people will start to see the many benefits of GMO's (genetically modified organisms). These organisms will boost the economy, produce more at a faster rate, and improve the quality of them. I hope that in the future we will find safe and healthy ways to modify our food so that we can help to end world hunger and get better quality food!
Graphic: http://politicolnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/GMO-CORN.bmp
This image shows a piece of corn being genetically modified.
Questions:
1) What is your opinion on GMO's?
2) Do you think that most of our food will be genetically modified in the future?
3) Would you eat genetically modified food?
4) What are the Pro's and Con's of Genetically modified organisms?
Monday, April 4, 2011
F.D.A and Dairy Industry Spar Over Testing of Milk
Title: FDA and Dairy Industry Spar Over Testing of Milk
Author: William Neuman
Publication: The New York Times
Date: January 25th, 2011
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/business/26milk.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Summary:
Each year, the FDA are finding more and more antibiotics in cows in dairy farms, more than the allowed amount. It is hard to get rid of the antibiotic milk, according to dairy farm owners, because they cannot just dump millions of gallons of milk just to make it better for the people. John J. Wilson, a senior vice president for Dairy Farmers of America, disagrees. He says, "the nation’s milk was safe and that there was little reason to think that the slaughterhouse findings would be replicated in tests of the milk supply." The F.D.A. said that it would confer with the industry before deciding how to proceed. 788 violated cows (cows with too much antibiotics in them) were found in 2008. In the end, the FDA decided to dump all the antibiotic milk, and start fresh.
Opinion:
I am kind of on the fence about this one. A lot of farms use antibiotics in their animals to keep them healthy and grow faster, but recently (as the article states) they are using a lot of antibiotics, too much, some may say. As we learned in class, this can cause problems. The biggest problem is that it can create resistant bacteria, which could get into the milk and into us. On the other hand though, I feel that it was wrong to throw out all that milk. That can cause environmental problems and it is not good for the cows. The FDA should know better than that.
Graphic
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/articles/nab/h-pylori.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/is-natural-selection-evolution&usg=__c_O6Ttw-eTgInvSJOPKpa2v7vX8=&h=407&w=550&sz=50&hl=en&start=0&sig2=du8vj2MbsAiT0eA1HgB9jA&zoom=1&tbnid=rGzqxgkvCzVFsM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=174&ei=9iiaTa2CCoOC0QG2w4X-Cw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dantibiotic%2Bresistance%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26biw%3D1045%26bih%3D484%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=436&vpy=184&dur=4872&hovh=193&hovw=261&tx=114&ty=182&oei=9iiaTa2CCoOC0QG2w4X-Cw&page=1&ndsp=10&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:0
I thought this was a good (and funny) picture of bacteria that can become resistant to antibiotics.
Questions:
1. What do you think of the FDA throwing out the milk?
2. What would you do about the antibiotic situation?
3. Would you even use antibiotics in the first place?
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Cracking the Genetic Code of Brown Tides
Author: John Collins Rudolf
Publication Date: 2/22/11
Link: http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/genetic-code-of-brown-tides-cracked/?partner=rss&emc=rss
Summary: In this article, scientists analyzed a certain type of algal bloom and the genome, or biological source code, to find the parts that make up this organism. Algal blooms can have deadly effects on marine ecosystems by reducing the amount of light and oxygen available. The specific bloom that scientists did a study on was the Aureococcus anophagefferens, a nontoxic bloom that thrives in polluted areas. Although the certain type of algal bloom is not toxic to humans, it poisons marine life and blocks sunlight from underwater vegetation and organisms. These blooms create something known as brown tides which are caused because of human activity and the pollutants that we put in the water. All in all, we must all be aware of what we put in our water or else it could result in algal blooms growing all along the east coast, wiping out marine ecosystems and fish populations for good.
Opinion/Reflection: I think that it is a bad thing that we have algal blooms at all. Algal blooms do not grow naturally , but are a result of nutrient pollution. We are the reason that these algal blooms are forming and wiping out fish populations and vegetation. Although we do not realize it, we are actually hurting ourselves. If we put in all these nutrients into the waterways and there is no fish, our economy will fall even lower and there will be no more marine animals to eat, trade, or sell. The way that these blooms connect with my own life is that my family and I usually go to the beach twice a year. If one day I walk onto the beach and I see a sign that says sorry beach closed-algal blooms, I would not be able to swim. These algal blooms do not have one positive effect on animals or humans and we need to quickly raise awareness and and eradicate algal blooms.
Questions:
1. What are some ways we can prevent nutrient pollution?
2. How do algal blooms create dead zones?
3. What would happen if all our seas were covered with mats of algal blooms?
4. How can we raise awareness of the dangers o0f algal blooms and their devastating effects?
Graphic: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110221163128.htm This is the link to a picture of a bay in New York where there is a brown tide and you can clearly see the discoloring of the water and can only imagine the effects of what is underneath that brown water.
Publication Date: 2/22/11
Link: http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/genetic-code-of-brown-tides-cracked/?partner=rss&emc=rss
Summary: In this article, scientists analyzed a certain type of algal bloom and the genome, or biological source code, to find the parts that make up this organism. Algal blooms can have deadly effects on marine ecosystems by reducing the amount of light and oxygen available. The specific bloom that scientists did a study on was the Aureococcus anophagefferens, a nontoxic bloom that thrives in polluted areas. Although the certain type of algal bloom is not toxic to humans, it poisons marine life and blocks sunlight from underwater vegetation and organisms. These blooms create something known as brown tides which are caused because of human activity and the pollutants that we put in the water. All in all, we must all be aware of what we put in our water or else it could result in algal blooms growing all along the east coast, wiping out marine ecosystems and fish populations for good.
Opinion/Reflection: I think that it is a bad thing that we have algal blooms at all. Algal blooms do not grow naturally , but are a result of nutrient pollution. We are the reason that these algal blooms are forming and wiping out fish populations and vegetation. Although we do not realize it, we are actually hurting ourselves. If we put in all these nutrients into the waterways and there is no fish, our economy will fall even lower and there will be no more marine animals to eat, trade, or sell. The way that these blooms connect with my own life is that my family and I usually go to the beach twice a year. If one day I walk onto the beach and I see a sign that says sorry beach closed-algal blooms, I would not be able to swim. These algal blooms do not have one positive effect on animals or humans and we need to quickly raise awareness and and eradicate algal blooms.
Questions:
1. What are some ways we can prevent nutrient pollution?
2. How do algal blooms create dead zones?
3. What would happen if all our seas were covered with mats of algal blooms?
4. How can we raise awareness of the dangers o0f algal blooms and their devastating effects?
Graphic: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110221163128.htm This is the link to a picture of a bay in New York where there is a brown tide and you can clearly see the discoloring of the water and can only imagine the effects of what is underneath that brown water.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Louisiana's Wetlands: A Lesson In Nature Appreciation
Title: Louisiana's Wetlands: A Lesson In Nature Appreciation
Author: John Tibbetts
Publication Date: Janurary 2006
Summary: Many of you have heard about Hurricane Katrina taking a huge hit in New Orleans in 2005. But did you know that this disaster could accually have been some what prevented if the wetlands along the coast of Louisiana had be maintianed and preserved. Now they would not have stopped the hurricane all together, however, the amount of damage that was brought could have been less if the wetlands where there to slow down the storm. There are many causes as to why the wetlands were eliminated along the coast of louisiana. One is the developement of levees, an embankment designed to prevent the flood of a river, these were build along the Mississippi River. The Mississippi River has many of its tributaries run all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico bringing its sedements with it. This allowed huge quantities of silt to settle and nurish the wetlands down south. When the levees were built it stopped this process. The amount of damage that was brought on New Orleans could have been prevented if people had payed attention to the decrease in wetlands along the coast of Louisiana.
Graphic:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cement.org/water/images/slurry_levee.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cement.org/water/dams_sc_faqs_slurry.asp&usg=__lnbYzOpNG19UO1aP8xzSVsSYoF8=&h=382&w=500&sz=46&hl=en&start=0&sig2=hZsk3x4HdkYPNk4jL0j36g&zoom=1&tbnid=PzMthmCAvwXMMM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=157&ei=UxOATe3BMOmV0QHJpaXzCA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlevee%2Bdiagram%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D528%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=288&vpy=84&dur=546&hovh=196&hovw=257&tx=134&ty=127&oei=UxOATe3BMOmV0QHJpaXzCA&page=1&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0
Opinion: I did not know that the Mississippi had such a big impact on the wetlands that were on the coast of Louisiana. People think that levees help prevent floods in the places they are built but they can cause flooding and other problems in places that depend on those rivers allow the water to travel to those places. If these levees had not been put up then the wetlands along the Louisiana coast could still be there. Wetlands are important because they help prevent flooding, they need to be preserved. In my backyard there are wetland that run throught my neighborhood. During heavy rains, rain water runs to the wetlands which taken in and carry water to a creek nearby. I never realized that this could prevent flooding in my neighborhood.
Questions:
1) Do you think that levees are a good thing or bad?
2) Do you think we can restore the wetlands in Louisiana?
3) Do you think the decrease in wetlands in Louisiana could have been avoided?
Author: John Tibbetts
Publication Date: Janurary 2006
Summary: Many of you have heard about Hurricane Katrina taking a huge hit in New Orleans in 2005. But did you know that this disaster could accually have been some what prevented if the wetlands along the coast of Louisiana had be maintianed and preserved. Now they would not have stopped the hurricane all together, however, the amount of damage that was brought could have been less if the wetlands where there to slow down the storm. There are many causes as to why the wetlands were eliminated along the coast of louisiana. One is the developement of levees, an embankment designed to prevent the flood of a river, these were build along the Mississippi River. The Mississippi River has many of its tributaries run all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico bringing its sedements with it. This allowed huge quantities of silt to settle and nurish the wetlands down south. When the levees were built it stopped this process. The amount of damage that was brought on New Orleans could have been prevented if people had payed attention to the decrease in wetlands along the coast of Louisiana.
Graphic:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cement.org/water/images/slurry_levee.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cement.org/water/dams_sc_faqs_slurry.asp&usg=__lnbYzOpNG19UO1aP8xzSVsSYoF8=&h=382&w=500&sz=46&hl=en&start=0&sig2=hZsk3x4HdkYPNk4jL0j36g&zoom=1&tbnid=PzMthmCAvwXMMM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=157&ei=UxOATe3BMOmV0QHJpaXzCA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlevee%2Bdiagram%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1362%26bih%3D528%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=288&vpy=84&dur=546&hovh=196&hovw=257&tx=134&ty=127&oei=UxOATe3BMOmV0QHJpaXzCA&page=1&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0
Opinion: I did not know that the Mississippi had such a big impact on the wetlands that were on the coast of Louisiana. People think that levees help prevent floods in the places they are built but they can cause flooding and other problems in places that depend on those rivers allow the water to travel to those places. If these levees had not been put up then the wetlands along the Louisiana coast could still be there. Wetlands are important because they help prevent flooding, they need to be preserved. In my backyard there are wetland that run throught my neighborhood. During heavy rains, rain water runs to the wetlands which taken in and carry water to a creek nearby. I never realized that this could prevent flooding in my neighborhood.
Questions:
1) Do you think that levees are a good thing or bad?
2) Do you think we can restore the wetlands in Louisiana?
3) Do you think the decrease in wetlands in Louisiana could have been avoided?
Friday, March 11, 2011
EPA Encourages Americans to Save Water During Fix a Leak Week
Title: EPA Encourages Americans to Save Water During Fix a Leak Week
Author: Richard Yost
Publication: United States Environmental Protection Agency
Date: 3-11-11
Link: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/AD97428925DDE4AA85257850006379B8
Summary: The EPA is promoting their third annual Fix a Leak Week, March 14 through 20. Across the country, household leaks waste over 1 trillion gallons of water per year. That is enough to support Chicago, Miami and Los Angles combined. Water leaks are easy and efficient to fix and you can save a lot of money and water in the end. If a family of four's water usage exceeded 12,000 gallons per month this winter, it is suggested they might have a water leak. Some ways to fix a leak and participate in the event, is to check for leaks by dropping some food coloring droplets in your toilet tank and flushing it to see if it appears in the bowl. Also, you can go to every pipe and make sure it’s on tight enough. Since this program started it saved more than 46 billion gallons of water and $343 million in water and sewer bills.
Opinion: I think this is great. It is really spreading awareness to homeowners that leaks can happen and are wasting water. I also think this will help a lot of people with water shortages. If the water is not wasted, then we will be able to use it later. I hope that this year will be very successful in helping our country save money and water.
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.friendlyplumber.com/images/repairing_leaky_pipes/pipe_leak.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/how_tos/how_to_repair_leaky_pipes.html&usg=__UHYuGME8hCvV3ls0mUGjILkMzaM=&h=201&w=191&sz=9&hl=en&start=0&sig2=5LsgpVBQ4trHcKtNsIbK7w&zoom=1&tbnid=g6EwVyqjO-ujvM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=105&ei=NJN6TfGUA8yw0QGv1dHrAw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dleaky%2Bpipes%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1010%26bih%3D535%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=696&vpy=250&dur=5211&hovh=160&hovw=152&tx=54&ty=89&oei=NJN6TfGUA8yw0QGv1dHrAw&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:0
This picture shows a way on how to fix a leaky pipe. Just glue a rubber strip to the puncture and tighten a clamp around the side of the pipe. Of course I'm no plumber, but it seems to me what is happening.
Questions:
1) Will you help out your self with bills and help out the earth with water by checking your pipes this Monday?
2) What’s another thing we can do to contribute to the event?
3) Is this an effective way of dealing with water leaks?
4) What is your opinion on the idea of having a week to do this? Or should you always be checking your pipes?
5) Name other ways water could be wasted every day other than leaks.
Author: Richard Yost
Publication: United States Environmental Protection Agency
Date: 3-11-11
Link: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/AD97428925DDE4AA85257850006379B8
Summary: The EPA is promoting their third annual Fix a Leak Week, March 14 through 20. Across the country, household leaks waste over 1 trillion gallons of water per year. That is enough to support Chicago, Miami and Los Angles combined. Water leaks are easy and efficient to fix and you can save a lot of money and water in the end. If a family of four's water usage exceeded 12,000 gallons per month this winter, it is suggested they might have a water leak. Some ways to fix a leak and participate in the event, is to check for leaks by dropping some food coloring droplets in your toilet tank and flushing it to see if it appears in the bowl. Also, you can go to every pipe and make sure it’s on tight enough. Since this program started it saved more than 46 billion gallons of water and $343 million in water and sewer bills.
Opinion: I think this is great. It is really spreading awareness to homeowners that leaks can happen and are wasting water. I also think this will help a lot of people with water shortages. If the water is not wasted, then we will be able to use it later. I hope that this year will be very successful in helping our country save money and water.
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.friendlyplumber.com/images/repairing_leaky_pipes/pipe_leak.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/how_tos/how_to_repair_leaky_pipes.html&usg=__UHYuGME8hCvV3ls0mUGjILkMzaM=&h=201&w=191&sz=9&hl=en&start=0&sig2=5LsgpVBQ4trHcKtNsIbK7w&zoom=1&tbnid=g6EwVyqjO-ujvM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=105&ei=NJN6TfGUA8yw0QGv1dHrAw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dleaky%2Bpipes%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1010%26bih%3D535%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=696&vpy=250&dur=5211&hovh=160&hovw=152&tx=54&ty=89&oei=NJN6TfGUA8yw0QGv1dHrAw&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:0
This picture shows a way on how to fix a leaky pipe. Just glue a rubber strip to the puncture and tighten a clamp around the side of the pipe. Of course I'm no plumber, but it seems to me what is happening.
Questions:
1) Will you help out your self with bills and help out the earth with water by checking your pipes this Monday?
2) What’s another thing we can do to contribute to the event?
3) Is this an effective way of dealing with water leaks?
4) What is your opinion on the idea of having a week to do this? Or should you always be checking your pipes?
5) Name other ways water could be wasted every day other than leaks.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Water Regionally Abundant in Great Lakes Basin, but not Always When and Where it’s Needed
Title: Water Regionally Abundant in Great Lakes Basin, but not Always When and Where it’s Needed
Author: None listed
Publication:U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Date: 2/7/2011
Link:http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2694
Summary:
According to the U.S. Department of Interior the basin of the Great Lakes has the potential of running low on water. The reason that the basin might run low on water is because if we keep pumping ground water from this area into Chicago, the water levels in this location would decrease by hundreds of feet. Scientists are saying that there will be plenty of usable water, but it may not be distributed evenly to the Chicago area. Scientists found this out because they were doing a five year study on how water use can effect the climate. By conducting this study many scientists were able to predict the future levels of water flowing through this area. They have predicted that as the years come there will be less water. Studies like this are going to be done in the Chicago river and Delaware river in years to come.
Opinion:
I think that the possible shortage of water in the basin of the Great Lakes is a HUGE problem. I am worried for the people who live in this area because if this happened where I live, I would hate to have to not always have easy access to water. I use water in my every day life so I cannot imagine how these people would struggle with this. I think that if we let water recharge in the recharge zone and go into the aquifers more quickly we would not even have this problem in the first place. I think that studies like the one done by these scientists should be done in areas across the world so we can help solve the problem of water shortages. I picked this article because it is very interesting that we could run low on water in our country! I hope that we can find a way to help the basin accumulate more water.
Graphic:
http://www.freakyweather.com/files/images/California%20Drought.jpg
Even though this would take a long time to happen here this picture shows what water shortages could look like.
Questions:
1)How do you think that we could prevent water shortages such as this one?
2)Would you be worried if you lived in the Chicago area?
3)Do you think that tests like this one should be done more often?
4)How could a water shortage like this possible one affect wildlife?
Monday, March 7, 2011
68 Percent of New England and Mid-Atlantic Beaches Eroding
Title: 68 Percent of New England and Mid-Atlantic Beaches Eroding
Author: None Listed
Publication: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Date: 2.23.2011
Link: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2707&from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsgsNewsroom+%28USGS+Newsroom%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Summary
In the past 150 years, it has been found that 68% of beaches on New England and Mid-Atlantic region are eroding. This is a result of beach restoration activities such as adding sand to beaches. Beaches change because of things like amount of available sand, storms, sea-level rise and human activities. Erosion is determined on these very factors. There is erosion in both regions, (Mid-Atlantic and New England), and they are a big hazard throughout both. "It is very difficult to predict what may happen in the future without a solid understanding of what has happened in the past," says Dr. Cheryl Hapke. Researchers are now using aerial maps to study future erosion along the coasts at more than 21,000 locations.
Graphic: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://whyfiles.org/091beach/images/erosiondia1.gif&imgrefurl=http://whyfiles.org/091beach/3.html&usg=__A4E-eaQ_04jc5Awb_86uKiyOMMQ=&h=170&w=299&sz=17&hl=en&start=0&sig2=JF7Ps-L8X-Z2Nu2nHqF4UA&zoom=1&tbnid=m7TWM2uOzkHpSM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=189&ei=O251TcK_JuS10QGan6jFAQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbeach%2Berosion%2Bdiagram%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D593%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=143&vpy=125&dur=2666&hovh=136&hovw=239&tx=190&ty=46&oei=O251TcK_JuS10QGan6jFAQ&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0
I thought this was a really good diagram of how erosion happens.
Opinion
Well this is NOT good! As for me, I go down to the beach every summer, and I know some people who actually live there. If the beach keeps eroding at this pace, we may not have any left. I really think that researches and scientists should do something about this. It may not be for a long time, but beaches along the Mid-Atlantic (which is where the Jersey Shore is) could possibly erode to non-existence. I hope this gets better. :-)
Questions:
1. Do you really think researches are actually doing something about this, or do you think they are just saying it?
2. Are you worried at all that the beaches might be gone?
3. Do you think the beaches will keep eroding at the same pace, or will it get better as the years go by?
By: Becca :-)
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Destructive Impact of Invasive Species Measured in 57 Countries
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Publication Date: 1/27/10
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/01/destructive-impact-of-invasive-species-measured-in-57-countries.php
Summary: There are various threats to biodiversity in our world and invasive species is just one, but is a major threat to biodiversity. In a study of 57 countries, studies show that each country had approximately 50 non-native species. These invasive species can be deadly for food chains and can lead to extinction for some animal populations. One example of an invasive species taking over is the rat which has grown in numbers and has made the Yellowhead, a bird native to New Zealand, suffer greatly. Here is a picture of the Yellowhead (http://www.elkeith.com/photography/image pages/yellowhead mohua 1.html). In the study made by the Global Invasive Species Programme, the number of introduced species per country ranged from as low as 9 (Equatorial Guinea) to as high as 222 (New Zealand). In all, there was a total of 542 invasive species documented and even worse, the report shows that the number of invasive species is severely underestimated. All in all, introduced species contribute to lowering biodiversity and bring destructive impact to both food chains and ecosystems.
Opinion/Reflection: I think it is bad that we have this high number of invasive species. We have only ourselves to blame as we brought these species with us in an effort to rid another species or for other reasons. If we have so many introduced species, certain animal populations will become extremely low and habitats will become changed completely. I usually eat chicken at least 4 times a week. If an invasive species of red foxes took over a habitat where chickens reside, I would not be eating chicken. The biodiversity of the countries in the study are very low because of the invasive species and we need to find a way to contain these species or move them elsewhere.
Questions:
1. What are some ways that we can contain invasive species or protect native species from invasive species?
2. Is it ever okay to bring an introduced species into your country, knowing the effect it may have?
3. What are some reasons why we bring in introduced species?
4. What would be the consequences of completely exterminating an introduced species?
5. How does introduced species affect both food chains and ecosystems?
Publication Date: 1/27/10
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/01/destructive-impact-of-invasive-species-measured-in-57-countries.php
Summary: There are various threats to biodiversity in our world and invasive species is just one, but is a major threat to biodiversity. In a study of 57 countries, studies show that each country had approximately 50 non-native species. These invasive species can be deadly for food chains and can lead to extinction for some animal populations. One example of an invasive species taking over is the rat which has grown in numbers and has made the Yellowhead, a bird native to New Zealand, suffer greatly. Here is a picture of the Yellowhead (http://www.elkeith.com/photography/image pages/yellowhead mohua 1.html). In the study made by the Global Invasive Species Programme, the number of introduced species per country ranged from as low as 9 (Equatorial Guinea) to as high as 222 (New Zealand). In all, there was a total of 542 invasive species documented and even worse, the report shows that the number of invasive species is severely underestimated. All in all, introduced species contribute to lowering biodiversity and bring destructive impact to both food chains and ecosystems.
Opinion/Reflection: I think it is bad that we have this high number of invasive species. We have only ourselves to blame as we brought these species with us in an effort to rid another species or for other reasons. If we have so many introduced species, certain animal populations will become extremely low and habitats will become changed completely. I usually eat chicken at least 4 times a week. If an invasive species of red foxes took over a habitat where chickens reside, I would not be eating chicken. The biodiversity of the countries in the study are very low because of the invasive species and we need to find a way to contain these species or move them elsewhere.
Questions:
1. What are some ways that we can contain invasive species or protect native species from invasive species?
2. Is it ever okay to bring an introduced species into your country, knowing the effect it may have?
3. What are some reasons why we bring in introduced species?
4. What would be the consequences of completely exterminating an introduced species?
5. How does introduced species affect both food chains and ecosystems?
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Australia's Floods Endanger An Already Stressed Great Barrier Reef
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Published: 2-15-11
Summary: On February 5th, a flood hit Australia. This flood had an obvious effect, which is wiping out many of the land’s features. However, there was a secondary effect that wasn’t so noticeable which is destruction to the Great Barrier Reef. “Expected damage will include smashed coral beds, movements of coral boulders, sand and rubble and major disturbance to sea grass beds,” proclaimed the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. “Floodwater can hurt reefs in many ways,” stated Huffington Post. “Coral becomes stressed when the level of salt in the water drops. The high concentration of soil nutrients in floodwater provides food for coral competitors such as certain types of algae. Sediment saps coral of energy by blocking the light it needs to nourish itself, and pesticides in the water can kill the coral outright.” With the marine protected areas, the reefs have been showing signs of coming back from over-fishing, pollution, rising ocean temperatures and changing pH balances. However the current flood was too much for the protectors to…you know, protect the reefs.
Opinion: I think this is not good. Even though that damage is not too bad, and the reef can still recover, for this short amount of time, the fish and plants that make up the reef will be very stressed and confused. If the situation got really bad, the reef would lose all control and not be able to support life. There would be no producers, then no consumers, then no secondary consumers, with a chain reaction leading to a non-existent “Great Barrier Reef.” Last year, I did a research paper on Australia and the reef was amazing, and I wanted to go there when I get a chance. I hope the floods are stopping and Australia can bounce back from the state they’re in now.
Questions:
1) What effects might this have on the people in Australia?
2) Do you think the floods are almost over?
3) What could be done to prevent further harm to the reefs?
Monday, February 14, 2011
New Hybrid Whale Discovered in Arctic
Title: New Hybrid Whale Discovered in Arctic
Author: Brian Handwerk
Published: January 25, 2011
Link: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/01/110125-whales-hybrids-antarctica-arctic-science-animals/
Summary:
Scientists have recently discovered a new Hybrid Whale. It is a cross between an Antarctic Minke Whale and an Arctic Minke Whale. These two whales were never expected to meet because they live in different hemispheres with different climate changes. The hybrid whale was discovered by Norwegian hunters. Many DNA tests were conducted to prove that the whale is infact a hybrid. As for Antarctic Minke Whales moving north is another discussion. Studies have shown that the amount of krill, a tiny crustacean that whales feed on, have decreased over the past years in the southern hemisphere, causing the Antarctic Minke Whales to leave there area and search for food. Some of them have searched all the way to the Arctic circle and have mated with the Arctic Minke Whales.
Opinion:
I think that the decrease of krill in the south is bad for the Antarctic Minke Whales. It is forcing them to leave their habitat and go somewhere else to search for food. If the Antarctic Minke Whales continue to leave the southern hemisphere, then it might affect the way other animals live in the southern hemisphere. Since there is a decrease in krill, whale species mating with different whale species might not be the best thing because more whales are being produced when there is already a shortage in food. However, I also believe that newHybrid Whales can be interesting to study and can open new ideas about the whale species.
Questions:
1) Do you think whale hunting is good or bad? Why? Or why not?
2) What do you think about a new Hybrid Whale speices?
3) Do you think it is okay for Southern Minke Whales to travel to the Northern Hemishere?
Author: Brian Handwerk
Published: January 25, 2011
Link: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/01/110125-whales-hybrids-antarctica-arctic-science-animals/
Summary:
Scientists have recently discovered a new Hybrid Whale. It is a cross between an Antarctic Minke Whale and an Arctic Minke Whale. These two whales were never expected to meet because they live in different hemispheres with different climate changes. The hybrid whale was discovered by Norwegian hunters. Many DNA tests were conducted to prove that the whale is infact a hybrid. As for Antarctic Minke Whales moving north is another discussion. Studies have shown that the amount of krill, a tiny crustacean that whales feed on, have decreased over the past years in the southern hemisphere, causing the Antarctic Minke Whales to leave there area and search for food. Some of them have searched all the way to the Arctic circle and have mated with the Arctic Minke Whales.
Opinion:
I think that the decrease of krill in the south is bad for the Antarctic Minke Whales. It is forcing them to leave their habitat and go somewhere else to search for food. If the Antarctic Minke Whales continue to leave the southern hemisphere, then it might affect the way other animals live in the southern hemisphere. Since there is a decrease in krill, whale species mating with different whale species might not be the best thing because more whales are being produced when there is already a shortage in food. However, I also believe that newHybrid Whales can be interesting to study and can open new ideas about the whale species.
Questions:
1) Do you think whale hunting is good or bad? Why? Or why not?
2) What do you think about a new Hybrid Whale speices?
3) Do you think it is okay for Southern Minke Whales to travel to the Northern Hemishere?
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Gulf Oil Has Entered the Food Web, Scientists Say
Title: Gulf Oil Has Entered The Food Web, Scientists Say
Author: Seth Borenstein
Publication Date: 11/8/10
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/08/gulf-oil-has-entered-the-_n_780560.html
Summary:
For the first time ever, scientists say that oil has made it into the food web. After the BP oil spill a lot of oil was in the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers say that plankton' in those waters have been eating the oil! Many researchers say that this isn't bad at all. William Graham says that the oil has continued its way on in the carbon cycle because marine life has eaten the carbon in the oil as if they were eating the carbon in marine producers. Surprisingly, it is said that the marine creatures from the Gulf of Mexico are still healthy to eat even though they have oil in them. The amount of plankton in the Gulf of Mexico is said to be equal or greater that before the BP oil spill.
Opinion:
I think that it is great that the oil from the BP oil spill didn't affect the marine life in the Gulf of Mexico. It is cool to know that it has made its way into the food web in that area. I am surprised to know that there are the same if not more plankton in the Gulf of Mexico even though they have oil in them! I never realized that this oil is still in the carbon cycle. I picked this article because it is really cool to learn that oil has entered the food web in the Gulf. It is important to know that the fish are healthy in the Gulf of Mexico because some people were concerned that they weren't.
Questions:
1. Do you think that it is good or bad that plankton have been eating the oil? Why or why not?
2.Do you think that it is cool that the oil has made it into the carbon cycle?
3.Do you trust that the marine life in the Gulf of Mexico is healthy to eat? Why or why not?
4.If you were a scientist would you be concerned about the food web in that area?
Author: Seth Borenstein
Publication Date: 11/8/10
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/08/gulf-oil-has-entered-the-_n_780560.html
Summary:
For the first time ever, scientists say that oil has made it into the food web. After the BP oil spill a lot of oil was in the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers say that plankton' in those waters have been eating the oil! Many researchers say that this isn't bad at all. William Graham says that the oil has continued its way on in the carbon cycle because marine life has eaten the carbon in the oil as if they were eating the carbon in marine producers. Surprisingly, it is said that the marine creatures from the Gulf of Mexico are still healthy to eat even though they have oil in them. The amount of plankton in the Gulf of Mexico is said to be equal or greater that before the BP oil spill.
Opinion:
I think that it is great that the oil from the BP oil spill didn't affect the marine life in the Gulf of Mexico. It is cool to know that it has made its way into the food web in that area. I am surprised to know that there are the same if not more plankton in the Gulf of Mexico even though they have oil in them! I never realized that this oil is still in the carbon cycle. I picked this article because it is really cool to learn that oil has entered the food web in the Gulf. It is important to know that the fish are healthy in the Gulf of Mexico because some people were concerned that they weren't.
Questions:
1. Do you think that it is good or bad that plankton have been eating the oil? Why or why not?
2.Do you think that it is cool that the oil has made it into the carbon cycle?
3.Do you trust that the marine life in the Gulf of Mexico is healthy to eat? Why or why not?
4.If you were a scientist would you be concerned about the food web in that area?
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Climate Change Workshop To Feature Leading Scientists
Title: Climate Change Workshop To Feature Leading Scientists
Author: Leslie Gordon & Joan Jewett
Publication Date: 1/26/2009
Link: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2116&from=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsgsNewsroom+%28USGS+Newsroom%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Summary
More than 450 scientists, policy-makers, resource managers will be meeting at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in San Francisco on January 29th and 30th to discuss changing climate. This two day workshop will feature discussion about climate changing features, such as Sea-level rise, severe winter storms, salmon populations, carbon sequestration, invasive plants, and migratory birds. Speakers from organizations, universities, and science study places will come together. The event is sponsored by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey. The purpose of the workshop is to share information about climate change with natural resource scientists and managers working to conserve the coastal ecosystems of California, Oregon and Washington. It is also to address the challenges associated with a changing climate. There will be many presentations and discussions.
Opinion:
I think it's pretty cool that they are doing this little work shop. I mean they did it like a year ago but cool. It is pretty important that we talk about climate change because it could really effect the future. I picked this article because it shows that people are actually DOING something about climate change and global warming instead of just sitting on their butts and saying its bad.
Questions:
1. Do you think this is a good idea and is it actually going to work?
2. Would you go if you had the chance?
3. Do you think they should do stuff like this more often? Why or why not?
Ben rocks...NOT (test)
This is a test blog. I love you all!!! Except Ben. Glee is on tonight. It's a good show. Now i'm going to change the colors and stuff
flkdsajflkdsjaflkdsajlkdsajlkfdsaj
flkdsajflkdsjaflkdsajlkdsajlkfdsaj
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)