Go Hug A Tree – Tomorrow’s Earth Day! Saturday, Apr 21 2007

Yep, tomorrow, April 22, is the day in which we celebrate the earth and all it has to offer. If we’re lucky, it’ll be a nice day. Begun in 1970 and continuing to this year and hopefully sticking around forever, people and organizations come together to recognize the earth and appreciate the environment. But I’m willing to bet that some people ignore Earth Day. Don’t be one of those people! Now, Earth Day is ideal for large organizations to do their own charity projects or whatever they may be, but that certainly doesn’t mean you can’t do anything on your own!

The Earth Day Flag.

Image Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Earth_flag_PD.jpg/320px-Earth_flag_PD.jpg

Earth Day should really be every day because the environment needs our help now more than ever. Here are some things that you personally can do to celebrate Earth Day:

• If you need to go somewhere that’s relatively close to your house, walk there or ride your bike instead of driving – you’ll have the satisfaction of knowing that you saved the air from your car exhaust
• Carpool, take a bus, or get a car that’s fuel efficient (has more miles per gallon)
• If you’re outside and you see garbage on the ground, pick it up, even if you think it’s gross, and don’t litter yourself
• Save water by leaving the water off when brushing your teeth and taking shorter showers
• Try and make the switch from plastic to paper bags if you can – plastic cannot easily be broken down and recycled
• Buy paper that’s been recycled
• Make the switch from incandescent light bulbs to compact fluorescent light bulbs – they’re more efficient
• Use cold water when doing laundry, and only do laundry when necessary (but don’t wait until your clothes smell!)
• Plant a tree – as we’ve learned, they take up CO2
• Buy locally produced food – don’t travel far to buy anything if it isn’t necessary
• Use energy efficient appliances in your home
• Don’t have any electronics on if you aren’t using them, and unplug them when they are not in use to cut back on wasted energy

These are just some of the many things you can do this Earth Day to show your support and appreciation. Don’t see them as chores – have fun with them, even if it’s just for Earth Day. Then if you can, carry them out in your daily life! =]

Sources: http://earthday.envirolink.org/organizers.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_day

http://www.earthday.net/

Leave a Response »

 

Ethanol – Worse Than Gasoline??? Saturday, Apr 21 2007

 Ethanol.

Image Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Ethanol_Flasche.jpg/180px-Ethanol_Flasche.jpg

Yet another issue that refers back to something specific that we learned earlier this year. We’ve heard it, and our book even states it: A switch from gasoline to ethanol is necessary, and one of the reasons is that ethanol burns much more cleanly than gasoline does. So with this in mind, how can a study show that ethanol makes the air dirtier and is responsible for smog-related deaths?

The new research says that if all automobiles in the United States ran on mostly ethanol fuel, by the year 2020 almost 200 more people would die yearly due to respiratory problems. Think about it – that’s a considerable increase.

Although, the shift to the use of ethanol as a fuel to replace gasoline is not likely to occur that quickly.

According to the study, about 4,700 people die each year due to respiratory problems from ozone. If ethanol increases the levels of ozone, even more people will by dying per year from respiratory problems because ozone is toxic in the lowest layer of the atmosphere. This new study shows that not only is ethanol no better than gas, it may even be a bit worse as far as air pollution.

Unsure what to think? Me too. Even the science books tell us that ethanol is a good alternative to gasoline – even though it may be more expensive, it burns more cleanly and would therefore help reduce the number of harmful and/or toxic chemicals that are released into the air from gasoline. This is just like the debate in my previous post – new information presented that conflicts with what scientists have thought for who knows how long! President Bush has even announced the reduction of gas usage by 20% over 10 years and using alternative fuels such as ethanol. Scientists believe that due to the switch this alternative, smog (mixture of smoke and fog) may go up by 1%.

However, many environmentalists have problems with this study, done by Mark Jacobson, Stanford University civil and environmental engineering professor. Ethanol is supposed to cut down on smog and reduce greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Scientists see no necessary reason to stop the usage of ethanol based on Jacobson’s study. Matt Hartwig of the Renewable Fuels Association said that actual data shows that ethanol is in fact ”greener” than gasoline, in other words, better for the environment. But according to Jacobson, ethanol being a better alternative depends on location. He says that ethanol use is a problem in areas where smog is already a considerable issue, such as in Los Angeles (where he believes most of the additional 200 deaths per year will take place) and the Northeastern states. Why would ethanol, a clean-burning fuel, produce more smog? Jacobson tells us that this is because: 1) ethanol produces more hydrocarbons than gas, and hydrocarbons are essential components in ozone production; 2) ethanol produces chemicals that turn into hydrocarbons, last a long time, and can spread over a pretty vast distance; 3) the lack of nitrogen oxide in the air due to ethanol can be a problem in places like Los Angeles, where smog dominates – excess nitrogen oxide would destroy the additional ozone being produced because of ethanol.

Well this is another interesting debate. Many environmentalists disagree with Jacobson, saying that the differences in his calculations are so small that they don’t really mean much at this point. It should also be noted that Jacobson, in his calculations, did not account for the fact that ethanol  decreases the number of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which cause global warming, a very critical issue that the world faces. Will Jacobson’s speculations prove to have some validity in the future, or will ethanol prove to be one solution to the problem of global warming?

Sources:

http://enn.com/today.html?id=12597

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol

Leave a Response »

 

The Hurricane Debate Friday, Apr 20 2007

You might recall that when we covered the topic of global warming earlier this year, we learned that one of the effects of global warming is more violent storms. Well, in terms of hurricanes, this would mean stronger, more violent hurricanes, right? Such as Hurricane Katrina? Hmm…maybe not.

Apparently there is currently a debate about whether global warming affects hurricane intensity, or even the mere formation of them. Many researchers strongly believe that global warming is linked to hurricanes, while others do not. A new study that’s come out shows that it’s possible that global warming actually makes it more difficult for hurricanes to form!

Gabriel A. Vecchi of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Brian J. Soden of the University of Miami utilized 18 complex computer climate models to predict the impacts of global warming for the time spans 2001-2020 and 2018-2100. Part of their results was an increase in vertical wind shear over the tropical Atlantic and eastern Pacific oceans. Vertical wind shear = a difference in wind speed or direction at different altitudes. Normally, when hurricanes encounter these they can weaken because the heat of the rising air spreads over a bigger area.

BUT…as we learned in class, warm water is what drives storms such as hurricanes, so it should seem that warmer conditions should make storms stronger, not weaker.

 A tropical cyclone is shown above. This is a type of hurricane.

Image Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Cyclone_Catarina_from_the_ISS_on_March_26_2004.JPG/250px-Cyclone_Catarina_from_the_ISS_on_March_26_2004.JPG

Vecchi and Soden don’t know if this change in wind shear will negate the increased potential from warmer oceans, but they do believe that it will make the Atlantic Ocean and Eastern Pacific ocean not as favorable to hurricane formation. On this issue, Vecchi states, “Which one of the two — warming oceans or increasing shear — will be the dominant factor? Will they cancel out? We and others are currently exploring those very questions, and we hope to have a better grasp on that answer in the near future.”

All they know is that the change in vertical wind shear will be large enough so that it cannot and should not go unnoticed. It should also be kept in mind that this recent study does not in any way intend to undermine the realities of global warming – they are out there, beginning to affect the world and scientists want everyone to constantly be aware of this.

So, on what do we base our own opinions? Well, there’s Hurricane Katrina that struck in 2005, which was highly devastating and would lead us to believe that global warming is producing stronger storms than ever. Now we’re just weeks away from the start of hurricane season – June 1. Forecasters, scientists, residents, and probably many others are anxiously waiting to see what will happen this summer as far as hurricanes. William Gray of Colorado State University, who is a top researcher, believes that there will be at least 9 hurricanes this year, with one of them likely striking the United States.

Even though Vecchi and Soden’s research predicts that hurricanes might be less intense because of increased wind shear, they did not get the same results for the west and central Pacific Ocean – rather, these areas will see better storm development.

Hurricane expert Kerry Emanuel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology believes, in contradiction with the findings of Vecchi and Soden, that storms’ vulnerabilities to wind shear is exaggerated. Emanuel published information last year that calculated that increasing the intensity of a storm via warming by 10% increases hurricane strength by 65%, but increasing shear by 10% only reduces hurricane strength by about 12%.

If the experts are split in their beliefs on this issue, then we can be sure that there is definite uncertainty regarding global warming and hurricanes. It seems to me that the only solution to this debate is time.

Sources:

http://enn.com/today.html?id=12596

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone

Leave a Response »

 

Green Weddings? Friday, Apr 20 2007

“Here comes the bride, all dressed in — green.”

Or at least that’s what they may be singing in London. It seems as though trying to reduce impacts on the environment is becoming noticeable in many aspects of life, and apparently British wedding nuptials are no exception.  So what does that mean? It means British couples “revolutionize” their weddings by having crazy new elements such as wedding dresses that have been recycled, guests commuting to the ceremony by bicycle, flowers grown at home rather than bought from a florist, and catering the reception with locally grown food rather than processed and shipped food.

A typical wedding dress. Gals, would you be willing to wear one that you knew was made from recycled materials?

Image Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cd/White-wedding-dress.jpg/220px-White-wedding-dress.jpg

British celebrity Liz Hurley’s wedding came under scrutiny when she claimed to have a green wedding, but as it turned out, her wedding produced about 200 tonnes of carbon emissions, which is higher than an average couple produces in 10 years.

Even wedding gifts are becoming more environmentally friendly. Guests have the ability to donate money to charities on behalf of newly weds.

So why have weddings jumped on the “stop global warming” bandwagon? According to Nicola Baird, for the Friends of the Earth organization, “A lot of people seem to feel that when they are making a big commitment to each other they would like to do some good as well.”

A woman named Sarah Webber, who is a Briton living in Australia, is attempting to make her wedding “green” by holding the actual ceremony in Australia but having a reception in Britain so that her family members won’t have to fly that great distance (the plane commute emits so much CO2!). She also intends to cater it with locally produced food so that shipping food from far away won’t add to CO2 emissions.

Recycled wedding dresses can be found on the Internet at charity shops or vintage shops if one prefers to be more stylish =].

Katie Fewings started www.ethicalweddings.com last year, and this site allows brides who are interested in having “green” weddings exchange information on obtaining tricky items such as recylced invitations or confetti.

An added bonus to the planning of green weddings is that they seem to be much more personalized than regular ol’ weddings. The brides feel as if they are really making a contribution to the welfare of humanity as a whole. And they really are. Weddings can still be fancy yet at the same time environmentally friendly. So keep all this in mind in about 10 years when you’re all planning your own weddings =].

Source:

http://enn.com/today.html?id=12541

One Response »

 

Do Those Big, Gentle Creatures Roaming Florida’s Waters Stand A Chance? Sunday, Apr 15 2007

I just returned from a vacation in Miami, where I happened to learn a little about manatees and their fate down in Florida. Strangely enough, when I come back, one of the first news articles I come across is about manatees down near Miami…

What’s going on with the manatees is that they are dying in huge numbers. This is due to three main factors: speedboats, red tide, and the loss of their winter habitats at power plants. With all this in mind, how could the government have a valid reason for taking the “endangered” label off the manatee?

 

Image Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b1/Manatee_photo.jpg/230px-Manatee_photo.jpg

According to wildlife officials, manatees are no longer considered “endangered” because they are not in any immediate danger; rather, they would prefer to label the manatees as “threatened.” This change of status, though, may take many years to occur, and if it does happen, some fear that the general public will no longer view manatees as “in danger” and ignore the efforts to keep them up and about in the oceans.

In 2006 there were 3,113 manatees in Florida. This year the count is 2,812. As a percentage decrease, that is: 3113 – 2812 = 301, 301/3113 = x/100, x = 9.67% decrease in Florida manatee population in one year. Wow, hopefully that % decrease per year doesn’t remain constant for the next ten years, because if you round that percentage up to a 10% decrease per year, that means it would take just 10 years for the Florida manatee population to go extinct.

The manatee does not have natural predators; however, it has a material predator, and that is the boat propeller. When I was at Key Biscayne National Park, I saw pictures of manatees that had scars all over their bodies due to speedboat propellers. I also read on one of the plaques that most manatees do not survive when they come into contact with speedboats. The place I was at, Biscayne National Park, has manatee zones marked off so that speedboats know when to slow down. This has helped to cause a general increase in the number of manatees over the last 30 years or so. Other problems that they face are being drowned in canal locks, hurt by fishing lines and hooks gone astray, red tide algae blooms, and cold winters.

The likely closings of power plants in Florida over the next few decades won’t help their survival either. Manatees cannot survive in excessively cold water (they need at least about 60 degrees Fahrenheit). They rely on warm discharge water from power plants.

As I learned when I was down in Florida, the best thing that people (or boaters) can do for them is to simply slow down when they are in those marked off manatee zones.

Sources:

http://enn.com/today.html?id=12572

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manatees

2 Responses »