Antarctica

Scientists still struggle to find the exact cause of the first Permian extinction, but they believe it was most likely global warming, possibly caused by volcanic eruptions. I have located an online article entitled, "Antarctica Served as Climatic Refuge in Earth's Greatest Extinction Event." It states, "A new fossil species suggests that some land animals may have survived the end-Permian extinction by living in cooler climates in Antarctica. Jörg Fröbisch and Kenneth D. Angielczyk of The Field Museum together with Christian A. Sidor from the University of Washington have identified a distant relative of mammals, Kombuisia antarctica, that apparently survived the mass extinction by living in Antarctica."
So if global warming continues to escalate, the planets align and the poles switch, and we are faced with cataclysmic events, could we find refuge in Antarctica?
Another article titled "Fossil Record Supports Evidence Of Impending Mass Extiction" reveals scientific data which shows "future predicted temperatures are within the range of the warmest greenhouse phases that are associated with mass extinction events identified in the fossil record." Dr. Peter Mayhew, a population ecologist and supervisor at the University of York, is quoted saying, "Our results provide the first clear evidence that global climate may explain substantial variation in the fossil record in a simple and consistent manner. If our results hold for current warming — the magnitude of which is comparable with the long-term fluctuations in Earth climate — they suggest that extinctions will increase."
Yet another article, titled "Mass Extinction's Cause: 'Sick Earth,'" states that "a warming of the earth and a slowdown in ocean circulation made it harder to replace the oxygen sucked out of the water by marine organisms...microbes would have saturated the water with hydrogen sulfide, a highly toxic chemical."
With all of this scientific data and evidence supporting global warming as the cause of mass extinction, it is clear that the present rise in global climate is bad, to say the least. But would Antarctica really be the place to escape to if it all came crashing down? Let's examine the Earth for a moment: it is spherical with a bulge in the equatorial region which suggests that as the Earth spins on its axis, the middle ground is what gets thrown outwards by gravity, much like a merry-go-round. Antarctica and the Arctic Circle region, being at the bases of the axis, seem to be the steady and sturdy ground to be upon if our world should experience significant changes.
After reading through these articles and support for climate change causing extinction, I am ready to suggest that us human beings should start preparing for an arctic climate...just to be on the safe side.

Rise in Cancer Near Nuclear Plant

A few days ago, I found out that my friend's mother was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. My friend told me that thyroid cancer has been on the rise in Rockland county due to a rise in emissions from a nearby nuclear power plant, called Indian Point. I decided to see if this was in fact the case.

I was able to find a Fox News report dated March 8, 2009 called "Cancer Cluster" that reviewed this trend. Thyroid cancer, which is highly sensitive to radiation, is caused by radioactive iodine found only in nuclear weapons and reactors. This radioactive iodine destroys and injures cells in the thyroid gland, leading to cancer and other disorders. The Fox News story reported that the four counties surrounding the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant (Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester) had the highest rate of thyroid cancer in the state, and among the highest in the U.S. The report stated that between 2001-2004 there were 992 reported cases of thyroid cancer, the highest amount in the country during this period.

Joseph Mangano of the research group called the Radiation and Public Health project also reported on this trend. Mangano reported that "before the Indian Point reactors began operating, the thyroid cancer rate in the four surrounding counties was 1.5 percent below that of the state. Now they are 54 percent higher." In his attempt to have the plant completely shut down, Mangano analyzed data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which he says showed that "from 2001-2005, the thyroid cancer rate for the four counties was 66% above the U.S. average The rate of the disease in Rockland County is 106 percent above the national average; 102 percent above in Putnam; 87 percent higher in Orange and 42 percent higher than average in Westchester."

This trend, in my opinion, can be linked to the actions of Enron right before they went bankrupt. The "it's just business" practice of nearly all companies seems to apply both to Enron and Indian Point. These companies simply turn their heads and focus primarily on gaining profit. It is confusing to me when some businesses put "customer satisfaction" at the top of their priorities, when, in this case, their very own customers are becoming diagnosed with cancer. Instead of "customer satisfaction" at the top of the list of priorities, I think many companies put "comany satisfaction" at the top, ignoring the satisfaction of their very own customers.

Sweet Solution to Energy Production

Engineer Vikram Seebaluck of the University of Mauritius and energy technology Dipeeka Seeruttun of the Royal Institute of Technology, in Stockholm, Sweden, have demonstrated that an optimal blend of sugarcane agricultural residues (30%) mixed with 70% sugarcane bagasse (the fibrous residue left after sugar production) can be used to generate electricity at a cost of just 0.06 US dollars per kilowatt hour. That figure is on a par with the costs of other renewable energies, including wind power at $0.05/kWh.

I saw this artical on line and thought this would be a pretty good source of energy. Sugar is a huge industry and to use the residue left over to produce energy is a really good idea. It is also very cheap to produce just being 1 cent more than the cost to produce wind energy. If this works well i think this would be a very effective way to produce electricity.

5 Ways to Save the Planet

Today I stumbled across this article titled “Five Ways to Help Save the Planet in 30 Minutes or Less” and after reading it I thought it summed up a lot of what we have discussed in class. The first thing the article mentions is to drive less. If you are only going a short distance ride a bike or walk, and when traveling longer distances take public transportation if available. This article says that a family who uses public transportation may save enough money to cover their food costs for a year. The second thing the article suggests doing is to eat more vegetables. The article talks about how the raising of animals contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and how vegetables are better for you anyway. The third and fourth items the article suggests is to use reusable shopping bags and to change your light bulbs to more energy efficient ones. The last suggestion the article makes is to pay bills online, as this will cut down on paper mail, and paper being thrown away.
These are all small changes but as we have discussed in class these small changes can make a big difference. Many of these small changes we can make are not only better for the environment but can also save us money, time, keep us healthy, and help make our lives more hassle free. These changes not only benefit the environment they benefit us. There is no reason that all of us can’t make small changes in our everyday lives, we just need to find the motivation to do so. What we need to realize is that there is motivation for every person to make these changes. Whether one wants to save money, get healthier, or help the environment motivation can be found. We just have to teach ourselves to think differently. For example if one wants to lose weight, they might join a gym; they pay for their membership, then drive to the gym then drive home. Instead why not go for a run outside, or eat more vegetables, or walk to work or school. We need to learn to think differently and teach ourselves not to keep buying more and more.
http://environment.about.com/od/greenlivingdesign/a/30_minutes.htm

Global Warming is a Hoax?

About two weeks ago, one of the world's leading climate change research centers was hacked into, revealing shocking files and emails. Hackers targeted the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit and published the files, including some personal messages, on the internet. After the emails and files were read, the research center was accused of manipulating data on global warming. "There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request", George Monbiot of the UK Gaurdian states. He continues and says Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change." The CRU, which plays a leading role in compiling UN reports and tracks long-term changes in temperature, has repeatedly refused to provide detailed information about the data underlying the temperature records. It is thought that this could have triggered the theft. Climate change skeptics claim that some of the leaked messages discuss ways of manipulating data that fails to comply with the establishment view that climate change is real and is being driven by man. Here is an excerpt taken from an email sent by Phil Jones, the director of the Unit:

"I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90."

Now what I found interesting is that this excerpt taken from ONE email that was sent by Phil Jones was sent nearly 10 years ago. In an interview with Phil Jones, he angrily stated to the reporter "Do you remember exactly what an email you sent said 10 years ago? No, didnt think so". Since the integrity of the global warming theory is being questioned by the media, I am now questioning the integrity of the media and their pattern of blowing stories way out of proportion. Should the entire global warming theory be viewed as a scam due to a variety of emails sent by three or four scientists? Should all physical evidence of global warming now be entirely ignored because of a few emails? Do these few scientists represent the entire global field of science? Is every scientist a liar and merely creating a scam for no reason? These are my questions for every skeptic and the media. I believe that the media is fighting to downplay global warming and yet again manipulate the publics opinion. Will it work? Nope.

The Copenhagen Conference

Starting on December 7th, and stretching until the 18th of the same month, representatives from 192 nations will work together to develop a collective strategy for combating global warming. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark to discuss the best way to follow up the expiring Kyoto Protocol. Needless to say, the eyes of the world are watching China and the United States, the biggest CO2 contributors, and hoping the two giants will be a part of the proposal this time around.

Let us all hope that China and the US will find the terms of any agreement reached acceptable, for the sake of the planet. According to NY Times' Elizabeth Rosenthal, "In 1997, 37 industrialized nations and the European Union agreed to emission targets in a pact known as the Kyoto Protocol. (American lawmakers declined to ratify the pact, which took effect in 2005 and must be renewed or renegotiated by 2012.)" The US refused participation in Kyoto due in large part to China's rejection. China passed on the protocol because they felt it would severely hinder their flourishing economy. Their country is considered "developed", but they are still developing in many parts, and emission caps would hamper them. The US turned down Kyoto because they felt in unfair for them to agree when China would not. China believes, justifiably, that they deserve the opportunity the US had to build up their country.

Copenhagen aims mostly to provide a bridge between now and 2012, when Kyoto expires. Kyoto has fallen short of many of its goals. Its successor, Copenhagen, shares the same goals, for the most part, primarily aiming for "reductions in emissions and aid for developing nations to adapt to a changing climate." It's time the two world leaders stopped shirking their responsibilities to the world at large and to future generations. We need to find a way to work together, with the rest of the world, to set ambitious, yet realistic goals for reducing emissions. This is not just about Americans or Chinese. It's about the world. If we continue to fail planet, we will all lose. If we find a way to work together, however, there is still hope. The world is watching our country and China. Let's not let them down this time.

COFFEE CUPS

Today I got a coffee and after I was finished I was looking at the sleeve I put on the paper coffee cup to keep my hands from being burned. This particular sleeve advertised saying it was eco friendly and was made from 100% recycled paper. At first when I thought about this I thought it was good. Then I realized that probably all these “eco friendly” sleeves are going to be thrown out. So really we just used an old resource that we no longer found useful and used more energy to make it into something else useful then we throw it away. Yes it is made from recycled paper so it is better than using paper we just cut down new trees to make. But a coffee sleeve is something that we really should not be using anyway. So in reality it is just a waste of energy and resources.
We use an enormous number of disposable coffee cups every single day. These coffee cups are sometimes made from recycled paper, sometimes from Styrofoam and when we are finished with them we throw them away. Billions of coffee cups are thrown away every year. They fill up our landfills and are one item that we could easily go without. It would be easy for everyone to purchase a reusable coffee mug and use it instead of using a new disposable coffee cup every time. I know for me sometimes I forget my reusable mug, and I’m sure this is the case with many other people as well. There are things we could do to promote people to use reusable mugs instead of disposable ones. For example I know some places offer a small discount if you bring your own mug. The discount may not be significant if you get it once but it you get it every day for a year it could be quite substantial. We need to make reusable mugs more of a habit in our everyday lives rather than something we use when we remember it. It is a small change in our daily lives that could have a large impact on our environment in the long run.