California Smog Problem Putting Giant Sequoia Redwoods At Risk
Author: Jaymi Heimbuch
Publication date: May 31, 2012
Link: http://www.treehugger.com/natural-sciences/californias-smog-problem-putting-giant-sequoia-redwoods-risk.html

Caption: This is one of the trees that is harmed by air pollution in California. These trees are called the Sequoia Redwoods.

Summary: California is well known for their gigantic redwood trees. This element of their landscape is in danger due to harmful smog in the Central Valley. Things like farms, food processing factories, and major highways all contribute to the pollution. This pollution prevents new seeds from being established. Also, needles turn yellow and cause the tree to die. The Central Vally region of California has the worst air quality of any national park, According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Not only does this pollution hurt the trees, it hurts us too. Workers in these national parks have to be warned of their increased risk of lung and heart problems associated with the pollution. The future of these trees is still uncertain, and a lot must be done still to ensure better air quality.

Opinion: I think that we had to have known that something like this would happen when we started to pollute more. These trees provide us with oxygen, and humans need oxygen to survive. So, I think that we should do everything we can to save the trees. I remember when I was in California and Oregon on vacation, a saw trees like these. A handful of them looked like they were dying so I asked my dad about it, and he said it was because of bad air quality. In the article, the trees are described as the "lungs of the planet", and it seems to me like they are becoming the 'damaged lungs of the planet'.

Questions:

1)  Explain a few things that can be done to improve the air quality.

2)  Who should be accountable for the polltion? Why?

3)  Do you think that the general public should be worried about this at the moment? Explain.

Temperature Inversion Layers

http://geography.about.com/od/climate/a/inversionlayer.htm

 

Temperature inversion layers, also called thermal inversions or just inversion layers, are areas where the normal decrease in air temperature with increasing altitude is reversed and air above the ground is warmer than the air below it. Inversion layers can occur anywhere from close to ground level up to thousands of feet into the atmosphere.
Inversion layers are significant to meteorology because they block atmospheric flow which causes the air over an area experiencing an inversion to become stable. This can then result in various types of weather patterns. More importantly though, areas with heavy pollution are prone to unhealthy air and an increase in smog when an inversion is present because they trap pollutants at ground level instead of circulating them away.

Opinion: Thermal inversion are areas when warm air is on the top of cold air, reversed from the original pattern Thermal inversions are bad and can create extreme weather conditions. Some of these extreme weather conditions are tornadoes and thunderstorms. Theses inversions are said to be a result of other weather patterns. The occur when a warm less dense air mass moves over a cold dense air mass.

Questions:
1) What are thermal inversions and why are they bad?
2) What are some things that cause these inversions?
3) Explain the normal pattern of air and contrast it to the inversion air pattern.

Pros and Cons of GMO Foods

http://www.livestrong.com/article/213053-pros-cons-of-gmo-foods/

This picture shows a cob of corn. The different colored peices
of corn are supposed to represent the GMO parts of the corn.

          As we all have learned, GMOs are genetically modified organisms that have new genes added from another organism to their existing genes. GMOs are an extremely controversial topic since there are so many pros and cons. The idea of having genetically modified food is appealing to some because it can help them with their issue of malnutrition; vitamins and minerals may be added to a food that were not recently present to enhance the food's nutritional value. On the other hand, some people may experience allergic reactions to genetically modified foods since scientists may mix/add protiens that were not present in the original food. Another con to GMOs is decreased antibiotic efficacy. What that means is that the food is altered so it is immune to certain diseases, then when we eat the food we are also immune to those illnesses. This may seem good at first, however with the GMOs from the food in your body it will make the real antibiotics less effective. Plants can also be altered to be resistant to insects. This is a pro because the GMO helps keep insects away whil still remaining safe for humans to eat. GMOs that keep away repell insects and weeds are also environmentally protective. By using a GMO to keep away the pests/weeds there is no more need for the harmful chemicals to destroy the environment. One of the major cons to GMOs would be the fear of the altered organisms transfering to the wild and mixing thier genes. By doing so, some species may become endangered or even extinct. As you can see there are the pros and cons to GMOs, which is what makes it an extremely controversial topic.

Opinion:
I think that certain GMOs are good, while others are not. I like the idea of the GMOs that repell pests so we don't have to use chemicals. By not using chemicals we are eliminating so much pollution and the idea of GMOs is very positive. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of changing the vitamins, protiens and minerals around in foods. I believe it is very dangerous to do that because someone could have a major allergic reaction to somthing they had always eaten without a problem. I think that GMOs should be allowed when scientists are making the plants resistant to ceratin pests and weeds, but GMOs that alter the vitamins, minerals and protiends of a food should not be allowed at all.

Questions:

1. If you had the power to do so, would you ban all GMOs? Explain why or why not.

2. What are some examples of GMOs that we are in contact with everyday and may not even realise it? Why are we not aware of these GMOs?

3. Do you believe that altering an organism to be pest resistant is better that using pesticides/chemicals? Explain.

Air pollution 'will become bigger global killer than dirty water'

Beijing China is one of the cities estimated to be hit hardest by air pollution.

Air pollution has become a bigger killer to humans than poor sanitation and the lack of clean drinking water. It is estimated that approximately 3.6 million people per year will be prematurely killed due to air pollution by 2050. That is almost 140 billion people, and the majority of the deaths are expected to be in China and India. The richer ocuntries are also expected to get hit harder because of their ground level ozone and their elderly populations--elderly people are more receptive to health problems. A recent report from the OCED revealed four key areas of main concern: climate change, the loss of biodiversity, water, and the health results of pollution. If current policies are allowed to carry on, the world will far exceed the levels of greenhouse gas emissions that scientists say are safe, the report found. If countries don't use cleanerr energy, emissions are expected to increase as much as half of what they are now.

Opinion:

It's not surprising that air pollution is expected to kill so many people, and that estimation of casualties is based on the current pollution rate, which will probably rise by 2050 so that means air pollution will kill way more people. The amount of pure oxygen in the atmosphere is a rather small percentage, and it's only going to get smaller. So many people are going to die due to things that were originally thought of to make our lives better, which is ironic. But hopefully over the next few years someone will invent a way to reduce the amount of pollution we put into the air.

Questions:

1)Where else in the world will be heavily impacted by air pollution?

2) Could the government(s) put restrictions on the amount of air pollution we are allowed to emit?

3) How long do you think will it take/ What needs to happen for everyone to realize just how badly we are treating the earth? What do you think will happen afterwards?

Wind Turbines Disrupt Golden Eagles Flight Paths
Author: none given
Publication Date: 5/10/2012
Link: http://www.statejournal.com/story/18260148/wvu-researchers-study-how-to-keep-wind-turbines-out-of-eagles-flight-path

Caption: This is a picture of the wind turbines in Altamont Pass, which is in California. Golden Eagles fly through this pass in order to get to their nesting grounds.

Summary: Wind turbines can provide a lot of renewable energy with proper conditions. However, there are a few drawbacks to the turbines. Studies were done in order to try to figure out why many birds, specifically the golden eagle, were getting killed by the wind turbines of Altamont Pass in California. West Virginia University found that birds would rather get to their nesting grounds fast and be tired rather than slow but well rested. In order for the birds to go fast, they need good wind. The places where the wind is optimal, are the same places that have a huge amount of wind turbines. The birds are unable to avoid hitting the wind turbines due to the huge quantity of them. Two biologists from WVU named, Adam Duerr and Trish Miller, placed trackers on the eagles to categorize their flight  and stop the problem. They hope that they can save the birds before it is too late, especially since their population is down to about 2,000 to 5,000.

Opinion: I knew that this kind of thing happened and wanted to know why. I also remember discussing something similar in class about bats getting killed by wind turbines. But you have to know that every good thing has to have at least one or more drawbacks. In this case, we would either have to move the turbines, or let the bird slowly die off. I would defininetly want to move the wind turbines, but to me it just doesn't seem likely. However, if the birds were smart they would change their flight patterns. So, in turn, the wind turbines are actually just speeding up natural selection in my opinion.

Questions:

1)  Do you think the turbines should be moved, or should we let natural selection happen? Provide an explanation of your opinion.

2)  Discuss the pros and cons of wind energy.

3)  What other types of alternative energy could be relied on at Altamont Pass as a substitute for the wind turbines?

Solar Energy 

This picture shows solar energy panel. These panels sit out in the sun all day collecting energy and transmitting it into electricity for us to use.

http://www.dasolar.com/solar-energy 

       Solar energy is a clean, renewable, alternative energy. It is prodused by having panels absorb the sun's energy and convert it into electricity. The elctricity is then either stored in batteries, sent to the grid, or converted into alternating current using an inverter for use at the location.  In fact, "Solar energy is our most abundant form of energy... Just one hour of sunlight provides enough solar energy to power the world's homes for an entire year" (dasolar.com). Solar energy is a renewable enrgy and will always be renewable since it collects its energy from the sun and, hopefully, the sun will always be there to provide us with energy. Solar energy may also be available to people in their homes; instead of paying fof their next electric bill, people may have the oppurtunity to put their own solar panels on their home to collect and make their own energy. There are actually a few ways to use solar energy which include, but are not limited to: Solar Thermal Energy at Home, Solar Hot Air Collectors, and Utility Scale Solar Energy. Solar Thermal Energy at Home is almost exactly what it sounds like; the sun is used to heat air or water which can be used to circualte around your house to keep it warm, or even be stored for showering. Solar hot water heaters are very simple, effective, and an inexpensive way to get hot water. Thermal solar energy is used around the world daily to provide free hot water for every day uses. The next usage of solar energy is solar hot air collectors. Hot air collectors, once again, do exactly what they say they do; collect hot air. This air is heated by the sun and then ventilated throughout the house to keep it warm. Finally there is utility scale solar energy. Utility scale solar energy is when a company produces solar energy that is then sold to everyday users like you and me.

Opinion:

I think solar energy is a great alternative energy source. Solar energy is something that companies should look into and invest in because some day solar energy may be our new main energy source. I believe that we should switch from fossil fuels over to alternative energys, especially solar energy. Solar energy is better than fossil fuels in many different ways, for example it is a clean energy source. Solar energy is also better than fossil fuels becuase it is renewable and free after the panels are set up. Plus, solar energy can be used in the home so people can produce their own energy and not have to worry about their next electric bill. Solar energy is a great way to produce electricity and should be used more often.

Questions:

1. Would you ever use solar energy in your home? Why or why not?

2. What makes solar energy renewable? Explain.

3. Do you believe solar energy will be the next main energy source?

Recycling not always an energy saver, study finds
by: Jonathan Benson
 http://www.naturalnews.com/032465_recycling_energy.html#ixzz1uDgUSGMw

Friday May 20th, 2011
A study at MIT found that in some instances, recycling uses more energy than using new products. Some things however, will always save energy like old tires and used motorcycles. Timothy Gutowski, the professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT, and some of his colleagues found that for every remanufactured product that appeared to have a net energy savings, there was another that had a net energy loss. And even among those with net savings, the benefits were often minute. The team also found that in the instance of performance rates by recycled items vs. new items, new items had better performance rates and saved more energy over time than the recycled items. With tires, they found that more gas was needed to use recycled tires than new tires. Overall, the team still says recycling still does help the environment in a big way with lowering harmful affects on landfills.

People would have ot figure that recycled models wouldn't work as well as new models, recycled models have already been through the process once. It's kid of like age, when people get older they aren't as fast and efficient as they were when they were younger. But what confused me was, it said that recycling tires will always be useful, but then the article said that more gas is used with recycled tires than with new ones. My parents are always looking for opportunities to recycle, specifically my dad. If he doesn't know if something can be recycled, he looks it up online.

1. If newer models save more energy over time than recycled ones, should we use more new items in attempt to save energy despite the impacts on landfills?
2. What could be done to make recycled models almost or just as efficient as new modles?
3. What are some items that most people don't think about recycling? Is there a way to get people to start recycling them more?  

Fertilizer Overuse Damages Agriculture and Environment in China

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china-news/fertilizer-overuse-damages-agriculture-and-environment-in-china-62671.html 

October 12, 2011 

 Picture: Environmental activist Wu Lihong holds up bottles to show the difference between clean water and the algae polluted waters of Taihu Lake in Jiangsu Province. Despite a two-decade battle to clean up the once-scenic Taihu Lake that earned him three years in jail, Wu says the water still 'stinks' from pollution. (Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary: Farmers in China keep increasing the use of chemical fertilizer in an effort to improve yield, while experts warn their overuse is making farmland unusable, degrading the quality of China’s fruit and vegetables, killing lakes and streams, and introducing pollutants into the air. “If farmers overuse chemical fertilizers for a long period, the fertilizer residues will affect water quality. When the nitrogenous fertilizer is washed away or carried into the air, it will decrease air quality,” Xu Mingang, vice director of Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, pointed out in an interview with the NTD TV. Chemical fertilizer use in China has increased by 225% since 1980, according to a survey by the Soil and Fertilizer Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences. The yield increased 40 percent during this period. “The production and consumption of the fertilizer in China are both more than one third of the world. In recent years, in order to increase the grain yield, the use of fertilizer and pesticides has increased, resulting in problems like land desertification, declination of organic matter in lands, and so on,” the general secretary of the Jilin Grain Economic Association, Liu Xiaoran, said, as reported by the Economic Information Daily. Economic Information Daily reported on Aug. 15 that in Jilin Province, which is China’s largest grain production province, said some farmers use the fertilizer for the entire season, in the planting season itself.

Opinion:

I think it is amazing how the fertilizer use is getting so overused that is decreasing not only the water quality but the quality of the air we breathe in. Hopefully they are making changes because as you can see in the picture above their water is dark green when the turbidity is supposed to be clear. As we learned in class the reason the water is green is because of the algal blooms. When too much fertilizer enters the body of water, the water begins to have too much nutrients in it. What has shocked me the most is that China uses about one third of fertilizer in the world. China’s government needs to put a stop to the increase in the use of fertilizer even if the yield is going better. 

Questions:

1)      Do you think that fertilizer is the only reason for the poor water and air quality in China?

2)      Why do you think China had such an increase of the use of fertilizer?

3)      If China does not stop over using fertilizer what are some ways to prevent the fertilizer from entering into the bodies of water?

New soccer ball can generate electricity

 http://www.pri.org/stories/business/social-entrepreneurs/new-soccer-ball-can-generate-electricity2461.html

Published 03 November, 2010

Author: N/A


A group of Harvard students have invented a soccer ball that charges electricity with each kick. The ball can then be used to power a light. Popular Mechanics have already called it one of the breakthrough innovations of the year. The Harvard students responsible for the invention are calling it "sOccket." Hemali Thakkar, a graduating senior at Harvard and one of the creators of the sOccket, told PRI's Living on Earth:

We saw that there was this universal love of soccer around the world and we saw this huge need for electricity and we said, 'hey, why not, why not put the two together.' And that's how sOccket came about.

The invention works by using magnetic charges. A magnet inside the ball bounces back and forth through an inductive coil, allowing an internal battery to capture current that can be used later on. It's the same technology that a shake-flashlight uses to generate and store power.
The ball requires only fifteen minutes of use to power a single LED light for three hours, says Thakkar. After playing with the ball, a light can be plugged into an electrical socket on the outside of the ball. This socket can support a direct-current electrical plug, which is standard in developing countries.
Creating a sustainable energy source for developing countries is about more than simply the ability to see at night. It's an attempt to solve a public-health problem as well, Thakkar says. Over 1.5 billion people worldwide use kerosene lamps to light their homes -- a practice that is directly linked to respiratory infections, which account for the largest percentage of childhood deaths in developing nations.
During South Africa's World Cup, the Harvard students partnered with a design firm to create twenty prototypes of the ball They gave the prototypes to WhizzKids United, an organization dedicated to HIV care and prevention using soccer to reach at-risk kids. Marcus McGilvray, founder of WhizzKids United says, "The ball stood up to the conditions and it held out really well."
After some minor adjustments, the Harvard team hopes to have a new version of the ball on shelves next summer. Proceeds from American sales would support a buy-one-give-one model, so groups like Whizzkids in South Africa could start including the balls into their own programs. McGilvray told Living on Earth:

sOccket really gives it a whole new dimension to be able to show them what innovative inventions are coming up around the world. You know, it gets young people to think, 'Wow!, You know, I think these are great things for children to learn from.'

Opinion: I think this is a great idea and an amazing advancement. It will really help benefit the people from Africa. If they can not pay for electricity they can play and generate electricity on their own. The only defect about this is that it can't generate much electricity. They say it can only power a light bulb. In the future they should be able to make changes and the soccer ball should be able to power much more.  

Questions

1.  How helpful do you think this would be to the African society?
2. Do you think this could help the public health crisis of Kerosene lambs?
3. Do you think that kids in America would use this product?