Cancer Now #1 Cause of Death in China, Coal Largely to Blame

Link
China is beginning to see the effect of their rapid march toward industrialization. Nearly 25% of China's deaths are contributed to cancer, while the leading cause of death in China is lung cancer. This is all caused by the heavy industry, coal-fired power plants, and numerous factories have so saturated the air with pollution. The number one contributor to this pollution is coal. According to the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, the burning of coal is responsible for 70 percent of the emissions of soot that clouds out the sun in so much of China; 85 percent of sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain and smog; and 67 percent of nitrogen oxide, a precursor to harmful ground level ozone. Coal burning is also a major emitter of carcinogens and mercury, a potent neurotoxin. So coal is literally killing China.
Reaction: Wow this is scary. I mean I know that China has horrible pollution, but I didn't know it was so bad that their cancer rate increased so much. This makes me think that it could be America in a few years. If we don't stop burning coal we could be at this point or somewhere close to this point in a number of years. I think this is a wake up call for the world and shows that alternative energy should be integrated into societies, like China, that are really over populated because it could help with problems like this.
Questions:
1) Do you think America will be able to avoide this fate? Why or why not?
2) Why does China have such bad air pollution?
3) What could be done to fix China's problem?

An Oxygen Tank-Equipped Bubble Dress Makes Air Pollution Irrelevent

Summary: Hannah Marie Newman came up with a dress called 8. The dress has a bubble and an air tank pumps clean air into the bubble. This dress has solved the problem of air quality. It is really just a funny play on our air quality problems. The 8 will not be sold in stores or worn around for pleasure. Newman just wanted to show that the air quality pollution is a problem and if we do not solve it then this is the solution.

Reflection: This is pretty funny. Newman really put herself out there by challenging our government like this. This dress is very funny and will put the air quality problem in perspective for a lot of people. I hope that it doesn't come to people wearing bubble suits for clean air, but if it did then this would be a good solution. I am completely shocked and excited to see the future for our air.

Questions:
1. How do you feel about the bubble dress?
2. Do you think our government will do anything about the air soon?
3. How do you feel about the air quality problem?

Air Pollution Can Harm Human Reproduction

Summary: The effects of air pollution from burning fossil fuels are not only bad for humans respiratory health, but now there are reports that air pollution lowers fertility in men and can complicate pregnancy in women. These problems are likely compounded by the rapid urbanization taking place in the rest of the world where it is harder to access healthcare. A test that examined 748 male workers that inhaled air pollution daily, 500 of those men showed change in their fertility.

Reaction: I always knew air pollution from burning fossil fuels was damaging to human's health, but this is very surprising! Air pollution causes so much damage and it is surprising that we have not done much about it, even after these test were taken and are clearly something we should worry about.

Questions:

1. How will this effect our world in the future?

2. What do you think can change so this is prevented?

3. What else can air pollution effect other then human's health?

Article:

Air Pollution Hurts Worker Productivity as Well as Lungs

Article

Summary: New ideas for better pollution control are constantly being proposed, but unfortunately these ideas are quickly shut down by the defenders of the status quote who says we can't afford them. They say, we could come up with cleaner technologies, but it would drag the economy down. "We're made to believe that it's a choice: protect air quality and human health or protect the economy." However, this assumption has been proven false by Matt Yglesias. According to Yglesias' recent studies a 10 ppd decrease in ozone concentrations increase worker productivity by 4.2 percent. Also, coal plants and factories cause hundreds of billions of dollars of damage to the economy annually. These facts can help us conclude that if we have better pollution control, then there will be better work productivity and our economy will benefit from it.

Reaction: I thought this new study was extremely interesting. The people who are opposed to making air quality better have to realize that we can always rebuild our economy. Large amounts of pollution in the air causes people and animals to become extremely sick and it's really bad for the environment. These issues are clearly a important and serious then having the economy go down. Additionally, if better air quality is going to improve the productivity of workers, then over time it will benefit the economy as well.

1.) Do you think we should spend the money on better technology?

2.) What are other risks of having alot of air pollution in our air?

3.) Why do you think better air quality causes better work productivity?

Landfill Taking Drilling Waste

In Weeling, West Virginia, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection gave permission to Chesapeake Energy to dump waste at the Short Creek Landfill. They are allowing this to happen because there are protective liners in the landfills at Short Creek which would collect leachate and test on it. However many people are unhappy with this approval. This is because recently, Wetzel County property owners sued Chesapeake Energy for dumping radioactive material into a large hole on their property. Now, Chesapeake is claiming that their waste contains no more radioactive waste. Many are concerned for the quality of their drinking water.

I thought this article was extremely interesting. I am really shocked that the Department of Environmental Protection would allow them to dump waste that recently was reported to contain radioactive material. If I live near this area, I would be furious. This is because the leachate from the landfill would be EXTREMELY dangerous to consumer's health if it was not properly taken care of.

1. Do you think the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection made the right decision?

2. How would you feel if a similar situation happened near us?

3. Would you be surprised if there was an disease outbreak in this area? Why?

Virtual Reality Lab Foucus on Conservation

Summary: "If a tree falls in a virtual forest, will anyone hear an environmental message?" That is the question that Sun Joo Ahn asked. She and Jeremy Bailenson are starting a new phenomena. Reality replications of cutting down a red-wood tree in the forest. A group of test sbjects were split into two groups. The first group read an article about the descriptive sounds and scenes of a red-wood tree being cut down. The second grop actually got to cut the tree down, with the help of virtual reality. The user puts on a helmet where all they see is the forest, and the speakers project the noises that one would hear. In fact when cleaning up a spilled glass of water the group who read the article used 20% more napkins than those who cut the tree down.

Reaction: I think that this new way of thinking is a great way to get our society to start listening. We need to conserve the forests we have left, or our animal s will have no more habitats to live in, and we will be out of birds to look at and animals to eat in some cases. I feel so strongly about this because I want our earth to survive and in order for that to happen we all need to pitch in and conserve.

Questions:

1) Do you think that this technology could help us start to conserve more paper and not be so wastefull? Why or why not?

2) What concerns you about our declining amount of forest habitats?

3) Would you be the one to step up and start to make a change? If so what will you do?

Wind Farms Paid Not To Produce - A Lesson In Energy Transmission & Storage

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/wind-farms-paid-not-produce-energy-transmission-storage-lesson.php?campaign=th_rss

Summary: Last month six Scottish wind farms were paid 1.46 million to operate their farms. The power that was produced was too much though for the UK eletrical grid to withhold. Wind farms in the UK are outspacing the the ability for the grid to accomadate the extra power.The power that is produced by wind farms needs to be taken care of properly and supplied where it needs to go. All though we need to get off fossil fuels we need to put this energy somewhere where it is needed.

Reflection: This is very interesting. I understand that we need to find a way to replace fossil fuels but i can't believe this alternative is making more than we need. They should sell the excess power to other countries. That way there is no waste and places that don't have power are supplied. This would be a great solution. I believe if you have the option to use an alternative energy you should. Look how much money these people made. I would definitely do this if i lived there.

Questions:

1) Would you use wind energy if you could? Why?

2) What do you think the UK does with the excess power?

3) Do you think it is possible for the world to get rid of fossil fuel use?

Futuristic Laptop Features Solar Panel Coverage

Link to article

Summary:

Years ago, putting solar cells into gadgets was very popular, this idea is now coming back in laptops. This new laptop is called the Lifebook Leaf. It has many advantages like being waterproof ,it's flexibility and it's touchscreen. The exterior is a giant solar cell, that can be folded open and charged. I think this is a great invention, especially with our environmental crisis. The designers of this laptop believe that designers can no longer rely on energy sources as if they were limitless.

Questions:

Do you think this is practical?

Do you think this is a good invention? and why?

What are some other inventions that you think could help save our environment?

Solar Cell Efficiency Could Be Boosted by Minimizing Defects

A new advance in solar cells that tips the surface with minuscule cone structures could neutralize manufacturing defects, boosting efficiency up to 80%. In conventional solar panels, more than 50% of the charges generated by sunlight are lost due to defects. Scientist Jun Xu and his team are looking at how nanocones can neutralize the defects. The idea isn't to fix the defects but to make them irrelevant. With the nanocones the team increased the overall electric charge to overcome the pitfalls of defects. The efficiency gains are relatively minor -- rising to 3.2 percent, compared to 1.8 percent for panels without the nanocones. "Our efficiency is moderate in generation, but the difference between the two platforms is huge," Xu said, referring to the models with and without nanocones. In the real world, even a much smaller percentage increase would be an important achievement for solar.
Reaction: This is really interesting. I didn't know that solar panels had a lot of defects. This could really expand the possibilities for solar energy. It could make it more efficient. I think the nanocones will improve solar panels and I hope that this works for Jun Xu and his team. In class we're learning about all the different types of energies and its important that the energies keep improving.
Questions:
1) Do you think this will improve solar power?
2) What is your opinion on switching to alternative energies?
3) Are there other alternative energies that you think should be looked into more? Or should solar be the main focus? explain.

Piglets Inherit Genetic Modifications for Clean Manure

Canada has approved limited production of animals dubbed "enviropigs™." This is a genetically modified breed of pigs producing up to 65% less phosphorous in pig excrement and urine. They would pass this trait onto their young as well. The issue that "enviro" can be attached to these pigs raises some major questions. Will it really work? What does this mean for the continued debates over GMOs? These pigs are modified using an enzyme known as phytase. They found this enzyme in E.coli bacteria. Scientists also discovered that the trait became inherited. The cost of raising pigs is reduced because farmers do not need to supplement pig diets with phosphorous nor with commercially manufactured phytase. Waste treatment costs, to manage the phosphorous in manure, can also be saved. Canada only approved limited prodution.
Reaction: This is a great advance in GMOs. I remember how in class we learned that people were always having to modify their animals or plants each new season. With these one animal needs to be modified and its done. This also benefits the environment. I am in support of this because it could help the environment and it doesn't seem like humans are going to be too effected by this, since these pigs will probably be saved for breeding. Either way this is a cool advancement in the frontier of GMOs and I am really interested to see if there is a follow up.
Questions:
1) Will it work?
2)What do you think this means for GMO debates?
3)Do you support more research into this topic moving forward? Why or why not.

*link in photo

Round Up Ready GMO Crop May Cause Animal Miscarriges

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/02/roundup_ready_crops_to_blame_for_animal_miscarriages.php?campaign=th_rss

Summary: Round up ready GMO crops contain an organism in them that is known to cause miscarriges in animals. This organism can reproduce and cause diseases in plants and animals. Scientists say that a moratorium should be put on the sale and planting of round up ready crops. They say that if this is causing disease and miscarriges in animals then we can only imagine what it must be doing to us.
Reflection: This is crazy. How can they allow something that could cause disease and miscarriges to be sold. People need to stop buying these and stop eating them. If we boycott them then they will stop selling them. I know from one of my family members that miscarriges are hard to deal with. If they keep happening many families will be hurt and sad. i do not want to see that happen.
Questions:
1. How do you feel about GMO crops?
2. How do you think you would feel if you or your wife was pregnant and had a miscarrige?
3. How do you think this crop has affected humans so far?

Monsanto's GMO Corn Causes Organ Damage in Rodents

Link to article

Summary: After genetically modifying plants and animals become more and more popular, a new report from International Journal of Biological Science suggests that not all GMO's are safe. They have discovered that three different types of Monsanto's GMO crops cause organ damage in rats. Each of these crops have been approved by safety boards, and are sold in many parts of the world including Europe and the United States. There has been an immediate ban on the import and cultivation of this corn.

Reaction: This is very big news for the GMO cultivation! This proves that GMO's can be very dangerous to us. I think this won't be the only time there will be negative impacts on our bodies and our environment because of GMO's. The safety board should have stricter rules for GMO's now that this discovery has been made. I think it is very scary that this crop has been sold widely around the world, when it could be very harmful to our bodies. They should do many more tests on all GMO crops being sold to protect our environment and our health.

Questions:

1. What do you think they should change or do differently after discovering this?

2. Do you agree with genetically modifying crops?

3. How do you feel about the safety board's decision to approve of this crop?

Genetically Modified Chickens That Don't Transmit Bird Flu Developed; Breakthrough Could Prevent Future Bird Flu Epidemics

Article by: Science Daily( January 14, 2011)

Summary: Researchers at the Universities of Cambridge and Edinburgh have found a way for chickens to stop transmitting avian flu to one another. This could pntentially stop all bird flu outbreaks, and stop this strain of flu from entering the human population. Though the scientists do not know what the effects on humans will be, they are hopefull. To make this achievable the researchers entered a new gene that acts as a "decoy." This decoy acts like a very important part of the bird flu virus. Instead of recognizing the viral genome, the virus recognizes the "decoy." Which in turn prevents the virus from replicating. When chickens were infected with the disease, the research shows that they did not pass the virus to the other chickens who were kept in the same pen; whether they were transgenic or not.

Opinion: I think it is excellent that scientists have found a way to prevent avian flu from being transmitted. I see it as we all eat chicken, so if there is a way for prevention, why should we put ourselves at risk? Also the fact that two different scientists have the same opinion on the matter, makes me feel like the experiment will succeed. With chickens being kept in such tight quarters things are bound to be spread that could not only kill them but us too. I don't really want to take that risk.

Questions:

1.Do you think that theses GM chickens will one day be safe for consumption?

2. What are the possibilities of the avian flu eventually getting into the human population?

3. Is it possible we ourselves have consumed GMO animals, and do you think the effects are good or bad?

California Court Overturns Order to Destroy GMO Beets

Summary: In December 2010, it looked like the GMO controversies would be coming to an end when a federal judge ordered that 258 acres of genetically modified sugar beets be destroyed. This was because the risk of gene contamination in Oregon's Willamette Valley was so great. However, the situation recently got worse when a federal appeals court in San Francisco overturned a previous ruling to destroy the sugar beets. This could be a potential problem because the GMO sugar beets account for 95% of the crop and there are fears that the wind might cross-pollinate with the organic crops.

Reaction: I found this article extremely interesting and I thought it was really strange that our legal system did not follow through with destroying the GMO sugar beets. The owners of organic farms must be furious because the seeds can easily be transported into their farms. After gathering information in class and learning about the major effects GMO's can have on our environment, I do not think they should be used. Not knowing the long term effects of using them is extremely dangerous to the health of humans and the environment.

Questions:

1. Are you for or against GMO's?

2. If you were the judge, how would you handle this situation?

3. How would you feel if you were the organic farmers?

Golf Courses That Reuse Water Irrigate Too Much, Study Suggests

Summary: The Royal Golf Club in Las Palmas has been irrigating their golf course too much. A study showed that the plants on the golf course were getting 83% more than they needed. This could lead to contaminating their aquifers. The club has been using desalinated water that they recycle and use over and over. The use of the desalinated water, though a useful way to recycle water, can have a negative impact on the stability of the soil and the quality of water in the aquifer.

Reflection: The Royal Golf Club needs to slow down the irrigation of the plants on their course. If they don't they risk the chance of contaminants and other things getting into their aquifer. Also their greens won't be as sturdy, because the soil will become loose and the golfers won't be able to dig their spikes in. I'm a little shocked thata as the price of water rises, they continue to use the same amount of water even though they don't need to. Over irrigating plants is bad for the health of the plants, they will be so overwatered that their roots will in a sense drown.

Questions:
Why do you think The Royal Golf Club irrigates their plants so much?
If they contaminate the aquifers, where will they get drinking water?
Should they think of cutting back and risk their lawns not being so lusciously green?

Picture is the link (:

Japan's Earthquake Shortened Earth's Day

Link

On March 11, 2011 Japan's 8.9 magnitude earthquake shortened Earth's day by 1.8 millionths of a second. This doesn't sound like a lot but it does have a large impact. After this day our Earth is spinning quicker then usual. Scientists discovered this by collecting information from the earthquake data and the earth's rate of spin. This happened because every time the earth's mass moves closer to the rotation axis, it spins faster. To help explain how it works, you can think of a ice-skater moving her arms closer to her body. When the skater does this, they spin faster.

Reaction:

I thought this article was so interesting! I had no idea that this was possible. This article got me thinking, even though it only shortened the day by 1.8 millionths of a second, how many more earthquakes or other natural disasters need to occur before our day gets to be shorter by hours? Although it does not affect humans that are day got millionths of a second shorter,I think that this could affect our world millions of years from now.

1) What other earthquake's may have shortened our day?

2) How did the earthquake effect Japan?

3) How did this earthquake effect the rest of the world?

Banana peels

A new science shows that banana peels can be used to remove metals from river water. A scientist, Gustavo Castro, discovered this by building water filters out of banana peels and forcing water through the filters. He and his team found that the metal was removed from the water and was bonded to the banana peel. Another test preformed was placing dried and ground banana peels and combined them with flasks of water that contained known concentrations of metals. Other studies have shown that other plant parts ex apple and sugar cane wastes, coconut fibers, and peanut shells can also remove metals from water. This is a better alternative to methods of decontamination used today as they are very expensive and could leave the water with different types of toxins. This is cheaper and helps to ensure that dangerous metals stay out of the water and won't addle systems in the body. Though it's advisable that no one use bananas at home, because tap water tends to be safe
Link
Reaction: This is an interesting scientific discovery. In class, we learned about the types of contaminants found in water and some of the methods that can be used to remove them. I was intrigued when I learned that the cleaning or decontamination methods could leave different contaminants in the water. What surprised me was that something as simple as a banana peel could be used as an inexpensive way to get rid of metals in the water. This could really help other countries that don't have the resources America does.
Questions:
1) Do you think banana peels should now be used to filter metals from water?
2) Are there any other ways to filter metals in water?
3) Could this be applied in the real world or is it just a discovery that won't go any where?

Will Congress Stop Spending $860,000 Annually on Bottled Water?

Link

Summary:

According to Corporate Accoutability International, the House of Representatives spends at least $860,000 a year on bottled water. Some are saying this is completely unnecessary and needs to come to an end. Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton quoted, "Congress is spending almost a million dollars annually on bottled water for itself that often carries misleading claims of purity, when water of equal or better quality is available through the public drinking water system installed here in the House." Studies show that about 70% their tap water cost a penny a gallon and bottled costs a dollar a gallon, that's a hundred times more! Also, some are saying the bottles that are purchases are compostable. However, this is not guaranteed and the bottles could just end up sitting in landfills producing one of the worst emissions culprits: methane.

Reflection:

After reading this article I was completely shocked! It is ridiculous how much money is spent on bottled water and I 100% agree with Norton that the change needs to be made. Tons of plastic, water, and money would be saved just by doing this! Also, after having the classroom discussion about tap water vs. bottled water, tap water seems safer to drink just because it is more filtered and closely watched for contaminants! This discussion was brought up at the dinner table not too long ago, and from the sounds of it, my family is going to make the switch too!

Questions:

1.) Do you think they should make the switch from bottled water to tap?

2.) What other alternatives are there?

3.) If you had the choice, would you make the switch?

Oil Drilling to Resume in the Gulf’s Deep Waters

Title: Oil Drilling to Resume in the Gulf's Deep Waters

By JOHN M. BRODER and CLIFFORD KRAUSS

Published: February 28, 2011

link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/business/energy-environment/01drill.html?partner=rss&emc=rss 

Summary:
The Interior Department said they would allow Noble Energy to drill into 6,500 ft deep waters off the coast of Louisiana. Michael Bromwich, Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy, said that the old system of fast approvals would not be happening anymore. They would review by a well to well process. This drilling comes as no suprise while oil prices are rising. Judge Martin Freedman recently ordered the Obama administration to move quick about allowing deep well drilling. Although Bromwich said his request was not because of Freedmans work and that they were opposed to what Freedman said. Bromwich said the Noble had put in new safety and envioronmental rules after the spill and had a contract with a company that could control a blowout of 69,000 barrels of oil a day.

Reflection:
It is very interesting that they would allow this so soon. This article really brought this situation in front of me. Water pollution is very serious and the BP oil spill killed many animals living in that area. I read many articles about the spill and it just shocks me that they would allow this. I think they should have waited at least a year and then tested this new drilling in smaller waters. Also the fact that they will be drilling in almost the same spot is ridiculous. I can't believe Bromwich let this happen.

Questions:
Do you think they should start drilling again in deep waters?
Why do you think Bromwich let this happen so quickly?
Do you think we should drill for oil at all anymore?


by Phil T.

Hudson River Fish Evolve

Summary: The Atlantic Tomcod, found on the bottom of the Hudson River, were found to have a genetic mutation. This mutation allows the fish to live in the Hudson and not be effected by PCB's (polychlorinated byphenils). If these fish did not have this rare mutation their species would probably been extinct by now. Their adaptation to the chemicals in the water was fast compared to most evolutions.

Reaction: I thought it was really cool how these tiny bottom feeders learned to adapt so fast. The chemical was only introduced to the Hudson in 1947. I personally thought adaptations took longer to occur in most species.

1. Do you think it is wrong for company's to be dumping chemicals into rivers like the Hudson? Why?

2. Why do you think these fish developed the gene mutation so quickly?

3. What are the consequences of having these chemicals dumped into our rivers?

Color Changing polar bear

Summary: There is a new invention that can show you when you are using too much electricity in your home.It is a stuffed animal polar bear that communicates with a home's electricity meter. It glows various colors to help people save energy. The pinker the glow gets, the more energy you are wasting.

Reflection: I think this stuffed animal is a great way to help people conserve energy. Energy being wasted is such a big dilemma in our world that is hard to fix. Many people don't realize how much energy they are wasting, and this polar bear stuffed animal is very helpful.

Questions:

1. What are some other ways that we can save energy?

2. Do you think people should try harder to use less energy?

3. Why is it important to save energy?

Galapagos Island rat infestation

The Galapagos Islands have been infested with an invasive species of rat. The rat has infested other spots and they have used poisoned blue bait to get rid of the rat. The bait only attracts the rat and does not attract the other inhabitants of the Galapagos. After the rats are gone, scientists will work on the less invasive species that inhabit the island. The bait is only putting the Galapagos hawk at risk because the hawk can eat the rats that have eaten the poison bait. Scientist captured 20 hawks just in case. The rats pose a threat to the tortoises, iguanas, and 50 different land and sea birds. These rats originally came to the island and wiped out the black rat.

When I read this article I was shocked that rats could pose such a threat. I always figured rats were not that important in the environment. I think the scientists are really inventive to make the poison bait. It could get rid of all the rats and not affect the animals a lot so the ecosystem could repair itself more.

1) Why do you think the rats pose a threat to so many species?
2) Why is is it important to ensure the Hawk survives?
3) Do you think there is a better way to get rid of the rats?

Second Blog! Rachel Rausa

Ants Have Big Impact on Environment as 'Ecosystem Engineers'

By: ScienceDaily 2/4/11

Have you ever thought about how important ants are? Recent research has been done at the University of Exeter and it has been discovered that ants have a tremendous impact on their local environment, especially the food chain. When the ants move through the soil underground, it adds lots of nutrients to it. This effects all levels of the food chain. Also, ants prey on a wide range of other animals, even prey that are larger than the ants. Dirk Sanders, an author of the study from the university's Centre for Ecology and Conservation, said that this was because ant workers can attack in large groups. Plus, they are extremely aggressive.

Before reading this article, I just thought that ants were just useless, annoying bugs that crawl on you when you sit in the grass. I now know how important ants are to our local environment. Without ants, many other species would be effected because the ants have such a powerful impact on the food chain.

By adding nutrients to the soil, how does this positively impact the other animals?

How do you think the food chain would be effected without ants?

What other ways to you think ants effect the environment?

 Sorry forgot my picture on the first post!

first blog. Upton and carbon emissions

Fred Upton Met with Energy Lobbyists in Secret Before His About-Face on Carbon Regulation

Summary:

Fred Upton changed his stance about climate change and said that regulating carbon emissions would be "unconstitutional". A meeting was held in secret with an invitation-only guest list that is tightly guarded. Local constituents are suprised at Upton. WKZO noted it is about more than just carbon emissions. They thought because of the Enbrige oil spill near Upton's district he would back them up on tighter construction restrictions. Instead he is backing the construction of new pipeline from Canada to Texas. He is now planning a bill to block EPA's ability to regulate carbon emissions.

Personal Reflection:

I was shocked that Upton  would do something like this. He should be working for the people, but instead he is working for his own needs. Upton should back what the people want and stop worrying about the carbon emissions. That is his own opinion and not the peoples

Questions:

1. Why do you think Upton is changing is stance?

2. Do you think Carbon emissions should be regulated? Why?

3. Do you think we should stop the construction of pipelines? why?

4. What do you think of all the oil spills happening reasently?