apes

Dont you just love the new car smell? My mom’s lease was just up, and she got a new Volkswagen.
She doesn’t let me ever take it when I want to, but sometimes I find myself sitting in the car just to smell it. Ok, just kidding, I’m not that big of a freak, but that really is one of my favorite smells.

We all know that cars pollute the air outside, but have you ever thought about car pollution indoors? A group just recently tied the “new car smell” to health issues, something that the chemical industry is upset about. The Ecology Center tested the inside of 200 cars for chemical content. They found, in a Chevy Silverado, for example, the seat contains 94 ppm lead, 2.5% bromine, and 6,798 ppm antimony. The arm rest contains 16% chlorine/PVC, so and and so on. They found what was in the soft door trim, hard door trim, steering wheel, shift knob, etc. Apparently, the chemical components could break down over time.

The Ecology Center announced the ratings and said “These chemicals become part of the air we breathe, contributing to ‘new car smell’ and a variety of acute and long-term health concerns. Since the average American spends more than 1.5 hours in a car every day, toxic chemical exposure inside vehicles is a major source of potential indoor air pollution.”

After studying indoor air quality, we know what chemicals can cause what illnesses. For example, low levels of lead in the air can cause health effects on the central nervous system, kidney, and blood cells. For small children who are more vulnerable, effects include delays in physical and mental development, lower IQ levels, shortened attention spans, and increased behavior problems.

The chemical industry has a whole other side of the story, but it is time for me to go be a napkin in beauty and the beast so I will fill you in later!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17651756/

http://www.epa.gov/iaq/ia-intro.html

It’s always fun to get roses on Valentines Day! But who would ever think when buying roses that they have been sprayed, rinsed and dipped in “a battery of potentially lethal chemicals”.

Does anybody remember that movie we watched last year in Mr. Slajert’s class called “Maria Full of Grace?” Maria worked in that crowded greenhouse cutting roses all day long and dipping them in chemicals. The working conditions were awful and she ended up losing her job. That’s how it really is in Bogota, Colombia. Working with roses provides an alternative to selling cocane, which many end up doing (like Maria in the movie) However, this so-called “positive”alternative hurts workers’ health and Columbia’s environment.

Pesticide usage is a huge problem in Bogota, Columbia. Almost all of the chemicals used for roses are classified as “extremely” or “highly” toxic by the World Health Organization. Making the problem worse, unlike the U.S., Columbia has no government regulations about pesticide use inside greenhouses, where toxicity levels tend to rise. On Nov. 25, 2003, 200 workers at Flores Aposentos were hospitalized after fainting and developing sores inside their mouths. The company was only fined $5,770 for this mass poisoning.

TO GO WITH STORY SLUGGED COLOMBIA TOXIC FLOWERS- A worker cut roses at the Inversiones Morcote flower farm in Bogota, Monday, Jan. 22, 2007. Inversiones Morcote is certified by Germany-based FLO-Cert GmbH for pursuing socially and environmentally sustainable agricultural practices. Some US consumer advocates complain that Colombia’s cut-flower industry, the second largest in the world, is ignoring market trends and relying too heavily on the use of pesticides.

(AP Photo/ Fernando Vergara)

Some of us wrote about pesticides as an indoor air pollutant for our indoor air quality assignment. The EPA lists this under health effects:

Irritation to eye, nose, and throat; damage to central nervous system and kidney; increased risk of cancer. Symptoms may include headache, dizziness, muscular weakness, and nausea. Chronic exposure to some pesticides can result in damage to the liver, kidneys, endocrine and nervous systems, as well as an increased risk of cancer.

Links between chemicals and individual illnesses are hard to prove because chronic pesticide exposure has not been studied in enough detail. However, researchers have found some disturbing information:The Harvard School of Public Health examined 72 children ages 7-8 in a flower-growing region of Ecuador whose mothers were exposed to pesticides during pregnancy and found they had developmental delays of up to four years on aptitude tests. Philippe Grandjean, who led the Harvard study published last year, said “Every time we look, we’re finding out these pesticides are more dangerous than we ever thought before and more toxic at lower levels.” For example, a woman named Carmen Orjuela began suffering dizzy spells falls while working at a flower farm in Bogota, Columbia. During the season of Valentine’s Day, she said her employer forced workers to enter greenhouses only a half-hour after they had been fumigated. (It is recommended that workers wait 24 hours before entering greenhouses sprayed with toxic pesticides) Carmen Orjuela said that those who refused to enter the greenhouse were told they could leave because 20 people were waiting outside to take their job. A study from Colombia’s National University confirmed that Carmen Orjuela’s illness was “directly related to an important exposure to potentially toxic chemical substances.”

So what’s the solution to these dangerous pesticides? Organic flower production. Companies need to start having environmentally responsible practices.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17115220/

http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pesticid.html

Today, the report that I talked about in my last blog was released. The depressing thing? The report says that no matter how much civilization slows or reduces its greenhouse gas emissions, global warming and sea level rise will continue on for centuries.

 This report was called a “very impressive document that goes several steps beyond previous research.” Another find: Scientists are 90% certain that global warming is caused by man. (especially burning of fossil fuels) So to anybody that says global warming is a “natural cycle” and shouldn’t be considered a big deal: This piece of information makes it pretty much impossible to say natural forces are to blame.

 Kevin Trenberth, director of climate analysis for the National Center for Atmospheric Research said:

“This is just not something you can stop. We’re just going to have to live with it. We’re creating a different planet. If you were to come up back in 100 years time, we’ll have a different climate.”

“We’re going to have to live with it” is a phrase that is going to be important in coming years. Adaptation was a word we had to discuss in our chapter homework- it is necessary to adjust to the new conditions. Adaptation is most critical in poor regions because they have the least access to natural resources and don’t have the means to protect themselves from any problems due to changes in climate.

But we shouldn’t give up completely.  Kevin Trenberth said that scientists worry that leaders will take the message in the wrong way. The scientists urged leaders to reduce emissions and also adapt to a warmer world with wilder weather. 

It should be interesting to see if this report will have any effect on Bush’s policy concerning greenhouse gas emissions.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16922234/

In class, we learned that the first three consequences of a warmer earth include:

1. expansion of seawater

2. melting of land based ice (increase in sea-level, flooding of low lying cities)

3. ecosystem shift – because of precipitation and temperature changes

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) estimated that there would be a sea level increase of 9 to 88 centimeters in the 21st century. If there was a 50 centimeter increase, many coastal areas would be flooded and made much more prone to damage from storms, displacing millions of people. (yes, that was a homework question!!)

These are all consequences we learned COULD happen with a warmer earth, but when there’s a real threat, things seem a lot different.

On Monday, Indonesia’s environment minister announced that the country could lose about 2,000 islands due to climate change. He said that studies by U.N. experts showed that sea levels were expected to rise about 89 centemeters by the year 2030. Indonesia is a country of 17,000 islands. If there was a sea-level rise of 89 centemeters, 2,000 small islands would be completely underwater.

                                 Map of Indonesia from Wikipedia

Indonesia has been trying to keep such a crisis from happening by reducing reliance on fossil fuels and switching to biofuels, which would reduce the emission of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. When fossil fuels are burned, “greenhouse gases” such as CO2 are emitted into the atmosphere. When IR light hits these greenhouse gases, the way electrons are arranged in a molecule can change- so the gases can become stretched or bent. A stretched or bent molecule is a high-energy molecule, and when it collides with other molecules, it transfers the energy and results in a higher kinetic energy, or a higher temperature. Therefore, with less greenhouse gases in the air, the temperature doesn’t have the ability to rise as much.

Rachmat Witoelar (Indonesia’s environment minister) is confident in the countries efforts.

“We are optimistic it can be prevented. Switching to biofuels is not only good for the environment but also will benefit us economically considering the volatile state of oil prices,” he said.

Another problem Indonesia is having due to climate change is a shortage in rice production. A draft U.N. report that will be released on February 2nd projects a big rise in temperatures this century and warns of more heat waves, floods, droughts and rising seas linked to greenhouse gases.

Currently, 35 industrial nations have agreed to cut emissions by 5% by 2008-2012 under the Kyoto Protocol. George Bush pulled the U.S. out of the agreement in 2001 because “it would damage our economy.”

In Paris right now, scientists and government officials are attempting to come up with the next authoritative report on global warming that is due to be released on Friday. (this will the the fourth report since 1990) In the bluntest language used yet, the report from the IPCC will warn the world that global warming is here and worsening. Hopefully, this will be the one to wake people up and make them realize that global warming is really happening.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16867998/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16904378/

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Id-map.png

Since we heard about the World’s Largest Laundromat in class, Paige and I have been entralled by the idea, overwhelmed with curiousity and wish to one day venture to the unknown land. (Ok, I admit, those were Motrya’s words, she is sitting right next to me) I am proud to live so close to such a place! It’s all old news now, but I decided to learn a little bit more about the laundromat.

In class we learned that solar power stations are benign renewable energy sources… they have the least environmental impact. Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn (Mr. Quinn’s brother as we all know very well…) said, “The World’s Largest Laundromat has served as a role model. It’s shown that solar can work in the Midwest climate, in the heartland.”

Apparently, in every article I read, Tom Benson “beams with pride” everytime he shows off his Laundromat, complete with 153 washers, 148 dryers and 15 flat-screen TVs. Located on top of this masterpiece is one of the largest, most cost-effective solar systems in the COUNTRY! That’s right, fellows apers, right near us! Thirty-six 10 x 4 foot panels supply this 24-hour laundromat with hot water.

Giovanni Marron does his laundry underneath a flat-screen television at the “World’s Largest Laundromat” in Berwyn, Ill., Wednesday, July 26, 2006. The laundromat has 153 washers, 148 driers and 15 flat-screen TVs and is one of the largest, most cost-effective solar systems in the country. Owner Tom Benson converted from natural gas to solar and his $150,000 hot water system has become a darling of environmentalists and officials smitten with the promise of solar. It is heralded as a prime example of how sun energy is practical, simple and cost-wise. (AP Photo/Brian Kersey)

Benson calculates that his $150,000 system saves him $25,000 annually. (so it should pay for itself in about five more years) He also expects it to last about 20 years. Benson said, “A lot of times the environmental stuff … ends up costing you money. People aren’t going to do it if it costs more.” However, Benson argues that his solar panels have no downsides.

Tom Benson, owner of the World’s Largest Laundromat stands on the roof of his facility next to the 36 10-by-4 foot solar panels that supply his 24-hour laundry with hot water in Berwyn, Ill., Wednesday, July 26, 2006. The laundromat also has 153 washers, 148 driers and 15 flat-screen TVs. Benson says the motivation to convert to solar was purely dollars and cents. His heating bills were climbing as high as $13,000, the equivalent of 25 percent of his total monthly revenue. (AP Photo/Brian Kersey)

Of course, there are advantages and disadvantages to solar power.

Here are some disadvantages:

• Solar stations are extremely expensive. They require a large initial investment.
• Solar Power is unreliable unless you’re in a very sunny climate.
• They don’t work at night.

However, here are some advantages:

• Solar energy is freely available
• Solar power is pollution free during use.
• Handy for low-power uses (like lights and batterys)
• After the initial setup, there’s little maintenance.
• After the initial cost of building the solar power plant, operating costs are low.
• In sunny counties, solar power can be used where there’s no easy way to get electricity to a remote place.
• Even though solar panels don’t work at night, energy can be stored.

There are also some pretty good perks: “Many people here have come up to me and said, `Thank you for helping the environment. Thank you for going solar,’” Benson said.

http://accuweather.ap.org/cgi-bin/aplaunch.pl

http://home.clara.net/darvill/altenerg/solar.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power#Advantages_and_disadvantages_of_solar_power

I’m pretty sure every one of us at one point in our grade school careers memorized the lyrics to “If I Had a Million Dollars” by the Barenaked Ladies. But have you ever thought about the lyrics? WHatta bout when he sings “If I had a million dollars…I’d buy you a fur coat…but not a real fur coat, that’s cruel.” Today, I learned that the Barenaked Ladies vocalist, Steven Page, really cares about the environment.

A couple of years ago, the Barenaked Ladies left their major cd label and partnered with Reverb, a nonprofit that helps musicians green their tours and raise awareness with their fan base. Steven Page hopes that one day, cities will have plenty of bike paths, whole communities will be powered by wind and other renewable energy sources, and music will be released online and on refillable USB thumb drives instead of CDs encased in plastic. Steven Page is very vocal about his views- campaigning with Canada’s New Democratic Party, wearing a “Vote Solar” shirt on stage, serving on the board of directors for WWF Canada, and participating in Windshare, a renewable-energy co-op in his hometown of Toronto.

Since we’ve recently studied Wind Power, I decided to research what “Windshare” was all about.

“WindShare’s mission is to demonstrate leadership and action in the community wind power sector, and to develop community power projects that are sustainable economically, environmentally, and socially. WindShare provides an alternative to large, centralized energy generation with the development of local, profitable and inclusive community power projects. “

Currently, the first community owned wind farm in North America is being developed in Ontario. This “Lakewind Power Project” will have the capacity to produce enough 100% renewable electricity to power over 3,400 homes in Ontario. That’s pretty sweet.

STeven Page is really passionate about his dreams of greening the music industry, and building cities “that really work.” (With bike lanes, public transportation, etc.) I think it’s great because they’re really communication the issues they really care about to their fans.

http://www.windshare.ca/about/about_windshare.html

http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/12/18/BNL/index.html

For some reason, everywhere I went this Christmas break, something we have studied in apes came up. It all started when my sister insisted we see “Happy Feet” the day after Christmas. I heard there was dancing in it so I agreed to go. Little did I know there were environmental issues involved!

THe movie brings up all kids of environmental issues in tiny ways. First of all, the head penquin announces that there is a food shortage (overfishing..) and blames it on poor little Mumble, a penquin who can’t sing but can dance. Mumble finds out from a bird that tries to eat him (disruption of the food chain) who has a yellow band around his ankle that “aliens” are taking their fish (that’s us!) and they’re the ones that put the yellow band around his ankle. Next, we meet a penquin who has physic powers with one of those pieces of plastic that hold together pop cans around his neck (trashing our oceans) that eventually starts to choke him. Mumble goes on a mission to find out who is taking their fish and ends up following a ship all the way from Antartica to some continent. He ends up very unhappy in a zoo, until he starts to tap dance and they take him back to Antarctica (?? this part I didn’t understand.) Humans observe the colony of penquins dancing and after much debate, humans stopped fishing in Antarctica. My dad left the movie hating it, my sister thought it was so-so, my brother loved it, and my comment was, “I need to go home so I can blog on this.” The movie brings up pretty complex environmental issues but I probably wouldn’t have caught them if I wasn’t thinking about my blog the whole time.

In two other situations during break I got to show off what I know. On CHristmas Eve, my Uncle Joe cooked Chilian Seabass. At the dinner table, someone happened to bring up the issue of seafood and how it could dissappear in a couple of years. Of course, I jumped right in and set the record straight from what I’ve learned by blogging. Then, on CHristmas day, my little brother George was talking about how he did a speech on Chernobyl in his oral communications class. My dad, sister LIzzy and I got into long discussion about nuclear power plants. It felt great that I knew what I was talking about.

Another time during break, my sister Patricia and I decided to go out for sushi. Since I normally don’t eat fish that much at all, I started thinking about if eating sushi dramatically adds to the loss of seafood. I found an article by Umbra on why we should not feel guilty eating seafood. (http://www.grist.org/advice/ask/2006/11/29/sushi)

Umbra suggests this:

• Read all about the aquatic life you like to eat. Educate yourself about the species. Learn how they are produced or harvested, which types to avoid, which to eat.
• Through this process, your “personal revulsion meter” will decide which fish are OK and which you will want to avoid.

Umbra basically says that the solution to overfishing is to learn about the fish you are eating, become disgusted by some of it, and order new things. Later, she said “If one truly cares for all the fishes of the world, one should stop eating all the fishes of the world.”

Lastly, over break I had to finish my Northwestern application to submit online by January 1. Keeping with my break full of apes, my big essay was on our communication with the Palestinian students in Bethlehem. (!!) I owe a lot to this class.

pictures courtesy of Wikipedia.

I occasionally check the Environmental Calendar that’s posted on Mr. McKinley’s blog, but never really find anything that interesting. However, today I went to the calendar and under Saturday, December 2, it says “Day of Remembrance for the Bhopal Tragedy.” What the heck is the Bhopal Tragedy??

I became curious and googled the Bhopal Tragedy. I found out it’s kid of a controversial issue, because surviving victims still haven’t recieved compensation. Here’s a little bit of what I’ve learned:

Bhopal is a city in central India. In 1984, a highly toxic vapor called methyl isocyanate burst from a Union Carbide pesticide plant, killing 2,000 people immediately, and injuring about 300,000. On top of that, 7,000 animals were injured, and 1,000 were killed. This incident has also been refered to as the “Hiroshima of the Chemical Industry,” and was one of the worst commercial industrial disasters in history. Even today, survivors are still suffering. Here are a couple examples of what they’re suffering from: partial or complete blindness, gastrointestinal disorders, impaired immune systems, and post traumatic stress disorders.

After the tragedy happened, involved parties began to argue and point the finger at one another. It’s also said that the site, even after 22 years, remains a source of lethal toxins. Some estimate that the number of those affected by the Bhopal Tragedy is above 500,000. I really can’t believe I never knew about this.
above photo: On the 20th anniversary of the gas tragedy, a woman in Bhopal views a photo exhibit. Courtesy of NPR.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4199681

http://www.hu.mtu.edu/hu_dept/tc@mtu/papers/bhopal.htm
http://ical.mac.com/WebObjects/iCal.woa/wa/default?u=mwmckinley&n=Environmental%20Calendar.ics

When I was a kid, my all-time favorite books to read in the whole entire world were the Barenstein Bears. When my sisters and my brother and I got Barenstein Bears on VHS, that was the best thing that had ever happened to us. We watched it over and over again, and today I can vividly remember my favorite episode. Papa Bear took brother bear fishing, but they kept catching dirty old boots and disgusting trash. Brother bear got very concerned, and went to visit a whale (I think?? That sounds funny) The whale was really sick and could hardly breathe because the water was so polluted. WHen brother bear looked around, trucks were dumping trash into the water uncontrollably. He decided to help, and he got all kinds of people to clean up the lake. Miraculously, the lake became sparkly clean and the whale lived happily ever after.

This story probably makes me sound really lame, but when I read an article called “Plastics in Pacific: Activists survey the mess,” the first thing I thought about was the Bearenstein Bears.  Recently in the Pacific Ocean, Greenpeace activists have been on a ship collecting old toothbrushes, beach toys, golf balls, and all kinds of nasty things from a huge vortex of plastic trash in the water. THis trash threatens sea creatures because they could get tangled in it, eat it, or ride on it. Since plastic doesn’t break down like organic material does, ocean currents and tides have carried trash thousands of miles to an area between Hawaii and the West Coast, called the “swirling vortex.” The swirling vortex was designated as a protected U.S. national monument in June by President Bush. (why would bush want to protect something that’s holding all this trash???)

In a new report, Greenpeace said at least 267 species – including seabirds, turtles, seals, sea lions, whales and fish – are known to have suffered from this trash either by getting tangled in it or digesting it. The report said the debris comes from four main sources: tourism, sewage, fishing, and waste from ships and boats. THis report comes just days after the report about seafood collapsing due to trends in overfishing and pollution!

Here are some other problems with all this trash:

• invasive species (eh, eh??) can be carried thousands of miles by hitching rides on plastic debris.
• Plastic is hazardess to animals that think it’s prey and eat it (organisms who eat the plastic end up starving because their stomachs are filled by there’s no nutrients)
• lost fishing nets and traps can continue to catch fish when they are no longer in use

Apparently, an international agreement called MARPOL is aimed at ending the dumping of plastic debris at sea. But even total enforcement of this agreement wouldn’t eliminate the problem, because most debris orginates on land. I guess we will need a miracle like brother bear to stop all this pollution!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15590510/

photos courtesy of EPA:

http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/debris/trash_on_beach.jpg

http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/debris/scuba.jpg

Could you imagine life without fish sticks, salmon, shrimp, swordfish, crabcakes, or tuna? Actually, I can because I hate seafood, but it is possible that in the year 2050, seafood could only be a memory.

In a study published on Friday, ecologists and economists warn that if our current habits of overfishing and pollution continue, the populations of just about all seafood could collapse in just a few decades. In class we have larned that even one species change in population could affect the whole entire ecosystem. Boris Worm of Dalhousie University enforces this idea: “

“Whether we looked at tide pools or studies over the entire world’s ocean, we saw the same picture emerging. In losing species we lose the productivity and stability of entire ecosystems.”

Worm continues by describing how when ocean species collapse, it makes the ocean itself weaker and less able to recover from shocks like global climate change. But according to Andrew Sugden, the international managing editor of the journal “Science,” it’s not too late to act. A shift from single species management to ecosystem management is needed, but it requires a lot of political will to do it. Co-author Steve Palumbi said, “Unless we fundamentally change the way we manage all the oceans species together, as working ecosystems, then this century is the last century of wild seafood.”

Four years was spent on this investigation. Scientists studied 32 controlled experiments, other studies from 48 marine protected areas, and global catch data from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s database of all fish and invertebrates worldwide from 1950 to 2003. They also studied a 1,000-year time period for 12 coastal regions, looking at data from archives, fishery records, sediment cores and archaeological data.

“At this point 29 percent of fish and seafood species have collapsed — that is, their catch has declined by 90 percent. It is a very clear trend, and it is accelerating,” Worm said. “If the long-term trend continues, all fish and seafood species are projected to collapse within my lifetime — by 2048.”

In order to fix this problem, researchers want new marine reserves, better management to prevent overfishing by large trawling fleets, and tighter controls on pollution. 48 areas worldwide are already protected, and they found that the diversity of species recovered dramatically. With that came an improvement in the ecosystem’s productivity and stability.

However, the The National Fisheries Institute (a trade association for the seafood industry) doesn’t see a problem.

“Fish stocks naturally fluctuate in population,” the institute said. “By developing new technologies that capture target species more efficiently and result in less impact on other species or the environment, we are helping to ensure our industry does not adversely affect surrounding ecosystems or damage native species.”

Seafood is a huge part of Americans’ diet. On top of that, worldwide fishing provides $80 billion in revenue and 200 million people depend on it for their livelihoods. A decline in seafood could be a serious disaster.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15532333/

photo courtesy of: www. cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/fsirpoo3.html