Pollution-Free Boating

Title: Pollution-Free Boating
Author: Andy Wallace
Date: December 3rd 2013
Publication: Environmental News Network

Electric cars often come up in conversations about saving the environment as the more eco friendly future of our transportation. Several car brands, such as Chevrolet (Volt), Nissan (Leaf), and Ford (C-Max Energi) have already produced their own models. However, by concentrating on the roadways, people often neglect discussion of waterways.

Electronic boats are also a way of sustainable and economical transportation. In fact, they might be the only watercrafts allowed on municipal water by 2020. New Electric, an electric-conversion company, is already influencing the industry of electric vehicles through their contributions to battery-powered boats.

Ecologically acceptable ways of water transport are important as water pollution keeps getting worse. According to Clean Technica, 700 000 000 gallons of oil are poured into the oceans every yea, and that is oil alone. This is only worsened by engine-exhaust and waste from conventional ships. Aside from ocean and air pollution, the oceanic fauna is harmed by noise pollution as well. Certain species, such as orcas and dolphins, are especially affected due to their sensitivity to loud sounds. This could be fixed if electric-converted watercraft were used as they are much more quiet and they do not pollute air at all.

As Anne Kloppenborg, CEO of New Electric, said - "Making electric boats isn't just making boats cleaner; it's making boats better." So not only that the usage of those boats reduces air, water, and noise pollution, but it can also be seen as more enjoyable. For once, the motor is free of vibration and sound. Consequently, the passengers can have a better experience of the natural sounds of water, waves, and wind, which are normally drowned out by engine sounds.

I thought this would be a good current event to write about as we were just going over water pollution in class. We talked about the many ways water is being polluted, and I thought it would be interesting to mention electric boats as a step towards improving the situation. I think this is a great idea, though I am a bit worried about whether it will become popular soon enough. Many regular boat producing companies will fight against it pretty strongly as it will impact their income, and there does not seem to be enough advertising to let people know that it is even an option. I hope the predictions about 2020 are correct and that this type of transportation will become dominant soon.

Corals surviving ocean polution

           

                Corals such as Porites and Pocillopora are adapting well to the acidification of the oceans. A study was done along the Gulf of California. These corals are amongst the most important organisms in the reefs of the Oriental Pacific Ocean. The oceans’, during pre-industrial earth, PH was 8.15. Now, is 8.05 – they are becoming more acidic. The acidification of the oceans is mainly caused by air pollution (caused by exhaust gasses and industrial pollution- an increase of carbon dioxide emissions). Scientists at the Center of Biological research of the Northeast used radiographic plates to visualize changes in extension, density and calcification. They also extracted DNA from the corals in order to know their genetic diversity. According to scientist Balart Paez: "These marine organisms are healthy, for the moment, because of a bigger energetic expense given by a genetic adaptation, however as the acidification levels rise there can be a disturbance in the sexual proportions. ". Genetic adaptation allowed these corals to survive in polluted waters. The effect that the acidulation has one them is dependent on their gender (the Porites have both males and females and the Pocillopora are hermaphrodites). The corals can produce more energy than they spend for adaptation, which makes them sustainable for now. However Paez says that higher levels of pollution could alter the gender balance for the worst  (Porites).

Russia outlaws abortion ads

Published time: November 25, 2013 14:05

Russia Today online website

The article talks about Vladimir Putin signing a law that makes advertising abortions illegal. The law put in place also makes free samples that contain narcotic or psychotropic substances illegal, “rises the age of voluntary consent for illegal drug tests from 16 to 18 years” and raises the punishment on practicing illegal folk medicine. But the center of this article is the banning of abortion advertising, because it is a small restriction of choice and social rights. Policy makers are trying to implement laws that will increase Russia’s fertility rate, but conservatives say that abortion is to be blamed for Russia “dwindling population” and therefore they try to implement laws like these. Conservatives like the church warren people that abortions are not just unethical but is also the reason why Russia’s population will be wiped out. In Russia in the past five years the number of abortions has fallen by a quarter, but Russia still has over a million abortions a year as reported by Deputy Health Minister Tatyana Yakovleva. By looking at the number of abortions per year and the children that those aborted children will have it is not crazy to suggest that by making abortions illegal and not only their adverting may slow down or even solve Russia’s decreasing population. This was not mentioned in the article but it is a suggestion when the topic of abortion and decreasing in population is mentioned. Because if Russia was to ban abortions because of the deceasing in population. Then they would have to do it sooner than later. Because considering that each year there are less and less people and possibly because of that less and less abortions, you have to consider that if people do stop having abortions it will take years till those kids reach reproductive age. It just suggests that economically developed countries might have to take extreme, unmoral and non-liberal decisions to control their population issue, similarly to Chinese one child policy. Soon the desperate times will call for desperate measures.

http://rt.com/politics/russia-abortion-advertising-ban-266/

http://swimswam.com/water-pollution-still-a-concern-for-rio-2016s-open-water-swimming-site/

WATER POLLUTION STILL A CONCERN FOR RIO 2016′S OPEN WATER SWIMMING SITE

 

Rio de Janeiro has a problem with water population was centuries but now it can forbid swimming contest planned for 2016. Water is too populated and World Swimming comity doesn’t want to put in danger swimmers.

Coliform bacteria is the most dangerous one in Brazil waters, measurements showed that three weeks ago it was 16 times higher than Brazil adequate level and 195 times higher than US water regulation. Coliform bacteria can be present in food and water, bacteria is fermenting lactose but it is cannot seriously harm a health condition.   

If Brazil don’t solve his problem with water there will be noting from the 2016 water Olympics. Big organizations like FINA, FISA, and ISAF will not send sportiest to Rio because of safety reasons.  

I choose this text because it is connected to our previous unit- water and also it is very interesting that I found out how Brazil is being “blackmailed” with water, it was the same thing with China on 2008 Olympic Games, but there was with air pollution and not with water pollution. 

Water industry warns it may not match demands of public supply and fracking

Title: Water industry warns it may not match demands of public supply and fracking
Author: ClickGreen staff
Publication: Environmental News Network
Date: November 27th 2013

Water UK, which represents the water industry, admitted in a report that there may not be enough water to effectively support the public and meet demands while also supporting fracking operations.
This statement was released by the water industry after a Memorandum of Understanding with the UK Onshore Operators Group in which all of the members agreed to cooperate in shale gas exploration and extraction processes.
One of the key aims of the agreement is to give the public more insight into what is being done to help the water resources and the environment and reassure them that action is being taken.

Through reviewing recent reports of shale gas extraction, Water UK has concluded that while there are risks to water as a resource, this can be helped through enforcement of regulatory framework.

The organisation also highlighted the risks related to fracking, especially since those are not yet fully understood. It explained that "The pressure on local water resources will depend in part on the pace and extent of shale gas extraction, although the potential to reclaim and reuse large proportions of water from each site promises to significantly mitigate the risks to local water resources.

However, where water is in short supply there may not be enough available from public water supplies or the environment to meet the requirements for hydraulic fracturing.

Shale gas companies should therefore engage with water companies as early as possible to ensure their needs can be met without reducing the security of supply to existing customers."

Furthermore, they appealed to the government of the United Kingdom to consider introducing legislation that would ensure that British water undertakers are consulted in planning processes for onshore oil and gas exploration and development. This way, water companies would gain important information about future extraction sites and would have enough time to make sure that all risks are understood and examined, and that the protection of water and the environment is prioritised.

I thought this would be an important article to consider, as we are discussing water as a resource in class at the moment. We have learned how unsustainable the resource is being used and that there is a danger of it running out, and this article is yet another proof of that. I think that this is an incredibly important issue and so attention should be drawn to it, which is why I chose this article

The Keeling Curve in Danger

"Uncertain Future for Iconic 'Keeling Curve' CO2 Measurements"
by Jeff Tollefson and Nature Magazine
Scientific American

The world-famous Keeling Curve

The Keeling Curve is one of the most recognizable and important graphs of our modern age. It shows the increase in atmospheric CO2 and is a true icon of climate change activism. It is produced by the Scripps institute for Oceanography.  The famous graph is taken from samples collected on Manua Loa in Hawaii. Currently, the CO2 measurements are begin measured at 13 sites, all over the world. This project now lead by Dr. Ralph Keeling (whose father, Dr. Charles Keeling started the project 55 years ago), is facing some serious issues with funding. Budget cuts have led to massive cutbacks and is now placing the project in serious danger of shut down. Until 2010, the research institution enjoyed a budget of $700,000, which has now been slashed to $350,000, impacted severely by the National Science Foundation's withdrawal of funding. Also, the The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is also having trouble maintaining their funding for this institute, whose own research overlaps with theirs. The NOAA's directer of the Global Monitoring Division in Boulder expressed his dissatisfaction with this situation by claiming that, "All [he] can do now is provide moral support to keep it going year by year until we come up with a plan." The financial struggles of the Scrippts project has driven the team to reach out through Twitter to get citizen donations to fund their research.
Personally, I am very unhappy with the level of funding given to the Keeling Curve project. This research project is of such cultural and historical value that it must be maintained. It was essential to the growth of the climate protection movement, shaping out understanding of an important environmental phenomena. If the CO2 levels in our atmosphere are not studied rigorously, our impact on the environment may not be as apparent. The work being done on this Scrippts projects is essential for dictating future environmental policies. Unfortunately, as is true with many other important scientific institutions, like NASA and the NIH. Science must not continue to be neglected. It is an area that leads to the progression of greater understanding and more advanced technology that help improve our world. The work Dr. Keeling does to monitor atmospheric CO2 is vital to furthering out understanding of our effect on the environment. 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/11/131111-north-dakota-wells-maintenance-water/

This article is all about fracking. Fracking is the process of using water to crack open bedrock to get to oil underneath. This is very popular in North Dakota because it brings lots of money to an area that hasn't had that before. The problem with that is that the water used for the initial fracking is only just the beginning. "the oil and gas play's 40,000 to 45,000 wells may need to consume roughly double that amount—as much as 10.2 billion gallons per year (28 million gallons each day)-in maintenance water to keep the oil flowing" What this means is that despite having to use a huge amount of water to open up the wells, the fracking industry is discovering that they will need to use much more water to keep the oil flowing. When water isn’t continually used salt builds up in the drilling equipment and disrupts the flow of oil. When we look at the lack of clean water to begin with this becomes a huge problem, not only for the oil business “In North Dakota, Suggs said that the future price and availability of fresh water may well determine how long wells remain economical to operate.  "If water becomes too expensive, that might potentially decrease the life of the well," he said.” but for the environment as a whole. The most obvious way to fix the problem would be to recycle the water used for the initial fracking but that is impossible. Water used for fracking can only be used for creating another well, not to keep the well operating. It gets even worse when we see that the water that is used for fracking has to be placed in storage facilities and is too dangerous to be put back into the environment. The private water industry in North Dakota would disagree however “Mortensen said the Missouri River has the potential to provide vastly more water than oil drillers would ever need.” This is a perfect example of the many energy issues in the United States, on one hand you have an industry burning one resource to create another that will destroy our environment while those making money off the first resource prevent anything from being done to conserve it. With all that we have studied about how quickly our water supplies will run out this is a pretty scary situation in North Dakota.