Bees 🐝 So Many Kinds of Bees

Advertisements

After Years of War, Nature is Flourishing on These Tiny Islands | National Geographic

“Toxic Lake Bursts Into Flames” National Geographic

Toxic Chemicals Database – Chemical Free Life

https://chemical-free-life.org/2018/01/20/toxic-chemicals-database/

U.S. Wildlife Officials Propose Endangered Status For Florida Crayfish | WGCU News

 

unnamed.jpghttp://news.wgcu.org/post/us-wildlife-officials-propose-endangered-status-florida-crayfish

By Jessica Meszaros • Jan 3, 2018

The Panama City crayfish is listed on the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission website as a “Species of Special Concern.” Now the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service proposes it be a federally protected species.

Federal wildlife officials proposed Tuesday to protect a crayfish only found in Bay County under the Endangered Species Act.

panamacitycrayfish__1_.jpg

The Panama City crayfish is only about 2 inches long, it’s tan-colored and has red dots on its head. There are only 13 populations found in Bay County with less than 100 crustaceans in each habitat.

Tierra Curry, senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity, says all the Panama City crayfish historically lived together in wetlands of the Pine Flatwood Forest, but then they were separated as the land was developed.

“The crayfish have been pushed into these little habitats like ditches and swells,” she says.

Curry says these crustaceans are important for multiple reasons. They create burrows that other species use, like insects and frogs. The crustaceans are also part of the food web— fish, birds and mammals eat them. And they’re herbivores that eat decaying vegetation in the water, essentially cleaning it.

“So protecting crayfish ultimately protects clean water for people,” says Curry.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently proposed classifying the crayfish as a protected endangered species. Curry says there will now be a public comment period, then scientists will weigh-in, and then she expects the Panama City crayfish to be federally protected in about a year.

UPDATE: The source for this story referred the the Panama City crayfish as a “fish,” but it’s actually a “crustacean.”

 

 

Republicans are using some very shaky math to justify drilling in the Arctic refuge | Grist

By Jackie Flynn Mogensen 

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
Early Saturday morning, Senate Republicans narrowly passed a controversial tax bill which — aside from overwhelmingly benefiting the rich — will open up 1.5-million acres of the pristine, 20-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for oil and gas drilling.

The fate of the ANWR has been a decades-long tug-of-war between Republicans and Democrats, with the right seeing the massive oil reserves within the park as a source of revenue for Alaska and the country, and the left insisting on preserving the land, which supports hundreds of bird species, arctic foxes, caribou, and polar bears. First designated a “wildlife range” in 1960 and then later a refuge in 1980, the land is also home to the Native Alaskan Gwich’in tribe, which relies on the land for subsistence.

“The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is one of the crowned jewels of our public lands,” Ana Unruh Cohen, the director of government affairs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told Mother Jones last week when the tax bill was still being considered. “Drilling there would totally mar this beautiful place.”

The ANWR measure was added to the tax bill late last month in an effort to secure the vote of Alaskan Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who had crossed party lines to oppose the Obamacare repeal in July and hadn’t yet committed to supporting the tax bill. The move worked; after the vote, Murkowski said in a statement that the bill’s passing was a “critical milestone in our efforts to secure Alaska’s future.”

Murkowski’s prediction, though, is an optimistic one. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that drilling in the ANWR would raise $1.1 billion for the federal government over the next 10 years and another 1.1 billion for Alaska over the same time period. This would, in theory, help offset the unprecedented cost of tax cuts proposed in the bill, which is estimated to add a whooping $1.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

But experts warn that the CBO’s estimates are off — by a lot. According to data prepared for the nonprofit Alaska Wilderness League by David Murphy, an assistant professor of environmental studies at St. Lawrence University, and analyzed by Bloomberg, the federal government is actually likely to raise less than a fifth of that 10-year goal, or about $145 million. This lower estimate is based on historic sales in the region; the average bid for drilling along Alaska’s North Slope since 2000 is $194 per acre. So, bids for ANWR land would need to be nearly seven times higher than that in order to match the $1.1 billion federal estimate.

The problem with the CBO estimate is that it’s based on the size of all recoverable oil reserves in the 1.5-million-acre section of the ANWR that would open for drilling (thought to contain between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels according to the United States Geological Survey). It also uses long-term oil prices of $70 per barrel (prices Tuesday were at about $57) and the estimated cost of production in the region. In a November report, the CBO says their estimates are “uncertain,” and “potential bidders might make assumptions that are different from CBO’s, including assumptions about long-term oil prices, production costs, the amount of oil and gas resources in ANWR, and alternative investment opportunities.” The CBO does not provide a margin of error in their calculations.

“[The CBO] doesn’t explain any uncertainty about this [$1.1 billion] number — and legislation is being drafted around it. This would never pass muster in an academic journal,” Murphy tells Mother Jones.

Findings from both the Audubon Society, a nonprofit conservation organization and the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank, similarly diverge from CBO estimates, but predict that oil and gas drilling would yield even lower numbers than Murphy suggests, at just $37.5 million over the next decade. They hinge their estimates on the average bid per acre since 1999 in the much larger, neighboring National Petroleum Reserve (an area already allocated for oil and gas leasing), which is just $50 per acre.

“Opening the Arctic to drilling as part of this tax plan is simply shameful. The Arctic Refuge isn’t a bank — drilling there won’t pay for the tax cuts the Senate just passed,” National Audubon Society President and CEO David Yarnold said in a statement just after Saturday’s vote.

Throwing even more confusion into the situation, when the Trump administration released its 2018 fiscal budget report in May, it claimed said that drilling in the ANWR would raise a staggering $1.8 billion over the next 10 years, but didn’t provide reasoning for the estimate in the report.

Beyond this uncertainty on how much drilling would actually deliver into state and federal coffers, the bigger issue might be that it’s not even clear if oil companies still want and are willing to drill in the ANWR — a contentious and also costly site for oil extraction. Due to differences in how the oil is held in the ground, oil production in the Arctic costs, on average, $78 per barrel, while production in the lower 48 states ranges from $40-60 per barrel, according to Murphy’s analysis. Moreover, there is no existing oil extraction infrastructure located on the reserve, and building wells from scratch would cost, on average, more than $6 million per well, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That doesn’t even take into account the headache that environmentalists and natives-rights activists could create for oil companies, if not potentially costly litigation.

Of course, this not to say that oil drilling won’t occur there. “It’s a much smaller area [than the neighboring Petroleum Reserve] with a large amount of oil,” so drilling in the reserve would likely be fruitful, says Murphy. “Talk about throwing darts at a board … If it’s opened up, I’m sure companies will bid on it.” And drilling there could still be profitable for companies, despite the higher cost of drilling in the Arctic. Still, the Petroleum Reserve may prove to be a safer option for oil companies, which would have access to existing infrastructure and less pushback from advocacy groups that oppose drilling in the ANWR.

“We have a significant position now that’s close to where we have infrastructure and a long history of strong operating capability,” said Al Hirshberg, the executive vice president of production, drilling, and projects for ConocoPhillips, in a statement. The company leases about 70 percent of the Petroleum Reserve’s sold acreage, and recently discovered a store of 300-million barrels of oil in the reserve. The company tells Mother Jones they “would consider” operations in the ANWR, but it sees “tremendous potential” in the Petroleum Reserve and remains “focused on our projects and exploration plans there” — a statement similar to what the company shared with Bloomberg.

Finally, there’s still a lot of unleased land left in the Petroleum Reserve. According to the Bureau of Land Management, over half of the reserve was still available for leasing as of August 2017.

It remains to be seen if the ANWR provision will remain in the tax bill once the Senate and the House finish reconciling their versions of the legislation. But even then, it is unlikely to be the cash cow Republicans are relying on. “Current presidential and congressional budget projections are unrealistic,” Murphy writes in his report. “It would be fiscally irresponsible to pursue this path on a budget justification.”

Republicans are using some very shaky math to justify drilling in the Arctic refuge

A Beacon in the Smog®

© 1999-2018 Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Grist is powered by WordPress.com VIP.

International Environmental and Human Rights Group Wins Major Grant | Global Justice Ecology Project

African Oil Palm plantations in the Lacandon Jungle of Mexico to be used for biofuel. Orin Langelle/LangellePhoto.org (2013)
Buffalo-based Organization Awarded $90,000
Buffalo, NY–Global Justice Ecology Project, an award-winning international non-profit based in Buffalo announced today that it will receive a grant of $90,000 from the Ceres Trust. The grant was made in support of GJEP’s leading-edge work to protect forests, wildlife and communities from the unpredictable and potentially devastating impacts of genetically engineered trees–such as wildfires, loss of water, sickness and forced displacement. 

“We are thrilled to receive this important grant from Ceres Trust,” said Anne Petermann, Executive Director and co-founder of Global Justice Ecology Project. [5] “In this age of climate change and extreme weather, our work in defense of forests and forest-dependent communities is more critical than ever, and this grant will help us accomplish many important objectives. In 2018, it will help us strengthen our work with indigenous peoples in Brazil, Chile, the U.S. and elsewhere who are protecting their lands and forests from corporate destruction.”

GJEP is also co-organizing a national forest protection conference in 2018 to reignite a powerful, united movement to protect forests in the U.S. The conference will link protection of forests with efforts to stop fossil fuel extraction and oppose dangerous and destructive false solutions to climate change such as wood-based bioenergy.

Global Justice Ecology Project’s Social Justice Media Program [3] includes Langelle Photography, a program designed to use the power of photography to expose social and ecological injustice while providing an historical look at social movements, struggle and everyday life. One goal is inspiring people to become involved in social change efforts. It is directed by GJEP co-founder and long-time photojournalist Orin Langelle. 

“I have been involved in and documented movements for social change and ecological protection since 1972, and I understand how critical it is to preserve our history,” stated Langelle. “People today can learn important lessons from struggles that came before—what worked and what didn’t. Being firmly rooted in history is critical. I am grateful to Ceres Trust for understanding this work.”

In January 2017 Langelle won the Member’s Exhibition Award at CEPA (Contemporary Photography and Visual Arts Center) in Buffalo, which includes a solo exhibit there in January 2018. The exhibit will be called Portraits of Struggle and feature photos documenting people’s efforts to defend and protect lands, forests and human rights around the world.

Contact: Tess Ipolito, Media Coordinator, tess@globaljusticeecology.org +1.716.867.4080

Global Justice Ecology Project received the 2013 White Dove Award from the Rochester Committee on Latin America for “dedicated efforts to protect Indigenous Peoples’ rights and native forests, and to promote social, environmental and ecological justice in Latin America and beyond, including the use of concerned photography.”
 GJEP leads the effort to stop the commercial sale and large-scale planting of genetically engineered trees, and its co-founders launched the first campaign against GE trees in 2000. In July 2017 GJEP organized the collection of 284,000 public comments and 500 organizational sign ons to the USDA protesting the agency’s proposed approval of the first genetically engineered tree–a non-native eucalyptus–which would be sold by the millions for planting across seven Southern U.S. states, despite the tree’s notorious reputation for being invasive, explosively flammable, water depleting, and displacing endangered species.

As the coordinators of the global Campaign to STOP Genetically Engineered Trees, in 2017 GJEP sent a team to Chile to investigate and document the aftermath of the worst wildfires in that country’s history–set off by a heat wave, and fueled by highly flammable plantations of eucalyptus and pine trees. They joined activists from around the world to discuss strategies to prevent the expansion of these plantations and the future use of GE trees in them helped mobilize a week of protests against a global industry conference in Chile on GE trees.
 GJEP’s Social Justice Media Program highlights the voices of activists and communities struggling to protect their lands, stop corporate destruction and stand up for justice. 
Category: Featured, No GE Trees News, Press Releases, Pressroom Tags:
← Scientists: Our Food is Being Sprayed by Toxic Chemical Cocktail
EnglishFilipinoFrançaisDeutschItalianoPortuguêsРусскийEspañol
266 Elmwood Ave., Suite 307
Buffalo, NY 14222
+1.716.931.5833

Brazil and Land Rights: A Historical Struggle that Continues and Intensifies
‘Gene Drives’ Are Too Risky For Field Trials, Scientists Say
100 Scientists Urge NC Governor To Protect Forests From Pellet Industry

 https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/896235001

All Reserved · Global Justice Ecology Project

Pollution Kills More People Than Anything Else! #StopAdani #COP23 #Qldvotes 

jpratt27

Dying from war, smoking, hunger & natural disasters turns out to be nothing compared to deaths from pollution, which kills nine million people a year.
The most comprehensive report to date on the health effects of environmental pollution shows that filthy air, contaminated water and other polluted parts of our environment kill more people worldwide each year than almost everything else combined – smoking, hunger, natural disasters, war, murder, AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.
It’s no wonder then that the number of contaminated water-related deaths in Puerto Rico is expected to climb into the thousands.
In addition to the human tragedy, this pollution costs us well over $4 trillion in annual losses, or 6% of global GDP.


According to the study, 9 million people every year, one in every six premature deaths, are caused by diseases from toxic exposures in the environment.

That’s 20 times more than all wars.

Dr. Philip…

View original post 1,311 more words

The Death of Insects — How It’s Happening and Why It Matters

Kirschner's Korner

New evidence based on the work of entomologists (people who study insects) and published in the journal Plos One reveals an alarming finding: Worldwide insect populations are rapidly declining. Specifically, researchers found more than a 75% decline in flying insects over a 27 year period.

Given how much our ecosystem depends on insects, this finding should trigger additional studies on insect biomass and global interventions to save insects. Bees, butterflies, and insects are primary vectors that pollinate flowers that make most of the plant life on earth grow. We need plants, trees, flowers, and fruits to grow to feed animals and people in order to live. Humans don’t survive without insects and other flying pollinators. Insects also serve as an important food source for other animals including fishes and birds.

Who is guilty of causing this insect Armageddon? According to experts, it’s likely caused by the usual suspects: climate change, the…

View original post 318 more words

Our Plastic Habit Is so Bad a Man Found a Fish Trapped in an Embedded Powerade Wrapper | One Green Planet

Our Plastic Habit Is so Bad a Man Found a Fish Trapped in an Embedded Powerade Wrapper
Aleksandra Pajda
October 31, 2017

In Alberta, Canada, a man recently made a discovery that shows just how directly our plastic waste affects wildlife. While fishing in the Saskatchewan River, Adam Turnbull came across a fish like no other he had ever seen – one that had grown with a plastic ring now embedded into its body. The piece of plastic turned out to be a Powerade wrapper. The sad series of images that Turnbull posted on Facebook is another reminder that our plastic waste never just “goes away.”
Turnbull started his post with a simple call: “Pick up your garbage.” 

“This is a Powerade wrapper which takes up no room in your pocket until you get to a garbage can,” he wrote.
Turnbull told UNILAD that, when he first saw the fish, he thought that it had been attacked and wounded by another fish. When he picked it out of the water, however, he noticed the wrapper – then grabbed a pair of scissors and carefully removed it.

In just a few days, his post has been shared more than 12,000 times.

Once freed from the plastic wrapper, the fish was released back into the water and “shot off like a rocket,” hopefully never to need human help again.

Plastic trash poses a serious threat to marine animals who are susceptible to ingesting and getting entangled in the debris. More and more often, we see the way animals are directly impacted by what we throw away – and this trend will not change as long as we do not change our habits when it comes to our plastic consumption. Every year, around 8.8 million tons of plastic end up in the oceans. It has become so all-pervasive that now researchers find pieces of it even in such improbable remote places as the Arctic Ocean.
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/man-finds-fish-with-embedded-plastic-wrapper/?utm_source=Green+Monster+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=01e0b57346-NEWSLETTER_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bbf62ddf34-01e0b57346-106049477 learn how to use less plastic in your everyday life, check out One Green Planet’s #CrushPlastic campaign!

All image source: Adam Turnbull/Facebook

Snarky bamboo TP company gives 50% of its profits to toilet, water, & sanitation projects : TreeHugger


https://www.treehugger.com/green-home/snarky-bamboo-toilet-paper-company-gives-50-its-profits-toilet-water-sanitation-projects.html

Victory! 50 Million Acres of Forest Finally Win Protection After 16-Year-Long Legal Battle | One Green Planet

Aleksandra Pajda
September 29, 2017

Woohoo! EarthJustice just won a 16-year-long battle to protect 50 million acres of forests from logging and road construction U.S. after a district court threw out an attack by the state of Alaska against the Roadless Rule that protects roadless areas of national forests.

The Roadless Rule was adopted towards the end of the Clinton administration and it prohibits most logging and road construction in roadless areas of national forests – which come up to about 50 million acres, that is about the size of Nebraska. The precious lands are some of the wildest places that still exist in America.

Although overwhelmingly popular among Americans and appreciated by the Forest Service, the rule soon became a problem to state political leaders with ties to the logging and timber industries, and they began attacking it even before Clinton left office. The new Bush administration failed to defend the rule. In that moment, Earthjustice stepped in.

“When we first started this, it never crossed my mind we would still be litigating the rule 16 years later,” said Earthjustice attorney Tom Waldo, one of the legal architects of the organization’s Roadless Rule strategy.

The main legal battles during this long and tasking period came from Idaho, Wyoming, and, Alaska, all of which challenged the rule. Each of the challenges was met with eager defense from Earthjustice. One case at a time, the organization began to win.

Just last week, the very final challenge to the rule was shot down when the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the state of Alaska’s claims lacked merit. The state could appeal the decision or the President could try to reverse it – but, because of the wide support for the rule, its benefits, and previous successes in multiple courts, any attempts at getting rid of the protections will be faced with a serious legal and political battle.

“When you have this 16-year-long experience of consistently having the courts uphold the rule, it helps build a track record of success and popularity that will hopefully help carry us through any challenges and provide a solid foundation for the rule’s continued success,” said Waldo – and, hopefully, the recent win of the Roadless Rule will prove to be the very final one.
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/million-acres-of-forest-finally-protected/

The Fight From Below Seen From Above: New Map Details Local Fossil Fuel Resistance | Global Justice Ecology Project

The Fight From Below Seen From Above: New Map Details Local Fossil Fuel Resistance

Posted on September 25, 2017 by GJEP staff
In an attempt to highlight and bolster the “groundswell of resistance” against fracking wells, pipelines, and other fossil fuel projects throughout the United States, a coalition of environmental groups on Thursday launched the Fossil Fuel Resistance Mapping Project, which details precisely where opposition to Big Oil is taking hold throughout the United States and how others can join in.

“People demand a safe and clean environment, and they will not rest until that is guaranteed for every community across the country.”
—Kelly Martin, Sierra Club

“From the Gulf Coast where people are recovering from Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, to the Pacific Northwest where wildfires are raging, many communities are leading fights against fossil fuel projects amidst life-altering climate impacts,” the coalition—which includes 350.org, Sierra Club, and Bold Alliance—said in a joint statement Thursday.

“These fights are not isolated events, but rather a groundswell of steadfast and widespread local resistance to fossil fuel projects across the continent in the absence of federal climate action,” the groups continue. “Grassroots leaders in these efforts are pushing back on the fossil fuel industry’s injustices, from environmental racism to violating Indigenous sovereignty.”

(Image credit: Fossil Fuel Resistance Project)
The groups hope that the map, which can be accessed on the coalition’s website, will serve as “a resource for people to find, start, or join a campaign in their community to resist fossil fuel projects, and for those involved in existing fights to connect with each other.”

They also believe the map will serve as a tool to raise awareness and concern about the risks those who live near oil refineries and pipelines face on a daily basis.

“With the climate-denying Trump administration putting the the health of Big Oil billionaires’ bottom lines before anyone else, the time to join your local fight to protect our air, water, and planet is right now.”

—Cherri Foytlin, Bold Louisiana “This map highlights what too many Americans are forced to grapple with everyday: a life, community, and clean water and air threatened by fossil fuel infrastructure,” Kelly Martin, director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels project, said in a statement. “That’s why we’ve seen the movement to oppose these projects grow rapidly in recent years. People demand a safe and clean environment, and they will not rest until that is guaranteed for every community across the country.”

The new project comes as the Trump administration continues its efforts to empower the fossil fuel industry and roll back regulatory measures designed to protect the air and water—even in the aftermath of deadly hurricanes like Harvey and Irma, which have left millions exposed to dangerous pollutants.

Foytlin, executive director of Bold Louisiana, said that the Trump administration’s blatant and “reckless” contempt for the planet should serve as a potent motivator for people across the country to join the burgeoning opposition movement and fight back.

“The extractive industry is like a cancer, and our efforts to stop this industry’s expansion are holistically connected on many fronts—this map makes that clear,” Foytlin observed. “With the climate-denying Trump administration putting the the health of Big Oil billionaires’ bottom lines before anyone else, the time to join your local fight to protect our air, water, and planet is right now.

Originally published by Commondreams.org

Copyright © 2017 · All Rights Reserved · Global Justice Ecology Project
http://globaljusticeecology.org/the-fight-from-below-seen-from-above-new-map-details-local-fossil-fuel-resistance/

Harvey triggered the release of more than a million pounds of toxic pollutants | Grist


Harvey triggered the release of more than a million pounds of toxic pollutants
By Emily Atkin on Aug 30, 2017

This story was originally published by New Republic and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Everything is bigger in Texas, including the number of chemical plants, refineries, and other industrial facilities. So when one of the worst storms in American history hit the heart of Texas’ petrochemical industry, it also triggered one of the biggest mass shutdowns the area has even seen. At least 25 plants have either shut down or experienced production issues due to Hurricane Harvey’s unprecedented severe weather and flooding, according to industry publication ICIS. But those closures are not only disrupting markets; they’re also causing enormous releases of toxic pollutants that pose a threat to human health.
Take Chevron Phillips Chemical plant in Sweeny, Texas. When it shut down due to Hurricane Harvey, it released into the atmosphere more than 100,000 pounds of carbon monoxide; 22,000 pounds of nitrogen oxide, 32,000 pounds of ethylene, and 11,000 pounds of propane, according to a report the company submitted to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). A couple thousand pounds of 1,3-butadiene, benzene, and butane were released as well. All of these releases were far more than what was legally allowed.
Chevron reported similarly huge amounts of air pollution above legal limits due to the shutdown of its chemical plant in Cedar Bayou. 28,000 pounds of benzene, a known carcinogen. 56,000 pounds of nitrogen oxide gases, which react to form smog and acid rain. From just one “miscellaneous” source at the facility, a combined 40,000 pounds of various chemicals were released — and that source had no legal authority to release anything at all.

Smaller emissions events were also submitted to TCEQ. In preparation for Harvey, the Equistar plant in Corpus Christi released 5,000 pounds of both carbon monoxide and ethylene. The shutdown of Chevron’s Pasadena Plastics Complex caused some excess releases, mostly of carbon monoxide and isobutane. Javelina Gas Processing facility went far above its relatively low pollution limits for its shutdown, reporting releases of 10,000 pounds of carbon monoxide and 4,000 pounds of butanes, among other things. One Pasadena refinery released a bit of particulate matter.

Between Aug. 23 — the day it became clear Harvey would threaten Texas — and Aug. 29, industrial plants reported 74 excess air pollution release events to TCEQ, or nearly 60 percent more than the previous week. Those releases have so far totaled more than 1 million pounds of emissions above legal limits, according to Air Alliance Houston, an environmental nonprofit that crunched the numbers.
This chart shows excess air pollutant emissions from the Chevron Phillips Chemical plant in Sweeny, Texas, following Hurricane Harvey. TCEQ

contaminants

The reason this is happening is simple: Petrochemical plant shutdowns are a major cause of abnormal emission events. The short-term impacts of these events can be “substantial,” according to a 2012 report from the Environmental Integrity Project, because “upsets or sudden shutdowns can release large plumes of sulfur dioxide or toxic chemicals in just a few hours, exposing downwind communities to peak levels of pollution that are much more likely to trigger asthma attacks and other respiratory systems.”

Air Alliance Houston’s Executive Director Bakeyah Nelson is concerned about how these shutdowns will affect nearby communities already suffering from Harvey. “The excess amount of air pollution puts communities in close proximity to these plants at risk, especially people with chronic health conditions,” she said. She also noted that communities closest to these sites in Houston — and in general — are disproportionately low-income and minority. Some residents have already been complaining of “unbearable” petrochemical-like smells.

But so far, TCEQ has not indicated these events have triggered health impacts. Its website offers no guidance for air pollution events from the storm, and TCEQ Media Relations Manager Andrea Miller told me the agency or local emergency officials would contact residents if an immediate health threat were to occur. What’s more, Miller said companies were probably reporting higher emissions that what actually occurred, “since underreporting can result in higher penalties.”

It’s unclear, however, how TCEQ would check many of the companies’ reports, since the agency turned off all its air quality monitors in the Houston area before Harvey hit. Miller confirmed as much on Monday, saying devices were either turned off or removed “to protect against damage or loss of these sensitive and expensive instruments.” Most of the plants impacted by Harvey are in the Houston area, as this ICIS map below shows.

oil-facilities-shut-down(2)

A map of industrial facilities in Texas that have either closed, reduced operations, or otherwise scaled back because of Hurricane Harvey. ICIS

None of this is to say that companies could have done much of anything this week to stop the release of these chemicals. Indeed, there is no way to avoid large releases of air pollutants when refineries and chemical plants shut down, and there was no way these companies could have avoided shutting down their facilities faced with such a destructive storm. In their reports to TCEQ, companies generally say they are operating within safety and good air pollution control practices. And fortunately, as one meteorologist pointed out to me on Twitter, the continued rainfall in Texas is likely improving the situation, preventing pollutants from remaining stagnant in the air as it destroys everything else.

The real problem lies in the sheer number of facilities having to shut down or decrease operations at the exact same time — meaning they’ll also all eventually have to start back up. And emissions-wise, starting back up is just as bad as shutting down. That’s evident in the TCEQ emissions reports; rebooting the Formosa Plastics plant two hours outside Houston will be an enormous emissions event. In Corpus Christi, the Flint Hills Resources plant reported releases of 15,000 pounds of sulfur dioxide — a particularly harmful chemical — for its start-up. Most of this, too, is unavoidable, said Neil Carman, the clean air program director at Sierra Club’s Lone Star chapter. “Plants aren’t like cars or trucks where you just push a button and its starts,” he said. “These are huge refineries and petrochemical plants, so it takes a number of hours to heat up their units.”

When these plants restart, it’s less likely that the communities nearby will have the rain to save them. (And it seems a cruel irony to wish for rain that’s already caused so much damage.) But Nelson says the real problem is that the plants are allowed to operate so close to residential areas in the first place. Houston’s lack of zoning regulations have been front-and-center in discussions about why Harvey has been so terrible for the city, and that’s no different in the discussion about air pollution. “When the city gets back on its feet, it’s a good time to revisit the dialogue about where facilities are allowed to be located, and what precautionary measures can be taken in the future for communities in close proximity to these facilities,” Nelson said. Unfortunately, like so many other problems with Harvey, the discussion may come too late for the most vulnerable.

Harvey triggered the release of more than a million pounds of toxic pollutants

A Beacon in the Smog®
© 1999-2017 Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Grist is powered by WordPress.com VIP.

Footage of Greek Oil Spill Shows Massive Scale of Damage

 

Seeking Shelter from the Storm

Flamingos shelter in Key West laundry room as Parrots seek refuge at Miami hotel window — boldcorsicanflame’s Blog A family staying at a Miami Marriott hotel found two parrots pressed right u…

Source: Seeking Shelter from the Storm

Petition · Bass Pro Shop: Urging 3 major Boat supply companies to donate their supplies for Texas Hurricane Harvey. · Change.org


https://www.change.org/p/bass-pro-shop-urging-3-major-boat-supply-companies-to-donate-their-supplies-for-texas-hurricane-harvey?source_location=update_footer&algorithm=promoted&grid_position=10&pt=AVBldGl0aW9uAB6BuAAAAAAAWaSiRIMlHhBlZjQ4MTA1MQ%3D%3D

Happy Honey Bee Day! – FIREPAW, Inc.


https://firepaw.org/2017/08/19/happy-honey-bee-day/

Study Links Most Amazon Deforestation to 128 Slaughterhouses

Jul. 28, 2017 08:58AM EST
Beef cattle awaiting slaughter in a corral. Fabio Nascimento
Study Links Most Amazon Deforestation to 128 Slaughterhouses

By Eduardo Pegurier, Translated by Bruno Moraes

Satellites are mechanical reporters of the Amazon deforestation process. By documenting the degradation and gaps created by the clear-cutting process over the years, they deliver the verdict: Two-thirds of the Amazon’s deforested area has been turned into pastures.

From the ground, the cattle count reveals that the Amazon is home to more cattle than people. By 2016, the region’s cattle numbers amounted to 85 million head, compared to a human population of 25 million—more than three cows per person. In the city of São Félix do Xingu, which contains the largest herd in Brazil, this proportion reaches 18 cows to 1 person.

The Brazilian Amazon covers 61 percent of the nation’s territory and harbors 40 percent of the national herd. Cattle are kept on about 400,000 farms and ranches there, ranging in size from a few to tens of thousands of hectares.

So it was that when the NGO Imazon finished a new and detailed survey on the region’s slaughterhouses, they received a major surprise: finding that a small number, just 128 active slaughterhouses belonging to 99 companies, are responsible for 93 percent of the annual slaughter—close to 12 million head.

The fact that slaughterhouses represent a bottleneck in the livestock breeding chain was already known. But Imazon’s survey breaks new ground because it clearly reveals the geography of livestock production in the Brazilian Amazon, documenting the area of influence—the amount of pasture required to fulfill the supply demands of each of the 128 slaughterhouses.

To put things in perspective, fulfilling the annual processing capacity of a single large meat processing plant requires almost 600 thousand hectares (2,317 square miles) of pasture, an area more than seven times larger than New York City. The set of slaughterhouses analyzed in the study, operating at full capacity, would require a pasture area of 68 million hectares (262,559 square miles, or roughly the size of Texas). Importantly, this amount exceeds the total pasture area available in the region today, indicating that in the near future cattle ranching will generate more Amazon deforestation.

Imazon’s study results reinforce the correctness of the satellite record, documenting an ongoing Amazon deforestation process linked to the cattle industry.

With this reality in mind, the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), the independent federal prosecutor’s office, has pressured the region’s slaughterhouses to sign the so-called Beef Agreement since 2009, starting in the state of Pará. This contract, made between the MPF and each signing slaughterhouse, commits the firms to inspections of the pasture land where acquired animals originated, in order to ban cattle pasture expansions resulting in deforestation.

Paulo Barreto, the Imazon study lead researcher, explains the practicality of the processing plant contracts: “It was like having two options to address this issue: gathering managers for each of these 100 slaughterhouse firms in a conference room or, alternatively, filling five huge soccer stadiums with all the farmers involved in cattle ranching.”

Fulfilling the annual processing capacity of a single large meat processing plant in the Amazon requires almost 600 thousand hectares (2,317 square miles) of pasture, an area more than seven times larger than New York City. The need for so much pasture has resulted in significant deforestation.

The analysis detailing the influence of so few slaughterhouses on almost the entire Amazon cattle industry involved detective work and geo-processing technology.
The first step was to obtain the addresses of every large meatpacking plant and certify them by using high-definition satellite images to look for typical facilities, such as corrals and wastewater treatment systems. From there, researchers wanted to answer two questions: What was the potential cattle supply range for each slaughterhouse? And, how do these potential pasture supply zones relate to already deforested areas and to those that are at higher risk of deforestation in the near future?

The researchers determined the maximum distance between each slaughterhouse and its suppliers by interviewing local managers by phone, then crossing data. There were extreme cases at both ends of the spectrum, including one plant in the state of Acre which did not buy cattle raised any farther away than 20 kilometers (12.4 miles) from their door. On the other extreme, a slaughterhouse in the state of Amazonas acquired animals from more than 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) away to compensate for a local livestock shortage during the dry season.

The study dealt with two slaughterhouse categories: those with a state license, which allows them to sell meat within their states; and those with a federal license, allowing the firms to sell country-wide and for export. On average, meatpacking plants with state licenses have the capacity to slaughter 180 animals per day, and buy from farms that can be up to 153 kilometers (95 miles) away. Plants with national licenses can slaughter 700 animals per day, brought from up to 360 kilometers (223 miles) away.

The next step in the analysis process, based on the maximum pasture to meat processing plant distances, was to establish the potential area that supplied each slaughterhouse—a goal accomplished with geospatial technology.

Satellite image of the JBS slaughterhouse in Santana do Araguaia, in the state of Pará, Brazil.
Google Earth

“Imazon has an extensive database of formal and informal roads in the Amazon, which has been updated since 2008,” said Amintas Brandão Jr., a study co-author. “We ran a spatial analysis in which you insert the coordinates of the slaughterhouse in the software and its maximum buying distance, say 100 kilometers. Then the software automatically goes through all the roads and navigable rivers accessible to that slaughterhouse up to those 100 kilometers distant. Thus, we have been able to delineate a potential supply zone.” According to Brandão, this was the study’s novelty: it establishes each slaughterhouse’s area of influence using the infrastructure network—the systems of roads and navigable rivers through which cattle can be transported.

Importantly, the total pasture zone of influence corresponding to all 128 analyzed slaughterhouses covers almost the entirety of areas embargoed due to deforestation by Ibama, the federal agency that polices environmental offenses. It also matches 88 percent of all deforestation that occurred in the Amazon between 2010 and 2015.

Also importantly, the study generated a forecast of the most likely future deforested areas in the Brazilian Amazon.

Again, the researchers utilized geospatial analysis software. They divided the entire region into a grid of 1 kilometer-wide squares. The probability of future deforestation was estimated for each square based on the presence of factors that stimulate forest destruction, such as available roads or rivers for transportation, distance to markets and land production potential. Using this data, they created a map of deforestation probability for the entire Brazilian Amazon. Then the researchers used the deforested area for the three previous years—1.7 million hectares (17,000 square kilometers; 6,564 square miles)—as an estimate of total forest loss that can happen in the three year period between 2016 to 2018. Based on this probability map, they determined the areas under higher risk of new deforestation. The last step was to overlap these projections and the slaughterhouses’ zones of potential supply. The match between the two was 90 percent.

In other words, if the current deforestation rates are repeated between 2016 and 2018, 90 percent of new forest loss will occur within the estimated cattle supply zone of 128 slaughterhouses.

If the Amazon’s current deforestation rate is repeated between 2016 and 2018, then 90 percent of new forest loss will occur within the estimated cattle supply zone of the 128 slaughterhouses.

Consequences and Solutions
“From the surveillance point of view, this work can help control deforestation by showing where its hot spots are,” said Brandão.

According to Barreto, “it is impressive how small is the number of slaughterhouse firms that sit at the end of a [cattle supply] chain that involves almost 400,000 ranchers.” For him, this confirms that the best way to reduce forest loss due to livestock is to involve the slaughterhouses in the deforestation surveillance, as the MPF agreements require.

But Barreto also points out problems with this approach: 30 percent of the slaughters are done by meat processing firms that have not signed the Beef Agreement. That means that these firms do not inspect the place of origin of their cattle. Worse, these slaughterhouses are located in the same area of activity as those who have signed the agreement, thus becoming alternatives for the sale of cattle raised in illegally opened pastures.

Imazon’s study created a detailed picture of the influence that slaughterhouses can have on deforestation. “We already have a map, and the technologies are available to trace cattle from the ranches where they are bred all the way to intermediate fattening ranches, and to the slaughter sites,” said Barreto. “Now, we need consistent legal pressure and punishment for breeders and meatpackers who condone environmental crimes.”

The new study forecasts that serious Amazon deforestation will likely continue to occur unless effective enforcement policies are adopted to monitor and control the pasture usage of the region’s slaughterhouses.

This sort of pressure, he said, came from the market itself in the case of foot-and-mouth disease, when the cattle industry realized that it would lose global markets if an effective vaccination program wasn’t implemented. The pinch from the market led farmers to organize themselves and to partner with the government to effectively control foot-and-mouth disease, which was quite a feat.
Likewise, if the government and slaughterhouses have the will, he says, then they can work together to end ranching activities that bring down forests. For Barreto, a good starting point for reducing deforestation would be the creation of a new round of beef sector law enforcement pressure administered by the MPF and Ibama. Such a move would be a huge step toward achieving zero deforestation in the Amazon.

 

This article was originally published in Portuguese by ((o))eco and can be found at their site or it can be viewed at Mongabay.com which edited this version of the story for English speakers.

CO2 Benefits the “Rats and Cockroaches” of Marine World – Scientific American

CO2 Benefits the “Rats and Cockroaches” of Marine World

Ocean acidification may be driving a cascade of changes that drains marine biodiversity

By Adam Aton, ClimateWire on July 7, 2017

Beneath the waves, swelling levels of carbon dioxide could be boosting some species to ecological dominance while dooming others.
A study published yesterday in Current Biology suggests ocean acidification is driving a cascading set of behavioral and environmental changes that drains oceans’ biodiversity. Niche species and intermediate predators suffer at the expense of a handful of aggressive species.

Sea-level rise and coral bleaching often dominate discussions about how climate change affects the ocean, but a host of more subtle—and harder to research—trends also play a role in reshaping the world’s marine ecosystems. Among the most pressing questions is how fish react to rising levels of CO2, said Tom Bigford, policy director at the American Fisheries Society.

“The hurdles for behavioral changes are far lower than the hurdles for life and death,” said Bigford, who worked with fish habitats at NOAA for more than three decades.

Now, for the first time, researchers from the University of Adelaide in South Australia have cataloged the changing ways marine species interact with each other.

For three years, they observed marine environments near undersea volcanic vents where CO2 levels are high—providing a window into the future acidity of ocean water—along with adjacent areas of normal acidity. They also conducted behavioral experiments on fish from the different zones to test their responses to food and habitat competition.

Receding kelp means less habitat for intermediate predators, with about half as many near the volcanic vents.

But the acidified conditions proved to be a boon to what the researchers called “the marine equivalent to rats and cockroaches”—small fish with low commercial or culinary value.

Snails and small crustaceans can flourish in high-CO2 conditions, providing plenty of prey for those small fish. And their high risk-taking behavior and competitive strength, coupled with the collapse of predator populations, allowed them to more than double their population.

In water with higher CO2, the dominant species were willing to adapt to riskier habitats, preferring bare surfaces instead of turf while subordinate species were nearby.

Mimicked predator attacks also showed the dominant species adopted riskier behavior in higher-acidity water, fleeing shorter distances than the fish in water with normal acidity. Subordinate species showed no change.

Rare and specialist species are the most vulnerable to climate change, even though they “contribute disproportionately to [ecosystems’] functional diversity,” the researchers wrote.

To counter that diversity loss, the researchers suggested stronger fishing protections for predators.
Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at http://www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers.
© 2017 Scientific American, a Division of Nature America, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.
­

Are Your Fireworks Causing Pollution? | Care2 Causes

By: s.e. smith
July 2, 2017
’tis the season for colorful, epic displays of fireworks – and my cat’s annual retreat behind the fridge. Americans use more 250 million pounds of them every year.

If you’re a fan of pyrotechnics shows, just thinking about fireworks probably conjures up a fond memory of oohing and aahing along with a crowd, as colors burst overhead and smoke drifts across the — hey, wait a minute.

Sorry, but I’m here to rain on your fireworks, because those delightful explosions come with a hefty dose of pollution. It doesn’t have to be that way, though — in fact, many municipalities are seeking out alternatives that allow residents to enjoy the fun, minus the environmental impact.
Love This? Never Miss Another Story.

Here’s the problem: Fireworks are made by combining gunpowder with metal that will react as it heats and ignites — that’s what causes the different colors and nifty visual effects. They also historically came packed with sodium perchlorate to act as an oxidizer to fuel that reaction. The explosion itself generates smoke as a byproduct of combustion, and along with it, tiny metallic particles that aren’t great for people — or animals — to breathe.

Researchers in Spain found that after major festivals, concentrations of strontium, copper, antimony, sulphur dioxide and lead, among many others, were much higher in urban areas than they should be. The pollution came not just from municipal fireworks displays, but also from members of the public who set them off in their backyards, just as millions of Americans do around the Fourth of July. They noted that poor quality control and questionable sources made some fireworks more hazardous than others.

Researchers have also found perchlorate in lakes after major fireworks displays. Surprisingly, the United States doesn’t actually regulate perchlorate content in fireworks, so companies have no particular reason to seek an alternative — unless consumers pressure them. Another source of pressure may be regional environmental agencies, which have the power to require permits from entities putting on major fireworks shows.

Between packaging, casing and other components, fireworks also generate a lot of litter. In the case of municipal displays, cities may have a contract clause requiring operators to clean up, but citizens feel no such obligations. The aftermath of a fireworks-laced weekend can include plastic and cardboard debris far and wide, from explosions as well as abandoned packaging.

The good news is that if you love the environment and explosions — like me — you actually can have your cake and eat it too. Researchers are developing less toxic oxidizers, as well as safer compounds that create dramatic color effects — and they’re even thinking about more eco-friendly shell casings. One of the biggest challenges the planet-loving crew faces comes in the form of the ubiquitous red firework, which is actually quite hard to create with eco-friendly compounds.

Disney uses compressed air to launch its fireworks, with the goal of achieving smokeless displays. That’s more enjoyable for theme park guests, but it also benefits the surrounding environment. It’s an important consideration for a business that puts on numerous shows annually.

One of the best sources for research into this issue may surprise you, because it’s the military.

Military personnel use flares that are very similar to fireworks in design, and as part of a goal to be a greener citizen, military researchers have been exploring cleaner burning materials and better packaging to reduce their environmental impact. One reason why? The military is still paying a high price for cleaning up pollution at abandoned bases across the United States, and it’s not eager to perpetuate the problem. In the short term, their work benefits civilian fireworks fans.

As you get ready to celebrate Independence Day, ask local officials about the fireworks used, and the specifics of the city’s contract with the company that puts on the show. If they aren’t using environmentally friendly options, ask why — and be sure to wear respiratory protection to the show. For those who love backyard shows — where it’s safe and legal — consider seeking out fireworks with biodegradable casings and look for products manufactured without perchlorate and other toxic compounds.
Photo credit: Kevin Muncie
Care2 Team Blog

It’s Time to Take America’s Plastic Fork Problem Seriously | Grist

It’s tine to take America’s plastic fork problem seriously
By Jenny Luna on Jul 3, 2017

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Whether for stabbing salads at our desks or slurping up late-night Thai, plastic cutlery has become a signature side to our growing takeout habit. It’s hard to say exactly how many forks, spoons, and knives Americans throw away, but in 2015 we placed nearly 2 billion delivery orders. If at least half those meals involved single-use utensils, that would mean we’re tossing out billions of utensils each year. They don’t just disappear: A recent study in the San Francisco Bay Area found that food and beverage packaging made up 67 percent of all litter on the streets.

Apart from being an eyesore, disposable cutlery endangers wildlife. A survey by four major environmental groups determined that plastic utensils ranked among the 10 most common trash items found in California — which contributes to a larger problem: The United Nations estimates that the oceans contain more than 8 million tons of plastic. As plastic breaks down, it can be mistaken for food by sea creatures, which can harm them and our seafood dinners.

A few options have surfaced in recent years. In 2010, a company in India started selling edible spoons and forks made from grains. Closer to home, California-based SpudWare’s forks are made from potato starch. But such alternatives, which cost about twice as much as plastic, still require a lot of energy and water to produce, according to Samantha Sommer, who runs a waste-prevention project for Clean Water Action. What’s more, not all major cities compost. And even if biodegradable or compostable utensils make it to a facility, there’s a chance they’ll end up in a landfill, says Robert Reed, a spokesman for the West Coast recycling and compost plant Recology. Depending on what they’re made of, he says, biodegradable utensils might not degrade completely; if they don’t, they could be plucked out of the pile and thrown away.

Perhaps diners should take a page from China, where environmental protesters publicized how the roughly 80 billion pairs of disposable wooden chopsticks produced each year eat up 20 million trees in the process. Greenpeace China launched a BYOC (Bring Your Own Chopsticks) campaign and worked with pop stars to promote reusable chopsticks as a trendy fashion accessory. As a result, disposable chopsticks were banned from use at many venues hosting events at Beijing’s 2008 Olympics.

Metal spoons have not yet graced American celebrity Instagram accounts, but maybe it’s time: Encouraging customers to bring in their own utensils helps businesses cut down costs and waste. A few years ago, Clean Water Action ran a test case with restaurant owner Francisco Hernandez of El Metate in San Francisco. The restaurant staff used to include plastic utensils with every order. Now, sit-down diners get metal forks, and disposables are in a countertop container for to-go customers who need them. Hernandez saved money that year — now he buys just one case of disposable forks each week instead of three — and he decreased his restaurant’s waste by more than 3,600 pounds. The change means El Metate has more to wash, but it’s likely that the water used to run his dishwasher (one gallon for every one-minute cycle) is dwarfed by the amount needed to make those plastic forks.

Still, a sea change might require more research and toothier legislation — something that worked in the fight against plastic bags. A 2013 study found that after San Jose, California, enacted a bag ban, there was nearly 90 percent less plastic in the city’s storm drains and almost 60 percent less in its streets than there had been before. Data like that helped California finalize a statewide ban — over the strenuous lobbying of plastics manufacturers — in 2016. Such legislation appears to be catching on: Chicago, Seattle, and Austin, Texas, have also enacted bag bans, and between 2015 and 2016, lawmakers proposed at least 77 state-level plastic bag bills. Given that success, here’s an idea: Charge a small fee for disposable utensils to help nudge consumers to make a habit out of carrying their own forks. Prettier streets, healthier oceans, and cheaper takeout? Sold.

A Beacon in the Smog®
© 1999-2017 Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Grist is powered by WordPress.com VIP.

Less Waste Makes for a Happy Planet: Simple Guide to Waste-Free Grocery Shopping | One Green Planet


http://www.onegreenplanet.org/environment/simple-guide-to-waste-free-grocery-shopping/

Why Reducing Meat Consumption Is the Easiest Step Everyone Can Take to Fix Our Broken Food System | One Green Planet


http://www.onegreenplanet.org/environment/why-we-need-to-reduce-meat-consumption-for-the-planet/

These Shocking Photos of the Disappearing Amazon Rainforest Are a Result of One Unnecessary Choice | One Green Planet


http://www.onegreenplanet.org/environment/meat-burgers-amazon-rainforest/?utm_source=Green+Monster+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=2a3381a683-NEWSLETTER_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bbf62ddf34-2a3381a683-106049477

Petition: U.S. Governors: Join the Climate Alliance – Resist Trump’s Efforts to Destroy our Planet and Economy


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/830/573/282/?z00m=29175145&redirectID=2417093215

URGENT: New EPA Administrator Fires Scientists, Wants Public Input on Regulation Cuts | Global Justice Ecology Project


http://globaljusticeecology.org/urgent-new-epa-administrator-fires-scientists-wants-public-input-on-regulation-cuts/#comments

Worm That Likes to Eat Plastic May Help Save Marine Species From Ocean Pollution | One Green Planet


Aleksandra Pajda
April 25, 2017

Now that we are facing the immense problem of plastic waste overflowing our planet, we almost wish something would just magically take care of all the dangerous trash finding its way onto streets and ocean waters. Well, while this solution may not yet exist – scientists have discovered that waxworms have a peculiar taste for plastic! But there is no magic whatsoever to the marvel of those little caterpillars – only the wonders of biology.

Scientists have reported that waxworms (Galleria mellonella) consume plastic at “uniquely high speed” and are able to break down even the toughest of them. During research, these worms proved perfectly able to eat through the infamously hard to break down polyethylene and did it 1,400 times faster than other organisms! According to scientists, the worm’s talent for breaking down such difficult materials lies in the potent enzymes in its saliva or gut – enzymes the worm uses to break down beeswax, which is similar to plastic in its chemical bonds.

What makes the news even more interesting, is it was discovered purely by accident. A biologist and amateur beekeeper, Federica Bertocchini, placed the worms temporarily in a plastic bag while cleaning out her hives and quickly noticed the holes that were appearing in the bag. During the following tests at Cambridge, 100 waxworms were released onto a plastic bag and holes began to appear after just 40 minutes!

Researchers claim that this discovery could be turned into a solution to the plastic problem on an industrial scale through a reproduction in large quantities of the specific enzyme that is responsible for breaking down the plastic. As reported by Independent.ie, Paolo Bombelli from Cambridge University believes that the newly discovered enzymes could be used to adapt recycling plants to biodegrade mass quantities of plastic and one day the enzymes could even be sprayed directly onto landfill sites or sea plants.

This thrilling discovery makes us hopeful for a breakthrough in the issue of plastic waste and the future of dealing with unrecycled trash. But let us not forget that, however uncannily great at eating plastic these waxworms are, they will not simply end our plastic problem. We currently dump around 8.8 million tons of plastic in the oceans every year – and around 700 marine species are threatened with extinction as a result. While these waxworms could lend these animals a hand, the responsibility to make conscious choices and take care of the world around us is still ours.

Global Warming (or is it Global Cooling?) | This blog examines the essential facts that show that human induced climate change is an absolute crock. In fact you don’t have to be a scientist to figure that out!


https://rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com/

Petition: Salt Lake City: Divest From Coal Energy!


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/115/785/038/