Environmental Science

   Well, today we started populations so I thought I would provide some more specific numbers concerning populations around the world. Here is what I found:

• World population ~ 6,585,027,788
• U.S. ~ 301,474,983
• Illinois ~ 12,440,351
• IL Male ~ 6,090,298          Margin of Error: +/- 4,022
• IL Female ~ 6,350,053     Margin of Error: +/- 4,022
• Largest Current Country Populations:
  1. China – 1,313,973,713
  2. India – 1,095,351,995
  3. United States – 301, 474, 983
  4. Indonesia – 245,452,739
  5. Brazil – 188,078,22

  

  “According to the Population Reference Bureau, these will be the ten largest countries based on population in 2050…”

  1. India – 1,628,000,000

  2. China – 1,437,000,000

  3. United States – 420,000,000

  4. Nigeria – 299,000,000

  5. Pakistan – 295,000,000

  6. Indonesia – 285,000,000

  7. Brazil – 260,000,000

  8. Bangladesh – 231,000,000

  9. Democratic Republic of Congo – 183,000,000

  10. Ethiopia – 145,000,000

  Smallest Current Country Populations:

  1. Vatican City ~ 920 (considered a country)
  2. Tuvalu ~ 11,640
  3. Nauru ~ 13,050
  4. Palau ~ 20,300
  5. San Marino ~ 28,880

Sources:

• http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
• http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/17000.html
• http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/17000lk.html
• http://geography.about.com/cs/worldpopulation/a/mostpopulous.htm
• http://geography.about.com/od/lists/a/2050pop.htm
• http://worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/ctypopsl.htm
• Photo Credit: AP-NASA-12/00/1972

Although few in number, some scientists are not convinced that humans are causing global warming but are saying it is a natural happening in the solar system. This hypothesis arrose due to the same greenhouse gas and warming on Mars like there is on Earth. There are obviously no humans on Mars so there is no way that any humans caused the climate change there. The natural occurence these scientists are referring to is that the warming is caused by changes in the sun. Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data shows how, “The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars.”

This “long-term increase in solar irradiance” is further explained with “planet wobbles.” Scientists have found that every planet has its axis-tilt changed and for Earth this happens once every “20,000 to 100,000 years” (called a Milankovitch cycle).

This is a startling theory considering all the work and laws that have been made to solve this problem. Other scientists opposed to Abdussamatov like Colin Wilson, a planetary physicist at England’s Oxford University, who said, “His views are completely at odds with the mainstream scientific opinion, and they contradict the extensive evidence presented in the most recent IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report.”

Abdussamatov goes even further to totally dismis the idea of greenhouse gases and their effect on the environment. His claim is that “carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth’s climate and virtually no influence on Mars. “

(Photo Credit: www.wikimedia.com)

This idea for sure will shake the science community but I don’t see enough evidence against the current notion of global warming to change my mind. We have proven and heard about numerous different types of greenhouse gases and their harmful effect on this planet if not on all planets. I doubt Abdussamatov will get very far with his extreme reasoning but the universe is very undiscovered and and very unfamiliar si their may be more of these types of “discoveries” in the future. Maybe impervious surfaces are good for the environment.

Sources:

• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mars_Hubble.jpg

   Prince Charles has recently been criticized for his excessive air travel around the world. He decided to skip a ski vacation to Switzerland but was still accused of traveling by air too much after he went to the U.S. to receive and environmental award. Critics are so hung up on this issue because researchers ahve found that “planes’ carbon emissions have more of a warming effect on the environment than cars do.” It is estimated that “5,200 pounds of carbon PER PASSENGER is emitted in a round-trip flight between New York City and Tokyo.” I researched about how many passengers would fit on that large of a plane and this is what I came up with:

5,200 lbs. / 1 passenger = X lbs. / 450 passengers

X = 2,340,000 lbs.

So well over 2 million pounds of carbon would be emitted in the round trip from New York to Tokyo in a full 747 airplane.

  Although airline pollution only “contributes to 1.6% of greenhouse gases,” researchers say this “number is rising fast” as more and more people flying annually.

(Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org)

  The problem is it is too hard to tell people not to fly because there is no other form of transportation that is that efficient. The next step down is a train which cannot go over water and is definately slower than a plane. A large plane flies about 420 to 580 mph, while the speed record for a train is 343 mph, but average around 125 mph. Another problem is planes require a lot of fuel and as long as an alternative fuel for smaller vehicles like cars is not created, there is no way to have one for planes. So for the moment this problem seems unsolvable until technology allows other equally efficient modes of travel and/or a better fuel source.

Sources:

• Time Magazine, “Greenhouse Airlines,” February 12, 2007, pg. 57
• http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/2610589/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_airplane

 I recently saw a movie trailer for a horror/thriller movie called Primeval. It talks about a serial killer named Gustave who has “killed over 300 people and is still at large”. No other reference is made to who or where he is. I was both confused and interested in this story because I thought I would’ve heard something about this in the news. I searched for this person named Gustave and what I found was very surprising. Gustave actually does exist but he is not human, he is a crocodile.

The cover for the the new film: Primeval

Photo Credit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Primevalposter.jpg

 Gustave lives in Burundi, Africa (near Rwanda) and is considered to be one of the largest freshwater crocodiles in the world. He is 10-12 meters long (32-40 feet) and weighs at least a ton  (2,000 pounds). Though this croc is very cool to most people, he is very deadly to those who live in the area.

 During mating season Gustave travels very far and on his way will eat 10-20 fishermen and boters at a time. One observer said he saw Gustave eat 17 people in one stretch of the shore. Obviously, people have tried many times to catch if not kill this man-eater, but everyone has failed. He has even been seen teasing people who have set out traps by getting closer and closer to the traps then backing off.

 Native of Burundi holding a photo of Gustave. 

Photo Credit: AP - Bobby Model – 2005

 I don’t know how this movie will turn out, I’m guessing everyone but one person will be eaten by Gustave and the last one gets him (like it happens in all of these movies). Researchers would like to keep Gustave alive for as long as possible to study him, so so I advise you not to go to Burundi, Africa anytime soon because you may be next on Gustave’s list. Hahahahahaha!

Sources:

• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2520815.stm
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primeval_%28film%29
• http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=68&art_id=vn20041115032108782C977005

 Not only does coal mining cause depletion of natural resources, health problems to workers, and high danger of mine accidents, but now studies say that coal mining in Australia was the cause of the 1989 earthquake in Australia that was the most damaging in the country’s history and caused 3.5 billion U.S. dollars woth of damage.

 The earthquake, on December 28 ,1989, was “triggered by changes in tectonic forces caused by underground coal mining.” The magnitude of the quake was relatively average (5.6) but the damage was very large: 13 people were killed, 160 injured, and “the monetary damage done by the earthquake exceeded the total value of the coal extracted in the area.” 

 Not only was the actual mining a cause, but the groundwater extraction used to prevent flooding added to the situation. Christian D. Klose of Columbia University found in his study that “for each ton of coal produced, 4.3 times more water was extracted,” for this particular site, while other sites can require “as much as 150 tons of water to be removed for each ton of coal produced.”

 This is not the first time that mining has caused earthquakes. Between 1976 and 1984 Uzbekistan experienced three massive earthquakes due to their natural gas mining field. The largest of the three quakes reached a magnitude of 7.3.

 Klose and other researchers are looking into ways to solve these problems, the main one being the the large amount of water being extracted at each site.

 Earthquakes add a whole new dimension to the need for alternative fuel options because of the long list of effects and earthquake can have on an area. Any type of mining, not just coal, can contribute to these earthquakes so it is definately time to solve these problems before an earthquake hits closer to home.

 Damage done by an earthquake in Los Angeles in 1994.

(Photo Credit: AP – DOUGLAS C. PIZAC – 1994)

Sources:

• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070103-mine-quake_2.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_accidents
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthquakes
• http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=022106-34

THIS IS AN ESSAY I RECENTLY WROTE FOR A BUSINESS SCHOLARSHIP TO WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS.

Four Reasons to “Go Green”

Are initiatives designed to preserve or improve the environment “good” for business or “bad” for business? As people become more aware of problems such as global warming and the depletion of natural resources, business leaders will need to consider alternatives and decide which ways to go.

Last summer I worked as an intern for my father’s construction company and I learned a term I had not heard before: “green architecture” (also called “green building.”) The term is used to describe steps that can be taken to make sure a building is “environment-friendly,” and it is a relatively new concept in the construction field.

In my opinion, running a successful construction business is very challenging. There are many rules and requirements to pay attention to during the process of getting permits and zoning approval. There are economic conditions that affect whether people want to build a building now or later. When the economy gets worse, companies tend to cancel or postpone new buildings. In those times, competition among builders also becomes more difficult, because some companies submit really low bids, just to keep their people working. Weather conditions also affect how the construction phases will go. Sometimes a job that looks as if it will be profitable ends up just covering costs.

Considering all that, I wondered if having another set of requirements to meet to try to build a “green building,” would just make the business all that much harder. However, my father and his partners have decided to view “green building” as an opportunity and are really excited about its possibilities.

An architect or builder who wants to design or build a green building can turn for guidance to an organization called “LEED” (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). This not-for-profit organization has developed a list of steps that can be taken to choose a building site, build the building and operate the building in a sustainable manner. A building that matches the criteria can become “LEED-certified”; a building that meets additional requirements can be designated as silver, gold, or platinum.

For my AP Environmental Science class, I have done some research of my own on this topic.  In my opinion, there are four reasons why it can be smart business to accept and promote the idea of green buildings. First, from an environmental point of view, it is the right thing to do. Second, the people who work in a green building will have better air quality and environmental conditions, so they will be healthier, happier employees. Third, when the building is finished, the owner can expect some cost benefits. Finally, a developer and builder who understand and use green architecture can use their expertise as a competitive advantage.

Green buildings help the environment by enhancing and protecting biodiversity and the surrounding ecosystems by reducing waste output and conserving natural resources. Air quality both inside and outside of the building would also be improved by using more efficient and renewable resources. Many companies are setting goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from their buildings. For example, Citigroup has committed to reducing its building’s greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent by 2011.

Green buildings are good for people in the workplace because workers will have more comfort due to better healthier conditions throughout the area. Also, the overall visual quality of the building and area will be more pleasant. In addition to retaining current workers, recruiting new employees will be easier because people who are concerned about the environment will want to work for companies who take a “green” approach to their business.

Green buildings save their owners money first and foremost by improving occupant productivity due to increased comfort and working conditions. Also the building as a whole will run more efficiently with a large decrease in operating and energy costs, through such measures as reflective roofing materials, energy efficient flush valves, and minimalist landscaping. In addition, space will be saved as a result of a better energy source, such as solar power, so there will be even more comfort for occupants of the building. Wal-Mart is focusing on green practices and is currently testing “sustainable design strategies, materials, and technologies for use in new and existing stores around the world.” Whether in its trucks or its buildings Wal-Mart has set ambitious goals for improving efficiency over the next ten years. The long-term goal for Wal-Mart is “to use 100 percent renewable energy, to create zero waste, and to sell products that sustain natural resources and the environment.”

Builders who know how to build green buildings will be ahead of others in their field because green buildings are the way of the future, and those who start early will reap the benefits. Government regulations are expected to be in place in the coming years and may insist that every building occupied by a government agency is a “green building.” Architects, builders and building owners who have experience and knowledge in green buildings will have an advantage over those who do not.

In conclusion, a company that “goes green” will help everyone who comes in contact with that business. People who see and experience that green-company may then use that knowledge to adopt more environmentally sound practices in all areas of their lives. “Green is going to be the industry of the 21^st Century,” says New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman, and Citigroup’s senior executive vice president Pamela Flaherty says, “ …over the next five to ten years, green practices will become embedded in how companies conduct all of their business.” As someone who cares about the environment and the success of businesses, I encourage current business owners and future entrepreneurs to seriously consider both the long and the short-term benefits that are results of green buildings. It is the future, so why not get a head start?

  In early December, Japanese scientists captured and took video record of a giant squid. Giant squid are very elusive and swim deep in the ocean so it is rare that any are ever seen let alone caught by anyone. The scientists said they used a line of small squid as bait and lured the squid close enough to be captured. Although the giant squid died due to injuries in the capture, this event sheds new light on the almost mythical creature.

The Giant Squid captured December 4, 2006

(Associated Press TSUNEMI KUBODERA, NATIONAL SCIENCE MUSEUM OF JAPAN)

 Giant squid are the largest known invertebrates and can grow to over 40-50 ft long. Although the giant squid can be just a large as things like the sperm whale, they are nowhere near the size in weight. This is because most of the length is due to the extremely long arms and tentacles. The mantle or “body” of the aquid is usually around 6-10 feet.

  The giant squid in the past has been viewed as a mythical deep sea creature, but obviously in recent times has been discovered to actually exist. So this raises the question of what other fabled creatures are lurking around in this world waiting to be soon discovered? Could sasquatch be lurking aroung in Thatcher Woods? Is the Loch Ness Monster deep below in Lake Michigan? Who knows?

 All I am saying is the world is very undiscovered, especially the deep ocean waters, so maybe we should take a step back in advancing towards discovery outside of this world and universe, and discover more of the world we live in.

Sources:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_squid
• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/12/061222-giant-squid.html
• http://accuweather.ap.org/cgi-bin/apl.pl

  National Geographic has recently reported that due to human intrusion in Madagascar, the lamur is “facing critical habitat loss.” The lemur is only found in Madagascar and the ring-tailed lemur is currenly an endangered species.

  Lemurs are small primates that are about the size of cats. They live in “troops” (average about 17 lemurs per troop) and live mostly in the tops of trees.

  The ring-tailed lemurs are already endangered because “the sparse, dry forests they love are quickly vanishing,” so this new invasion of humans is not helping.

Two Ring-Tailed Lemurs

(Photo Credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Ring_tailed_lemurs.jpg)

Below is a link for the website with a video about the lemure habitat loss:

 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061129-lemur-video.html

Sources:

• http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/ring-tailed-lemur.html
• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061129-lemur-video.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemur

(This really has nothing to do with what we are currently studying in class, but I thought it was pretty interesting.)

  In Geneva, Switzerland, this magnet will be a major part of a newly designed particle accelerator (called ATLAS), which is part of the “European Organization for Nuclear Research’s Large Hadron Collider.” The particle accelerator is supposed to be in operation late next year.

  A particle accelerator is “a device that uses electric fields to propel electrically charged particles to high speeds and magnetic fields to contain them.” Scientista say the goal of this particle accelerator is to is to “explore the fundamental nature of matter and energy by creating conditions similar to those of the early universe.”

(A Small Particle Accelerator)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Particle_accelerators_1937.jpg)

 This specific superconducting magnet, which will hold the create and sustain the huge magnetic field, weighs 110 tons, is 16 feet wide, and 82 feet long.  The image of the magnet can be found here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061121-giant-magnet.html

 Sources:

• http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061121-giant-magnet.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnet
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_accelerator

   One of the questions raised in class was whether it was right to use a source of food as energy because of the possible negative effect on hunger. Well scientists are now pushing for more reasearch to be done in the areas of ethanol and its production. Kenneth G. Cassman, director of the Nebraska Center for Energy Sciences at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln stated “It (the research) is the core issue to ensuring that we don’t come up short in food supply, and don’t have high consumer prices, and can still maintain expansion of the ethanol industry.”

   Conflicts are arising about whether corn can sustain both energy and food requirements. One side says “…it will be possible to produce 16 billion gallons of ethanol by 2015 while also meeting corn grain requirements for human food and livestock feed,” while others claim the prices in all agriculture and livestock feeds will rise dramatically due to the shortage of food. Hunger is a major problem in this country and others and it cannot be forgotten due to the demand for fuel. Everywhere we go people are begging or asking for money in order to eat.

  We can be sure that this issue will be a major part of conversation and that both sides will be strongly supported.  This along with rising gas prices will surely force this issue to be resolved.

Photo Credit – (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Gas_prices%2C_July_2006%2C_San_Francisco%2C_California_01.jpg)

  There definately needs to be more reseacrh done in order to determine what the best solution is to this energy problem. Hopefully scientists will either be able to find a new source of energy without using food, or find a way to provide enough food for people and enough fuel for… well … everything.

 Sources:

• http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11680
• http://www.ethanol.org/ethanolresearch.html
• http://www.ethanol.org/ethanolresearch.html