Primeval January 5, 2007
Posted by rharbour in Uncategorized.1 comment so far
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:
Coal Mining Problems Add Up January 4, 2007
Posted by rharbour in Uncategorized.add a comment
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:
“Green” Building Essay January 2, 2007
Posted by rharbour in Uncategorized.add a comment
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 21st 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?
