INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE: High concentration of farm animals an environmental and public health problem

Factory FarmingAn eye-opener:

The current industrial farm animal production (IFAP) system often poses unacceptable risks to public health, the environment and the welfare of the animals themselves, according to an extensive 2½-year examination conducted by the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production (PCIFAP), in a study released today.

.       .       .

Over the past five decades, the number of farms producing animals for food has fallen dramatically, yet the number of food animals produced has remained roughly constant. It is the concentration of farm animals in larger and larger numbers in close proximity to one another, along with the potential of IFAP facilities to affect people, that give rise to many of the public health concerns that are attributed to IFAP. Animals in such close confinement, along with some of the feed and animal management methods employed in the system, increase pathogen risks and magnify opportunities for transmission from animals to humans. This increased risk is due to at least three factors: prolonged worker contact with animals, increased pathogen transmission within a herd or flock, and the increased opportunities for the generation of antimicrobial resistant bacteria (due to imprudent antimicrobial use) or new strains of viruses. Stresses induced by confinement may also increase the likelihood of infection and illness in animal populations.

.       .       .

According to the EPA, the annual production of manure produced by animal confinement facilities exceeds that produced by humans by at least three times. Unlike most human sewage, the majority of IFAP is spread on the ground untreated. Manure in such large quantities carries excess nutrients and farm chemicals that find their way into waterways, lakes, groundwater, soils and airways. Excess and inappropriate land application of untreated animal waste on cropland contributes to excessive nutrient loading and, ultimately, eutrophication of surface waters. Eutrophication is an excess of nutrients in a body of water, mostly nitrates and phosphates from erosion and runoff of surrounding lands, that causes a dense growth of plant life and the death of aquatic animal life due to lack of oxygen.

.       .       .

IFAP runoff also carries antibiotics and hormones, pesticides, and heavy metals. Antibiotics are used to prevent and treat bacterial infections and as growth promoters. Pesticides are used to control insect infestations and fungal growth. Heavy metals, especially zinc and copper, are added as micronutrients to the animal diet.

According to a 2006 UN report, globally, greenhouse gas emissions from all livestock operations account for 18% of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, exceeding those from the transportation sector. IFAP can produce greenhouse gases such as methane and carbon dioxide. Other greenhouse gases, primarily nitrous oxide, arise mainly from the microbial degradation of manure.


Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

MERCURY NEWS

CoalI’ve recently come across some informative and interesting news stories regarding mercury pollution that bolsters the argument for utilizing or producing more renewable energy, constructing the smart grid, practicing smarter energy use, or changing our energy policy from one that depends largely on fossil fuels to a national energy portfolio that doesn’t reflect an unsustainable dependency on fossil fuels. Despite issues such as mercury pollution and mercury poisoning in addition to climate change and the immoral practice of mountaintop removal, coal-fired power plants are still scheduled to be constructed to provide easily available energy. However, are we so addicted to energy that we’re willing to compromise our own health, the health of our children, and the health of our environment? Despite pointing the finger at China’s coal consumption, “the effect of direct mercury fall-out from the smoke-stacks encompasses a 60-mile radius from the plant.”

As a note, there is some overlapping in the information I’ve provided via various sources below, but I tried to grab the choicest bits.

  1. Power Plants Are Major Influence In Regional Mercury Emissions:

    The amount of mercury emitted into the atmosphere in the Northeast fluctuates annually depending on activity in the electric power industry, according to researchers at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.

    .       .       .

    Mild winters and a correspondent decrease in the need for regional power plants to burn coal could partially explain the decline in mercury emissions, according to the authors. The study, published this summer in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, estimates that power plants account for up to 40 percent of total emissions in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania and in New England.

    “The study highlights just how important power plants are in influencing regional mercury emission,” said Sigler. “We should not forget other source categories when formulating abatement policies, since they also contribute significant amounts to the total emissions,” Lee added.

    Mercury, which converts to highly toxic methyl mercury in ground water, is found in fish and can cause neurological problems in developing fetuses and dementia and organ failure in adults who eat fish in large amounts and over long periods.

  2. Tuna getting more toxic:

    The level of methylmercury contamination in Pacific Ocean fish has increased 30 percent since 1990 as a result of mercury atmospheric emission rates from Asia, and is expected to increase 50 percent by 2050.

    A newly-released study by the U.S. Geological Survey shows the first evidence linking current atmospheric mercury deposits to methylmercury in Pacific Ocean fish. Tuna harvested in the Pacific Ocean account for 40 percent of human methylmercury exposure in the United States, according to the study.

    Methylmercury is a highly toxic form of mercury that rapidly accumulates up the food chain and can cause serious health concerns. Several studies indicate that methylmercury is linked to developmental deficits in children exposed in the womb. Exposure to the toxin in adults has also been linked to increased risk of heart disease, and can also cause auto-immune deficits in some people.

  3. Toxic mercury in seas tied to algae, air: Study finds the process by which ocean fish can become poisoned:

    A new study in the Pacific Ocean suggests that algae at the water’s surface absorb mercury from the atmosphere and then sink to mid-depths, where they decompose and release methylmercury, a highly toxic form of the metal that poisons both fish and the people who eat them.

    .       .       .

    Mercury is a byproduct of coal combustion, industrial waste and other human activities. It is also a powerful neurotoxin that can cause developmental problems in babies and heart disease in adults, among other health woes. More than 90 percent of methylmercury that gets into people in the United States comes from ocean fish and shellfish, especially tuna

  4. A New Source of Methylmercury Entering the Pacific Ocean:

    Currently, national and international groups are seeking the most effective ways to minimize human methylmercury exposure, and this paper presents the first evidence linking current atmospheric mercury deposition to methylmercury in Pacific Ocean fish. The scientists constructed a computer simulation model that links atmospheric emissions, transport and deposition of mercury to an ocean circulation model. The combined model allows the scientists to estimate future ocean mercury concentrations given anticipated future mercury emission rates from human-related sources. The model predicts that Pacific Ocean mercury levels will rise another 50 percent by the year 2050 if mercury emission rates continue to rise as projected. Such increases could have implications for resulting methylmercury levels in Pacific Ocean fish. The overall findings from this study suggest that measurable changes in mercury levels of very large systems (such as the Pacific Ocean) are plausible over reasonably short time frames (decadal), and it is equally plausible that reductions in ocean mercury levels would follow if mercury emissions were decreased. Environmental professionals, regulators, resource managers, and other decision makers can use these results to help make informed decisions about atmospheric mercury emissions and potential human exposure to methylmercury from fish consumption.

  5. How Mercury Emissions Reach Tuna And Other Seafood, And Why Mercury Contamination Is Likely To Worsen:

    “This unprecedented USGS study is critically important to the health and safety of the American people and our wildlife because it helps us understand the relationship between atmospheric emissions of mercury and concentrations of mercury in marine fish,” said Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. “We have always known that mercury can pose a risk, now we need to reduce the mercury emissions so that we can reduce the ocean mercury levels.”

    “This study gives us a better understanding of how dangerous levels of mercury move into our air, our water, and the food we eat, and shines new light on a major health threat to Americans and people all across the world,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “With this information in hand, plus our own mercury efforts, we have an even greater opportunity to continue working with our international partners to significantly cut mercury pollution in the years ahead and protect the health of millions of people.”

    Water sampling cited in the study shows that mercury levels in 2006 were approximately 30 percent higher than those measured in the mid-1990s. This study documents for the first time the formation of methylmercury in the North Pacific Ocean. It shows that methylmercury is produced in mid-depth ocean waters by processes linked to the “ocean rain.” Algae, which are produced in sunlit waters near the surface, die quickly and “rain” downward to greater water depths. At depth, the settling algae are decomposed by bacteria and the interaction of this decomposition process in the presence of mercury results in the formation of methylmercury. Many steps up the food chain later, predators like tuna receive methylmercury from the fish they consume.

  6. Environmental group cites pollution-IQ connection:

    Lowered IQ due to mercury pollution from mercury-cell chlorine factories costs the American economy $3.8 million in lost wages annually, according to an environmental group’s analysis that attempts to place a dollar value on the costs of certain types of pollution.

    .       .       .

    Oceana claimed those four plants released more than 2,000 pounds of mercury into the air in 2006, resulting in an estimated loss of $3.8 million in economic productivity.

    Olin’s Augusta plant, in its federally required Toxic Release Inventory disclosure to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, reported releasing 137.85 pounds in 2007, down almost 85 percent from the 834.5 pounds the plant released in 2005.

    Tonya Bonitatibus, Oceana’s field representative in Augusta, said the study, entitled, Hidden Costs: Reduced IQ from Chlor-Alkali Plants Harms the Economy, underscores the dangers of eating fish with high levels of mercury.
    “The fish found in the Savannah River have continually been shown to have elevated mercury levels, and with Olin chemical, located on the banks of river, continually adding 600+ lbs of mercury into the air and water a year, the mercury levels will only continue to rise.”

    Olin officials have said in response to past criticisms from Oceana that there are no plans to convert the plant to newer technology, which would cost as much as $90 million. The company remains in compliance with its state and federal environmental and operating permits.

  7. H.R. 2065: Mercury Pollution Reduction Act of 2009:

    To amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to phase out the use of mercury in the manufacture of chlorine and caustic soda, and for other purposes.

  8. House bill HR 2065 may help remove mercury found in high fructose corn syrup:

    High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has recently been shown to contain mercury, a heavy metal that is extremely toxic, especially to the brain. In January, a report was released by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy as well, a simultaneous peer reviewed research article was published in Environmental Health. The findings showed that of 55 foods listing HFCS as the first or second ingredient 1/3 of them were contaminated with mercury in levels that could easily be toxic to humans.

    How does this happen? HFCS is a highly processed sweetener that goes through many steps on its way from corn to HFCS. One of these steps often involves the use of caustic soda to break down the corn kernels. This caustic soda is created using mercury cells, hence the contamination. There are mercury free options that can be used to make HFCS but unfortunately they are not being utilized universally.

    Mercury cell technology has been banned in Japan and the EU is phasing it out by 2020. Now there is hope that the U.S. will follow suit in as little as two years. Earlier this week the Mercury Pollution Reduction Act of 2009 was introduced to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act. Seattle University School of Law professor Catherine O’Neill spoke at the subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection about the extensive damage mercury does to human and environmental health.


Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

FISHERIES: NOAA declares four fish stocks fully rebuilt

BluefishMonkfishAccording to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the “Atlantic bluefish, Gulf of Mexico king mackerel and two stocks of monkfish in the Atlantic — have been rebuilt to allow for continued sustainable fishing.”

Via overyonder on Twitter.

Bluefish image by Joe Kunkel. Monkfish image found here

CAN YOU SEE ME? | ANIMAL CAMOUFLAGE

Mountain Goat

See more animal camouflage


Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

ANTHROPOLOGY: Evidence suggests humans may have cannibalized Neanderthals

What happened to the Neanderthals?  Several theories exist: cannibalism by humans, climate change, competition with humans, hybridization with humans, or did a “Neanderthal-eat-Neanderthal world . . . spread a mad cow-like disease that weakened and reduced populations of the large Eurasian human,” or was it a combination of these factors? From the guardian.co.uk:

The controversial suggestion follows publication of a stuy in the Journal of Anthropological Sciences about a Neanderthal jawbone apparently butchered by modern humans. Now the leader of the research team says he believes the flesh had been eaten by humans, while its teeth may have been used to make a necklace.

Fernando Rozzi, of Paris’s Centre National de la Récherche Scientifique, said the jawbone had probably been cut into to remove flesh, including the tongue. Crucially, the butchery was similar to that used by humans to cut up deer carcass in the early Stone Age. “Neanderthals met a violent end at our hands and in some cases we ate them,” Rozzi said.

.       .       .

Rozzi believes the jawbone provides crucial evidence that humans attacked Neanderthals, and sometimes killed them, bringing back their bodies to caves to eat or to use their skulls or teeth as trophies. “For years, people have tried to hide away from the evidence of cannibalism, but I think we have to accept it took place,” he added.

But not every team member agrees. “One set of cut marks does not make a complete case for cannibalism,” said Francesco d’Errico, of the Institute of Prehistory in Bordeaux. It was also possible that the jawbone had been found by humans and its teeth used to make a necklace, he said.

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook