BP OIL SPILL from the air

These images are from “James Duncan Davidson, TED’s conference photographer, [and he] is among a crew of five photographers and videographers reporting on the Gulf of Mexico for the TEDxOilSpill Expedition.” You can find more photos from the TEDxOilSpill Expedition on the Flickr page of duncandavidson, and you can follow TEDxOilSpill on Twitter or read their blog. TEDxOilSpill is also conducting a poster competition.

Surface oil:

Via

Via

Via

Via

Oil burning on the ocean’s surface:

Via

Via

Via

Via

Via

Via

Oil in the marshes and islands of Barataria Bay, Louisiana:

Via

Via

Via

Shrimp boats skim the ocean’s surface around Barataria Bay, Louisiana:

Via

The Deepwater Horizon accident site showing controlled burns being conducted and ”one of two drilling rigs drilling the releif [sic] wells“:

Via

Via

Via

Via

Via

The authors or licensors of these images do not endorse my work or me and their images are 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

COLONY COLLAPSE DISORDER increasing costs for farmers

Colony collapse disorder or CCD occurs when a bee colony collapses or fails due to the sudden disappearance of its worker bees. Bee colonies may be destroyed or may withdraw from a hive for a number of reasons. For example, Varroa mite infestations can be particularly destructive. However, the exact cause of CCD or “the mass disappearance of worker honey bees” is unknown. There are several theories to explain what’s causing CCD, but it probably results from a combination of factors. Though, there may be one or two factors—probably resulting from anthropogenic activities—which play a more prominent role in the manifestation of CCD. For instance, according to the Daily Green, bee frames, which house the honey, pollen, bee larva, and unhatched bee eggs, have “to be replaced every 2 or 3 years because of the agricultural toxins that build up inside.” More from the Washington Times:

The prevailing theory on the cause of CCD includes several factors. The three main suspects of CCD are: viruses, stress and pesticides. When joined together these factors may create the deadly disease, researchers say.

As a result of the increasing scarcity of bees and beekeepers, the cost of bee rental has skyrocketed. Farmers rent beehives to increase pollination thus crop productivity, so bees do more than just make honey—they’re important pollinators as well. According to estimates from a Cornell University study, “Nearly one-third of U.S. agriculture depends on the 2.4 million bee colonies for big crop production, where they annually pollinate $14 billion worth of seeds and crops.” More from Economist.com:

Since 2006, however, bees have been suffering from “colony collapse disorder” (CCD), a mysterious affliction that has drastically reduced their numbers. As a result, says Joe MacIlvaine, the president of Paramount Farming and the largest almond-grower in the world, the rental cost of a hive has tripled in the past five years to about $150. Bee rental now accounts for 15% of Paramount’s costs.

So Paramount has hired Mr Wardell, who has been studying bees for 30 years and CCD since it broke out. Its cause may be mobile-telephony radiation, viruses, fungi, mites and pesticides—or none of the above. In the absence of a clear explanation, Mr Wardell is concentrating on something different: nutrition.

A healthy worker bee spends about four weeks in its hive, feeding on protein-rich pollen and nursing larvae, and then another two weeks in the field eating sugary honey until its proteins are depleted and it dies. For some reason bees are getting too little protein in the hive, thus dying after only about four weeks, almost as soon as they venture outside. So Mr Wardell is force-feeding them protein. He owns a patent for MegaBee, which he says “looks like cookie dough”. He puts a bit of this into the hives, blocking the bees’ entrance so that they have to chomp their way through it. As part of his new job, Mr Wardell is working with beekeepers across the country to supplement bee diets everywhere.

So far he has noticed that hives are smaller this year and some colonies still collapsing. But he has hopes that his cookies will work, bringing more of a buzz next year.

In addition to nutritional issues, current research into a solution for CCD is focusing on breeding disease-resistant bees. From the Washington Times:

Through the growing science of genomics – the science of looking at molecular information in DNA – Mr. Delaplane’s science team will select a super-resistant bee that is able to naturally combat CCD and a culprit in this disorder: varroa mites.

First, “We’re going to be identifying bees that are resistant to XYZ” diseases, he said. Then, “We will be able to genetically mark these lines.”

The technique of marking and using favorable genetic traits is now done in the animal and plant industry, but marking a natural trait is different than engineering a change.

“We have no plan for doing [genetic] engineered selections,” Mr. Delaplane said. “We’re going to be screening for natural resistance.”

Afterward, Mr. Delaplane’s team will take those disease-resistant bees and breed more of them. Here science is guiding the process of natural selection.

Once the genetically strong bees are developed in the laboratory, they will be shipped to commercial bee breeders. The breeders, in turn, will mass produce them and flood the market with disease-resistant bees to beekeepers across the country. CCD may still be around, but the superbee’s immune system will effectively combat it.

Photo source for attribution here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. The authors or licensors of these images do not endorse my work or me and their images are protected under an attribution license. The bee graphic is via The New York Times.

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

NONRENEWABLE RESOURCES dwindle as consumption and populations increase

Image via Cool Infographics

If demand continues to grow, the estimates of remaining reserves of some natural resources—or nonrenewable resources in particular—are grim (click on the image to enlarge and read how long some nonrenewable resources are predicted to last).

The amount of nonrenewable resources is fixed, meaning that replenishment or concentration is extremely slow (i.e., on geologic timescales), so unsustainable human consumption causes these resources to become increasingly unavailable. To put it another way, human consumption disperses or dilutes these nonrenewable resources to the point that it’s not economically feasible to recover them. Consequently, conservation and recycling, in addition to other sustainable policies, should be aggressively implmented, and people should be educated about overconsumption and environmental degradation. Certainly, sustainable policies are prudent policies.

Since consumption directly impacts the availability of natural resources, our economy is directly dependent on natural resources. As a result, all goods and services depend on the availability of natural resources. As a result, environmental degradation is a costly habit—both to the environment and to future generations. In fact, the “world’s leading 3,000 companies cause $2.2 trillion in annual damage to the environment.” More from the Atlantic Online:

The world’s leading 3,000 companies cause $2.2 trillion in annual damage to the environment, according to a UN report that will be released this spring. Based on eight years of studying a group of companies that includes the entire S&P 500, the report tracks corporate supply chains in order to place a monetary figure on greenhouse gas and particulate emissions, local pollution, water use, and various other depletions of environmental resources.

The report, which the UN commissioned in order to educate eco-minded investors, may be the first step in a global push to factor natural resources into business costs. Environmentalists have long argued that since nature provides services — “ecosystem services,” they’re now termed — vital to doing business, placing a monetary value on these services is the best way to ensure that we do not overuse them. In some instances this extra cost would be passed on to consumers, but in others it would be absorbed by businesses.

.       .       .

Since it never hurts to be prepared, though, utility, mining, forestry, and chemical companies — the biggest offenders, according to the report — would be wise to develop contingency plans for what they would do if forced to pay for the environmentally harmful byproducts of their longstanding business models.

VIDEO: High-speed rail around the world—except the United States

Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow. From the first railroads to the interstate highway system, our nation has always been built to compete. There’s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.

- President Obama in his State of the Union address

Images: Some of Japan’s fastest trains—the 500 Series and the 700 Series bullet trains

In the video below, you’ll notice that the United States has fallen behind in providing high-speed rail infrastructure and services when compared to the rest of the world. This is due to several factors. First, when compared to Europe—which has higher population densities—the population of the United States is distributed over a much larger area (although an argument can be made for high-speed rail for this reason). However, the United States is growing—particularly in the northeast, some areas of the west, and some parts of the south—and the cost of petroleum-based fuels are increasing and will continue to increase, so the need for upgraded mass transit is inescapable.

Furthermore, given air pollution and corresponding health care costs, global warming, and the cost of maintaining massive amounts of paved roads, the automobile is an costly and inefficient method of transportation. Nonetheless, the automobile has historically been prioritized over rail services (see the Great American streetcar scandal).

Another reason why high-speed rail is underdeveloped in the United States is that the federal government hasn’t aggressively promoted high-speed rail (although, the Obama Administration wants to update the United States’ rail infrastructure as part oft their economic recovery plan). As a result, the only high-speed rail in the United States is the Acela Express, but it is slower than other high-speed rail services around the world.

There’s a lot of utility in high-speed rail, and there’s a lot of opportunity in the United States for high-speed rail. For example, high-speed rail can compete with air travel, and not only can high-speed rail alleviate congested highways, it’s environmentally friendly, since it produces less carbon than automobile or air transportation. Furthermore, a study by the Natural Resources Defense Council found that foreclosure rates went down in areas “with good bus or rail service – and so having a car is not required.”

Video: High-speed rail around the world:

In this video, President Obama makes the case for high-speed rail and described the success of high-speed rail in other countries:

On the Net:

  1. America 2050
  2. How Big Are the Environmental Benefits of High-Speed Rail?
  3. Passenger Rail, Low Population Density


Photo source for attribution here and here. The authors or licensors of these images do not endorse my work or me and their images are 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

VIDEO: Kennedy and Blankenship debate the environmental impacts of coal

In case you missed it, above is the debate between Don Blankenship—the Chairman and CEO of Massey Energy Co., which is the fourth largest coal company in the United States—and Robert Kennedy, Jr.—a well-known environmental attorney.

Blankenship doesn’t believe in climate change and is very hostile towards environmentalism. Nonetheless, pollution from his industry negatively impacts the environment. For example, coal contains mercury, and after combustion, this mercury enters the environment through atmospheric deposition. Upon entering aquatic environments, mercury is converted by anaerobic organisms through a process called methylation into an organic and more dangerous form. This converted mercury is called methylmercury, which is a persistent bioaccumulative neurotoxin, and if we consume certain types of seafood, then we consume this neurotoxin.

Other pollution issues from burning coal include nitrogen deposition, which results in eutrophication or an overgrowth of algae due to excessive nutrients within the aquatic environment. Eutrophication can result in fish kills. However, the most controversial side effect of burning coal is the contribution and addition of carbon dioxide—a greenhouse gas—that has been trapped within the fossil fuel for millions of years. There are other environmental consequences from burning coal such as acid rain and fly ash spills. Obviously, the environmental concerns associated with the combustion of coal are well-founded.

During the debate, one issue that Kennedy and Blankenship agreed upon was the characterization of carbon capture and storage (the process of capturing carbon dioxide after the combustion of coal and at the point source of emission) as “a joke.” From the Charleston Gazette:

And at the end of the debate, Kennedy said somewhat glibly that he and Blankenship probably agree that carbon capture and storage, as a technology to deal with global warming, “is a joke.”

More from the New York Times:

Kennedy, the top attorney for the environmental group Waterkeeper Alliance, brushed off his first question to declare mountaintop-removal mining a “sin” that damages Appalachia’s environment and people to enrich a wealthy few in a speech peppered with statistics and references to Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Environmental regulations were not responsible for lost mining jobs, Kennedy declared, but mountaintop removal has busted unions and eliminated tens of thousands of workers.

Blankenship responded in kind, hailing his industry the life-blood of West Virginia and painting Kennedy as an outsider with an extreme environmentalist agenda that assaults “people who are teaching your Sunday schools and coaching your Little League.”

Video via Clean Skies


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