Fire Tornadoes

A fire tornado is exactly what it sounds like. A tubular shaped cylinder of fire that looks much like a tornado. They are created when high heat and turbulent winds mix together and "aren't so much rare as rarely reported". This fiery tornado look-a-like will suck in nearby objects, like a tornado, and has a core that is on average one to three feet wide. This fire tornado--or fire whirl, fire devil, or firenados--can span five to ten stories tall, and rarely can by dozens of feet wide and over a hundred stories tall. 

The picture above is a photo of a fire tornado seen in Hungary in earlier March. Below is a small example of just how destructive a fire tornado can be...

BR 163-Transoceanic Highway

Earlier in the year a 2600km highway was opened for the public that travels from the Atlantic coast of Brazil to the Pacific coast of Peru--cutting straight through the heart of the Amazon rain forest. Because this region is such a poor region it is hard to ignore the potential economic outcomes but the environmental concerns could be frightening.

As an attempt to document and figure out the environmental impacts a project was launched that deals with a "leaf pack". A leaf pack will be a mesh bag full of tree leaves that will remain secured in streams. A period of time will be allotted for organisms to feed and live on these leaves. When given the chance to examine the leaves after the experiment scientists will be able to gauge the health of the water and the organisms in the water. Hopefully, this project will show the impact of the new road. 

How much energy are you saving with your choice in light bulbs?

On National Geographic there is a program where you can enter how many light bulbs you have in your home and even select how many are Incandescent, CFL, or LED. And it will then tell you facts based on the American average.

In my, Canadian, household I have 16 Incandescent light bulbs. Which means:

1. I have 24 fewer light bulbs than the average U.S. household.
2. I use 6.4 fewer efficient bulbs that the average.
3. I am likely saving about $89.96 more than the average U.S. household each year, due to my choice of bulbs.
4. If every household in the United States took the same steps on lighting efficiency:

                                  It would save $10,165,196,506 in energy costs.

                                  It would be like shutting down FOURTEEN coal power plants.

                                  It would be like taking 11,003,128 cars off the road.

                                  It would reduce CO2 emissions by 56,115,956 metric tons.

                                  It would cut emissions equivalent to 305,559 rail cars of coal.

The facts on if every household in the United States switched to how my family uses light bulbs is shocking but I think what I find most shocking is the fact that the AVERAGE American household has 40 light bulbs. I thought that having 16 in your house was extortionate!

Source: http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/energy/great-energy-challenge/light-bulb-savings-calculator?source=gecfeatures

Habitats

Habitats are being destroyed daily and not just the types you think. I know, personally, that when I think of habitats I think of wetlands, the Amazon, forests, oceans. Thus, when I think of habitats being destroyed I imagine big corporate offices full of big-shots, who only care about the dollar, ordering workers to cut down trees and build more offices for them. I don't imagine myself, just going for a walk. Ever since I was a little kid, as I walked I would break off twigs, rip off leaves, kick up dirt, things that every kid does. But as I was sitting on the beach today, looking at the ocean, I realized that the twig I just ripped from the ground and began snapping into tiny pieces could have blossomed leaves for a tiny bug to eat. It could have given shelter and food, yet I just snapped it in half like nothing. Then, I thought of all the other little, mini habitats I might have destroyed in my life. I am not saying I will never rip off another leave again, or not pick up a stick from the ground to keep my hand busy, but what I found astonishing was that until now, I never thought twice about it. I never thought about the consequences that I might have caused for an organism. It made me think how much we can take this planet for granted and not think of those beneath us in the food chain, who we depend on for survival.

The Impact of the Seafood You Are Eating:

While I was perusing the National Geographic website I saw a link on the bottom left-hand side of my screen, stating The Impact of Seafood. When you click on the link you are led to a webpage that opens up with an animated two-slide process...

By startling you by these facts it hits you how much we are affecting the seafood populations and many of us might not even realize it. And it is necessary to bear in mind that these figures probably do not include the number of fish that is caught illegally.

You then reach a page where you can select your seafood of choice from a long list of options, from Barramundi (US Farmed) to Tuna, Yellowfin (US troll/pole), with everything from anywhere you can imagine in between.

You could also choose to narrow the selection down based on Omega-3 Content, Sustainability Rating, Mercury Level and Food Chain Level.

By selecting some of my favourite seafood items I learned that Oysters (wild) [this is another disadvantage to trying to establish the amount of seafood consumed or fished in a year, it is near impossible to keep track of what people are going into their backyard and catching, although I am guilty of this] oysters have a good sustainability rating, a very low mercury rating, as well as a low omega-3 content with a level two on the food chain.

On the other hand, Tuna, Bluefin is recommended by Monterey Bay Aquarium's Seafood Watch to avoid. As well, it has a very high mercury level and a medium omega-3 content with a level four on the food chain, as a top predator.

I would highly recommend everyone to check out this website (link!). Other than checking out where your favourite seafood lies you can also watch an intro video, see the marine food chain and check out the world's seafood footprint! While you are under the World's Seafood Footprint tab you can look at a geographical map of the world that shows where fish were caught in the early 1950's and where fish were caught in the early 2000's. The results are astounding. I know that before I take another bite of seafood I will bear this in mind and make sure I know where my food is coming from. 

Source: http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/take-action/impact-of-seafood/#/seafood-decision-guide/

Bubble Curtains?

Apparently, back in February, National Geographic posted an article on the upcoming technology of the underwater "bubble curtain".

While not proven it is a promising technique to aid in lessening the impact that human-made underwater noise has on marine life. In 2003 and 2004 the California Department of Transportation deemed it necessary to drive new pilings in the seabed, but were concerned that the pressure of the waves they created while hammering the pilings into the sea floor would affect the seals nearby. The consulting marine biologist for this project, Bud Abbott, warned the waves might kill the fish as well.

During an early test quite a few dead fish were found on the surface. After collecting the fish for testing Abbott found that the swim bladders of the fish has burst and their kidneys were greatly damaged as well. As alarming as this was it helped scientists discover ways to lessen the harsh effect of sound waves.

"When a pressure wave hits an air bubble, it will compress the bubble, then it will expand again, so energy is lost," Abbott explained. Although scientists disagree on the amount of energy lost in this process, Abbott said, there is no doubt that the air bubble actually changes the shape of the wave.

"Sound travels faster through water than air," said Abbott. "It slows down as it hits the air bubble." This creates a much smoother wave, altering it from a brief percussive bang to a longer, weaker wave.

For the Bay Bridge project, Caltrans placed a wall of air bubbles directly against each pile as it was being driven. This attenuated the waves caused by the pile driving. Overall fish deaths were reduced and delayed mortalities did not occur beyond 69 meters (226 feet) from the piling.

In Germany offshore wind farms are becoming increasingly important in the nation's plans for renewable energy but are becoming concerned that marine life may be affected by the construction and placement of these wind turbines. A government study found that porpoises avoided swimming within 20 kilometers of wind farms and because of this Germany has set a limit of 160-decibels allowed in wind farm construction 750 metres from the source. The government has even listed bubble curtains as an option to lessen the noise level.

Shell is another name that is looking into bubble curtains for protect the marine life from the noise pollution it creates. It is a very important issue because Shell works in the Arctic where the marine life are among the most diverse in the world. Unfortunately, Shell's research on bubble curtains is still at an early stage so it will not be included in their 2012 season of exploratory drilling.

This method does not show signs of being prefect however as Karl-Heinz Ehlmer, who was involved in the first study of bubble curtains in Germany, says that are bubbles may be sensitive to tide currents and larger bubbles can show a chaotic behaviour. He also mentioned how expensive this technology is and mentions other alternatives. One that he is working on is called Hydro Sound Dampers, uses only fishing nets and foams. He finds that this is better than bubble curtains because is is more effective in lowering noise and is less costly. Other scientists are thinking of instead masking the noise, lowering it altogether by anchoring the turbines to the sea floor in a less noisy way. 

So, unfortunately it does not seem that they will be a definite way to lower noise pollution any time soon but it is slightly reassuring that there are methods and experiments by scientists taking place to lower the noise.

Source and Direct Citation: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2012/02/120207-bubble-curtains-to-protect-whales/?source=gecfeatures

The Fracking Song

Do I agree with everything that is said in this video? Not exactly, but with its catchy tune I think it's a great way to raise some awareness about fracking.

Perth-Andover, New Brunswick

Located in Northern New Brunswick, Perth-Andover recently has been the headline of all local news stations.

  

The river, that previously separated the two different towns, has broken up and the water levels has caused approximately 500 people to evacuate the town. Local businesses and homes are still flooded two days later and although the water levels have lowered about half a metre townsfolk are still unable to return to their homes. 

(What the normal water level is)

Plaster Rock, New Brunswick

In July of 2010 in the small town of Plaster Rock a freak wind storm came out of nowhere. After supper the sky suddenly turned black and the rain started with wind howling. It was a scene from a nightmare with the power cutting out in the beginning and not knowing what was going on because it was not in the forecast. Soon the thunder and lightening began. This storm lasted for a few hours but the effects lasted for days.

The power was shut off for three days and city workers from hours away were called in to clear away the trees and fix the broken power lines. It is just another example of how unpredictable Mother Nature can be.

Air Pollution

Air pollution is a broad term applied to any chemical, physical (particulate matter), or biological agent that modifies the natural characteristics of the atmosphere. 


The atmosphere is a complex, dynamic natural gaseous system that is essential to support life on planet earth. 


Stratospheric ozone depletion due to air pollution has long been recognized as a threat to human health as well as to the earth's ecosystems. Worldwide air pollution is responsible for large numbers of deaths and cases of respiratory disease. 

Enforced air quality standards, like the Clean Air Act in the United States, have reduced the presence of some pollutants. 


While major stationary sources are often identified with air pollution, the greatest source of emissions are actually mobile sources, principally the automobile. 


There are many available air pollution control technologies and urban planning strategies available to reduce air pollution; however, worldwide costs of addressing the issue are high. 


The most immediate method of improving air quality would be the use of bioethanol fuel, biodiesel, solar energy, and hybrid vehicle technologies. 


The World Health Organization estimates that 4.6 million people die each year from causes directly attributable to air pollution. 

Many of these mortalities are attributable to indoor air pollution. 


Worldwide more deaths per year are linked to air pollution than to automobile accidents. 


Research published in 2005 suggests that 310,000 Europeans die from air pollution annually. 


Direct causes of air pollution related deaths include aggravated asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, lung and heart diseases, and respiratory allergies.


Article Directly Cited From: http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/a/air_pollution.htm
                                                 https://www.google.ca/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=586&q=air+pollution&gbv=2&oq=Air+Poll&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_l=img.3.0.0l10.49l1228l0l2133l8l8l0l0l0l0l268l1516l2j2j4l8l0.frgbld.

What you can do...

We can not change the world's climate and situation individually but there are small easy things people of every age can do. Together, as families, communities, and cities we can make a difference.

"Do not think a small group of people cannot change the world, indeed it is the only thing that has"


1. Do Not Litter- Who do you expect to come behind you and pick up the gum wrapper you just dropped? Or the Tim Horton's cup? Where do you expect it to go? It will not vanish, it will remain. Remember, the Earch is not your personal trash can.
2. Conserve Water- We only have a limited amount of water on this planet and when it's gone it's gone, let alone our fresh water supply! There are simple ways to cut down on the amount of water you use, as easy as turning off the tap while you brush your teeth or cutting down your shower by five to ten minutes.
3. Turn Off Your Computer at Night- If you turned off your computer every night instead of leaving it in sleep mode you could save 40 watt-hours per day. That would not only help the environment but also save you! You would save up to four cents a day, which doesn't sound like much but would add up to 14$ per year.
4. Recycle Glass- By recycling your glass you can reduce air pollution by 20% and related water pollution by 50%, if glass isn't recycled it can take up to a million years to decompose.
5. Use Both Sides of Paper- While it may seem obvious by using both sides of paper you can help cut down on the millions of tons of paper thrown away each year. American businesses alone throw away 21 million tons of paper every year.
6. Recycle Your Newspapers- Of the 63 million newspapers printed each day in the United States, of these, 44 million papers will be thrown away. By recycling only one paper a week it would save more than 500,000 trees every week.
7. Don't Buy Your Gift Wrap- Instead reuse gift bags that have been given to you or even create your own. Reuse your other newspapers or old papers by wrapping gifts with them. You can use stamps or markers to individualize old paper for the recipient! 
8. Rethink Bottled Water- Instead of choosing plastic water bottles choose a reusable container that you can refill yourself. If you do choose to opt for plastic water bottles, make sure you recycle your water bottles instead of letting them join the 90% that will take thousands of years to decompose...
9. Buy Local- When you can visit farmers' markets and local stands to buy your food. Not only will you be reducing the amount of greenhouse gases that are created when products are shipped all over the world but you will also support your local economy!
10. Adjust Your Thermostat- By raising your thermostat by one degree in the summer and lowering your thermostat by one degree in the winter you will save about 10% on your energy use.
11. Plan Your Errands- Instead of running out five time a week to run your errands, sit down early in the week and make a list of all the errands that need to be done, then try and get them down all at once. You will help reduce your carbon emission as well as your gas bill!
12. Your Commute- Change up your commute by taking the bus or riding your bike to work! If this isn't possible make a car pool at work or a buddy system at least once a week where you will drive to work together in one car instead of taking different cars!

Source: http://www.50waystohelp.com/

Hypocritical...

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mairi-beautyman/five-comics-giving-anti-e_b_151892.html

              

Sheila Watt-Cloutier

Sheila Watt-Cloutier is a Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, recipient of an Order of Canada in 2006, and former international chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, but most importantly is a proud Inuit citizen of Kuujuaq. She has been trying to raise awareness of the affect the melting of the Arctic is having on the communities who depend on the ice and snow for transport and hunting. Her goal is to teach people about the importance of the Arctic.
                 "It [the Arctic] cools the rest of the planet. When it breaks down, it has an impact around the world."

Watt-Cloutier is currently a visiting scholar at Mount Allison University, Sackville, New Brunswick and continues to fight for the rights for the Inuit as she considers climate change a human rights issue for the Inuit people. Another project of hers is attempting to ban the pollutants which have been poisoning the Arctic food chain. Mrs. Sheila Watt-Cloutier carries a very important and heavy message, the Arctic affects us all. We are already beginning to feel its effects with the rise in temperatures and the time is now to stop this.

A Smaller Perspective

It is difficult for us to fathom that our planet is 4.6 billion years old. Therefore it is difficult for us to place everything in a time line that is comprehensible when dealing with ten digit figures. So, if we scaled down the 4.6 billion years to merely 46 years it becomes immensely more comprehensible. But by scaling down our time line that means that we have only been around as humans on this planet for approximately four hours and that our Industrial Revolution began only one minute ago. That means that in less than one minute we have destroyed forests and tore apart different lands in a search to get fuels and resources. We have been the cause of numerous extinctions and have multiplied our population by unthinkable amounts.

Now, we have not really done all of this in one minute but in comparison to the age of our planet we have progressed at such a rate that our need for more, more, more and bigger and better has caused damage and lasting effects that are only progressing further. Using the time line that the Earth is only 46 years old, if we can cause this amount of damage in one minute, without changing our way of life what state will we be in by five minutes?

Source: http://library.thinkquest.org/11353/facts.html

Is This True!? Yes, it really is.

Source: http://bradcolbow.com/

What Is Fracking?

Fracking [frak-ing] : (noun) hydraulic fracturing.

Hydraulic Fracturing: (noun) a process in which fractures in rocks below the earth's surface are opened and widened by injecting chemicals and liquids at high pressure: used especially to extract natural gas or oil.

Hydraulic fractures can happen naturally by veins and dikes but many companies and governments have begun the process of fracking, which is when a crack or hole will be made in the rock to help release the natural gas. The reason this appeals to many different industries, oil companies or governments is because of the potential money earnings.

Areas rich in shale rock all over the world have been turning towards fracking in a hope that it might help the economic downfall. New Brunswick, Canada is just one of the many areas in question. Fracking is when holes are drilled into shale rock to release the natural gas inside.  Fracking is so controversial to neighbours of these explorations and environmentalists alike because of the risks that are involved in the process and the after-effects it may have. Hundreds of people in the US alone are currently sick because of what fracking has done to their water supply! Two minor earthquakes have happened on the Lancashire coast in Britain in 2011 near where the fracking was taking place. The question is, was all of this caused by negligence, or the fracking itself?

Some sources state that the 14 leading oil and gas service companies has used approximately 750 different chemicals, including dangerous substances such as benzene, a known human carcinogen, and lead, a probable human carcinogen. 

                          "Between 2005 and 2009, the oil and gas service companies used hydraulic fracturing products containing 29 chemicals that are known or possible human carcinogens, regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for their risks to human health, or listed as hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act."**

Twenty-nine known or possible human carcinogens, surely that makes the whole process unsafe and it should stop, right? Yet the companies are saying that the reason people are getting sick is because of faulty equipment or mistakes made by the workers, not the process itself. The industries say that as long as fracking is preformed correctly and efficiently then there shouldn't be any problems, but how can you ignore the visual evidence of contaminated water supplies? The companies are denying the risks involved in fracking and personally I think if they had come out directly to lay everything on the table we would be in a completely different situation. 

Currently, New Brunswick, Canada is teetering on the edge of joining this bandwagon. Being a poor province with plenty of shale rock it is definitely an option, but is it worth it? Who is telling the truth, the companies or the environmentalist? Can fracking perhaps be preformed harmlessly with minimal effect on our environment or is it a complete mistake that will render us citizens sick? Maybe fracking can be preformed differently and safer here but the evidence from previous expeditions remains and the chemicals used are frightening. Once more, it comes down to, is it worth the risk for the end result?

Sources: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14432401

                http://8020vision.com/2011/04/17/congress-releases-report-on-toxic-chemicals-used-in-fracking/ **

           http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/GeneralInformationaboutCarcinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens