cancer

I am going to point you to THIS article for a very important read.

Yes, on the surface it looks like an article about the Tasmanian Devil and it’s extinction. And it is. But the subtext is what is so, so critical about this story.

Tazmanian Devils will more than likely go extinct because of a cancer that is spreading through out the species. What research has shown is that because of low biodiversity and genetic variation, the cancer has mutated to be… CONTAGIOUS. I will give you a few minutes to let this sink in. Contagious. We have always thought that cancers are independently caused and created.

The implications of this finding are enormous. Maybe not on human populations, unless our politics and economies segregate us even more. But on our plant and animal populations, absolutely. Think of the homogeneous nature of corn and the proliferation of that cash crop in our world. Think of all the animals currently on the endangered species list, and the limited amount of genes in the population to reproduce.

This is something very serious and needs a lot of scientific attention. You see, we may all think that global change is not going to affect the current species all that much, in our lifetimes. However, if cancer can become contagious… we may just see a change we are not ready for.

hadn’t thought about this

October 16, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature

The NY Times is chock full of some good stuff today.

There is an article about animal migration and the imposed limitations due to roads.

“Some experts believe that habitat fragmentation, the slicing and dicing of large landscapes into small pieces with roads, homes and other development, is the biggest of all environmental problems. “By far,” said Dr. Michael Soulé, a retired biologist and founder of the Society for Conservation Biology. “It’s bigger than climate change. While the serious effects from climate change are 30 years away, there’s nothing left to save then if we don’t deal with fragmentation. And the spearhead of fragmentation are roads.”

Fragmentation cuts off wildlife from critical habitat, including food, security or others of their species for reproduction and genetic diversity. Eventually they disappear.”

The article can be found HERE.

we thought acid rain was bad… what about acid ocean

October 16, 2008 by  
Filed under climate change, environment science, Nature


For you science enthusiasts out there… here is an interesting article, out of my alma mater… go slugs!… about the acidification of our oceans.

In our history, our oceans have seen times where it was more acidic than basic. The transition, however, occurred over many thousands of years. Science points to the acidification happening again, but this time happening very, very quickly.

Of course, since we have never seen this before, we do not know what the effect will be on marine life or human life.

“More than anything, it’s the rate of change that has scientists worried. It’s one thing to add a big load of carbon dioxide to the ocean over a few millennia, quite another to shock the ocean by adding a similar amount in just a few centuries. “We do not know with certainty what the consequences will be,” says Ken Caldeira, a climate expert with the Carnegie Institution Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University. “But we are now adding carbon so fast that, chances are, the disturbance to the ocean will be even more extreme.”

click HERE for the article.

not so grand

October 15, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature, politics

The Bush Administration is rushing forward with plans to mine the Grand Canyon for uranium, ignoring a command from Congress to cease such operations…

you can read more HERE

If you live in SoCal…. this affects you. I promise.

Oh… and there is this:
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been strangely silent on this issue, despite his claimed commitment to protecting the Grand Canyon from drilling

help getting out of the house

October 14, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature

I came across a very interesting study done by a company in London, that I think could have a major impact in all of us getting out of the house and into public spaces.

It seems that women would go out to parks more if they felt safer, naturally. Ironically, they do not feel safe when there are posted signs about police and clear, empty spaces. Instead they found that undercover police and bushes (!!) created the feeling of safety. Interesting.

click HERE to read the article. It may be something our country could look into and get us out into parks a wee bit more…??

Would it surprise you?

October 10, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature, politics

Would you be shocked and awed to find out that Bush made an 11th hour decision that allows for even more environmental destruction?

I think… um, NO!

click HERE for the article from The Daily Green. You can go HERE, too, for a more comprehensive look at oil shale.

“The lifting of the limitation paves the way for the Bush administration to finalize its draft regulations for leasing. Unfortunately, the regulations — as proposed before the limitation was ever lifted — could be extremely costly for both the environment and the American taxpayer.”

Didn’t we leave England because of “taxation without representation”? I’m starting to feel it again. Hey… look at that! History DOES repeat itself!

I am TEEB’d off

October 10, 2008 by  
Filed under economy, environment science, Nature

Oh, those Germans. They went out and studied something kind of cool and important.

It is called The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity… or TEEB. It is designed to promote a better understanding of the true economic value of the benefits we receive from nature.

“Nature provides human society with a vast diversity of benefits such as food, fibres fuel, clean water, healthy soil, protection from floods, protection from soil erosion, medicines, storing carbon (important in the fight against climate change) and many more. Though our wellbeing is totally dependent upon these “ecosystem services” they are predominantly public goods with no markets and no prices, so they often are not detected by our current economic compass. As a result, due to the pressures coming from population growth, changing diets, urbanisation and also climate change, biodiversity is declining, our ecosystems are being continuously degraded and we, in turn, are suffering the consequences.”

What is the economic cost of losing such biodiversity? Well, it is going to make this financial crisis look a whole lot nicer to be dealing with.

“Taking these future losses into account, the net present value of services from forests ecosystems that we lose each year is estimated at between $1.35 trillion and $3.1 trillion.”

You can go HERE for the whole article.

sometimes I wonder why I fight so hard

October 9, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature, politics

Please pay attention to the very last quote in this excerpt.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in the long-running dispute over the Navy’s use of mid-frequency active sonar off the coast of Southern California. Environmentalists and wildlife advocates argued that restrictions on the Navy’s use of sonar imposed by lower-court judges should be upheld — at least until the Navy conducts its required environmental impact statement — citing sonar’s track record of seriously messing with whales and other marine mammals. Predictably, the Navy argues that halting or restricting sonar training exercises in any way harms national security. If the judges’ comments are any indication, the court is likely to rule in the Navy’s favor this spring. Justice Samuel Alito wondered aloud how a lone judge could ever restrict anything the Navy does, Justice Antonin Scalia characterized the required-but-still-not-done environmental impact statement as “procedural,” Chief Justice John Roberts said that if the Navy didn’t train with active sonar, another Pearl Harbor-type attack would likely happen, and even Justice Stephen Breyer said, “The whole point of the armed forces is to hurt the environment. You go on a bombing mission — do they have to prepare an environmental impact statement first?”

From grist.org

egg-cellent

October 7, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Food, Nature

I will admit that ever since I have read… well, anything by Michael Pollan… I have been wanting my own chickens. I know that it seems silly to you, but when you imagine for a few seconds the condition these animals are raised, you stop eating them. And I love eggs. I love eggs to scrambled and poached and omeletted. I love eggs in my cakes and brownies and ice creams.

I currently buy them from my farmer’s market, but I have to say, that is the one item that I have found to be quite costly.

So, I want a chicken coop.

HERE is an article about states becoming more lenient on restrictions for having backyard coops. I guess more and more people feel the same way as I do.

sea you later

October 6, 2008 by  
Filed under environment science, Nature

There is one treaty we have all agreed on… presumably not under the Bush Administration… la dee da, la dee da…. anyway.

The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is the world’s most widely endorsed environmental treaty. In it many countries have agreed, that by 2010, we will conserve 10% of the worlds ecological regions.

Relatively speaking, it seems we are doing well when it comes to land. Not so well when it comes to the sea. While 12.2% of the planet’s land area is under legal protection only 5.9% of the world’s territorial seas and less than 1% of the high seas are protected.

HERE is the article. This may be a good opportunity to support Heal the Bay or Oceana

« Previous Page