A stude at the University of California, Davis has recently revelaed a fish that has evolved against water pollution. They are found in harbors in the East Coast where there has been a mixture of highly complex industrial pollutants since the 1950's. This species is known as the Atlantic Killifish. They have rapidly evolved to be 8,000 times more resistant to water pollutants than other fish. The reason they have been so quick to evolve is because of thier incredibly high genetic diversity. It is great than that of even humans. While this is intersting, we should not get our hopes up of evolution catching up to the sixth mass extinction we have brought because the majority of species do not have nearly as high of genetic diversity than these fish. While these fish have no commercial value, the serve as an important food source to fish that do have commercial value. This is a perfect example of the term, "Nature always finds a way." It is incredibly interesting that these fish have evolved in the last sixty years to become resistant of heavily polluted water. While we cannot expect species to evolve at such a rate, this should be a prime incentive to push for genetic diversity and restory endagered species populations so that they become more resistant to radical change brough to their environment by people. This research can also lead to further exploration of how gene pools can influence a populations resistance to change or ability to adapt to change. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/12/161208143334.htm
0 Comments
The Great Barrier Reed has suffered its worst coral dieoff on record as the new year apporaches. This can be largely attributed to raising in global and sea temperatures. The Northern Part of the reef suffered the most damage as roghly 67 percent of the shallow water corals in that region have died off in the last eight months, roughly a 700 kilometer stretch. This was examined by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies. Researches claim that nearly all of the coral in some reefs in the Northern Region have died. The central and southern part of the reef has faired better than the Northern part as the center has lost six percent and the southern section has lost one percent since 2016.
Some of the researches attribute this to El Nino events. While this may (or may not), there is an undeniable fact that our oceans are warming and causing coral to be bleached as a result of human output. Research says corals can rebound if water temperatures cool down but as our rate of green house gas emissions, this does not seem plausible. Coral reefs are a primary area that endures direct effect of global warming as they rely so much on the temperature and chemical makeup of the water. It is unfortunate that such a prestine and beautiful area is being layed to waste as a result of human emissions. http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/38641-great-barrier-reef-suffered-worst-coral-die-off-on-record-in-2016-new-study Donald Trump's election has spelled possible future disaster for many groups both in and out of the United States. Unfortunately, he is a walking ticking time bomb for the environment which directly effects everyone on the planet. There are hundreds, and maybe even thousands of ways Donald Trump could destroy what little we have left of our environment but here are seven of the biggest threats he poses to our environment. One way is by breaking the Paris Agreement, which he has already publicly said he will do. This means that not only the US, one of the largest green house gas emitters in the world, will go unregulated, but that the rest of the world will suffer from our blatant idiocy. The second way he poses a threat to the environment is by killing the Clean Power Plan. Again, Trump has publicly stated that he plans on pursuing this which would leave the U.S. producing unregulated amount of carbon emitted. The third way Donald Trump poses a threat to the environment is by eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency. This one really does not need explaining as one can understand the effects just by the phrase "eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency." Although legally it would be almost impossible for him to completely eliminate it, he could reduce their power by putting them into more of an advisory role. The fourth way he poses a threat is by hiring climate change deniers to positions of power. A prime example is the notorious climate change denier Myron Ebell who is now the chair of the EPA and the Department f Energy. The fifth way he poses a threat to our environment is by cutting funding towards clean energy. The world is calling for a move to clean energy but Donald Trump may hush them. The sixth way Trump poses a threat to the environment is by unregulating methane emissions. Considering carbon emissions is on the decline in the U.S., although that may change with a Trump presidency, methane is the next top green house gas contributing to global warming and is on the incline in the U.S. The seventh way Donald Trump could destroy the environment is by allowing fracking on federal lands, ala Sarah Palin.
It is unfortunate and devastating that as the world started to become aware of the massive threat global warming poses, we take a giant leap backwards by electing Donald Trump as our president. That is all I have to say. Environmentalist groups agree on the majority of aspects regarding the preservation of our environment but carbon taxes remains an area where they are divided. In the state of Washington, initiative 732 will hit the ballot in December. It will raise prices from $15 to $100 per metric ton by the half-century. Many argue that although it does address a big problem in Washington, it will further the distance of inequity from low income families. One of the biggest problems in with environmental groups is that they usually project to desire of a well-off white person rather than low income families in which pollution affects the most. Opposers of I-732 claim that it does not take a big enough step towards reducing carbon emissions nor does it address low income communities. Those in favor claim it is a step in the right direction and that flaws can be worked out later. Carbon taxes are a tricky subject but ultimately I think it is vital for there to be one nation wide. This carbon tax needs to put an impactful carbon tax that forces the nation out of using carbon as an energy source. This carbon tax also then needs to use taxpayers money to transfer the country to renewable resources. It also must not be manipulated in a way where these huge corporations do not use this as an excuse for massive tax breaks. Finally, this carbon tax needs to invest in those most affected by carbon emissions (hint: not the coal or fossil fuel industry). Unfortunately, this is incredibly difficult as a large portion of those in congress are endorsed by the carbon industry. It will take the uniting of everyone in order to put pressure on these multi-billion dollar corporations and politicians. It support I-732 but I do not see it as a solution. I see it as a starting point from which we can strive towards perfection where we faze out carbon use quickly and effectively without hurting low income communities. I hope this also can spark a nationwide carbon tax. Senator Bernie Sanders along with 4 other senators have asked President Obama to a comprehensive environmental review of the North Dakota pipeline. This pipeline has caused an uproar in the Native American community and environmental community. The Native American community fears that the pipeline will destroy sacred grounds along with pollute local water. Environmental groups also fear the pollution of water systems. Both fear for the well being of of Lake Oahe and the biodiversity that calls it home. Sanders and Senators Dianne Feistein, Ed Markey, Patrick Leahy and Benjamin Cardin released a statement saying, "The project’s current permits should be suspended and all construction stopped until a complete environmental and cultural review has been completed for the entire project," Unfortunately, experts say that this request and, if granted, review, could take several months to complete.
I think that this project spells disaster from the get go. The Native American people have already been robbed of all their lands, religion and well-being so destroying their sacred lands would just add insult to a massive injury. It also spells for environmental disaster as it could possibly pollute water sources that both the local people and the local ecosystems rely on. Even if this somehow does not immediately have negative environmental impacts, it just adds to the odds of a catastrophe. Leaks or ruptures could lead us to a Flint, Michigan 2.0. Also, it is ironic to see one who lost the democratic nomination actually promoting change while our two presidential candidates are stuck on who said what and who deleted what. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pipeline-dakota-idUSKCN12D1Z7 One of the least covered topics in our presidential elections is the environment. Our two candidates also have completely opposing ideas regarding topics such as climate change and energy use. Hillary Clinton promises a push for clean and renewable energy while Donald Trump calls man made climate change a hoax. Clinton also wants to boost water supplies in California while Trump says there is no drought and that its just poor water management and distribution by the government. Trump also claims that the Chinese made up the idea of global warming as a marketing technique.Clinton on the other hand wants to make a large shift to wind and solar power and create jobs through environmental preservation, restoration and management. Trump on the other hand wants to boost the coal and oil industry back up. He also has this insane plan to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency. It is a tough call who is more of an environmentally friendly presidential candidate.
Not the one does not already know this but Donald Trump is an idiot. There is no other way to put it. He bases what he says off of how he "feels" about the environment. He uses no relevant accurate data to back what he is saying. He either blames the idea of Climate Change on China or takes out a bogus statistic about how the temperatures in Texas are at an all time low, as if Texas represented the entire world. The only time he wants to acknowledge global warming and rising sea levels is when his golf course is in danger. His response to his golf course suffering from erosion from higher sea levels is to of course build a wall around it. This is no joke. He applied for a permit to build the wall. Trump is also notorious for attempting to debunk global warming by gauging the temperature where he is and if it is cold, tweeting about it saying global warming is a hoax. Hillary Clinton may not have all the greatest ideas about environmental protection as she has had a history of being pro-fracking. At least she has a plan though so that our planet does not implode. It would have been life to have a candidate like Bernie Sanders who has extreme ideas to get our planet back on a path where we do not have a mass extinction. http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2016/10/13/voter-guide-clinton-and-trump-global-warming-energy-and-california-drought/91277414/ Big decisions were made at the UN's Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES). This convention affected the conservation of pangolin, African Gray Parrots, lions, elephants, rhinos, sharks, and rays. CITES put eight species of pangolin on "appendix one" meaning their can be no international movement of these animals for trade. It also finally put the African Gray Parrot on appendix one which have seen their numbers diminish immensely due to deforestation and illegal poaching and catching. Lion parts are now only allowed to be traded by private owners of captive bred lions. The proposal of Zimbabwe and Namibia for allowing of trade of ivory to fund conservation programs was rejected. The southern African Kingdom of Swaziland was also rejected after the proposal of rhino horn to be sold on the market to raise money for conservation efforts. Four species of sharks and nine species of rays are now in appendix two which now strictly regulates all fishing of these animals. The two biggest push's after this convention were the restrictions on ivory trade of elephants and rhinos and as well as the heavy harvesting restrictions on sharks and rays. It is tough to take a side on the ivory ruling as each have good points. Conservation groups rely on trophy hunting and sell of ivory in order to fund their programs. It has shown to be effective sacrificing the few for the improvement of the entire population. The other side counters that with the idea that allowing for any type of ivory trade encourages poaching and keeps ivory as a prominent source in society. The other important ruling about setting tight restricitons on the consumption of certain ray and shark species has me excited yet I would have liked to have seen them add these species into appendix one so that their populations can flourish again without human intervention. http://pulse.ng/world/convention-on-international-trade-in-endangered-species-decisions-made-at-un-meeting-on-wildlife-trade-in-south-africa-id5563466.html One common assumption made by right wingers is that reducing the amount of CO2 will hurt the economy. They argue that removing a resource that which our economy relies on will cause the economy unnecessary troubles. In reality, ignoring the problem will cause our economy much more trouble if we wait and see how it "plays out." Recent studies show that there will be greater costs to both our economy and society if we choose to ignore our CO2 problem. We must invest in plans for reusable energy and in plans to phase out the world's massive carbon use. Carbon Pricing Proposals have been proposed to the House of Representatives which put a cost on carbon use where the money would circulate back into efforts to remove carbon as a resource but these proposals have been denied. But it is time for people to wake up. If we as a planet do not take action in stopping our massive green house gas use, we will have more than the economy to worry about. Another common argument made against global warming is that it is an El Nino year. Although El Nino does cause a short term raise in temperature, it cannot explain the raise in temperature ever since the industrial revolution. It also fails to address why the entirety of our oceans are warming. In reality, El Nino can only be attributed to roughly 2.3% of global warming. It is time to stop making up excuses we hear from Fox News. Global warming as a reality. http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-limits-economy-intermediate.htm http://www.skepticalscience.com/el-nino-southern-oscillation.htm According to officials of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the Grauer's gorilla has seen its numbers drop to fewer that 4,000. It's status has moved from endangered to critically endangered which is the category right before extinction. Conservationists have warned that extinction is becoming more of a reality for these gorillas. The International Union for Conservation of Nature has recorded a 77% drop in population of Grauer's gorillas in the past generation, going from roughly 17,000 to 4,000. Bushmeat hunting and civil war of the Democratic Republic of Congo have been leading causes of the population decline in these gorillas. All gorillas are now considered to be critically endangered. It seems surprising to me that people in this world are oblivious to the fact that the world's largest gorilla is on the brink of extinction. Although an animal being put onto the critically endangered list is never good, maybe all gorillas will receive the attention they deserve. Also, with the recent murdering of the beloved Harambe, people seem to be coming around on animal preservation and conservation. Hopefully conservation efforts will compensate for habitat loss and poaching that cause the declining numbers in gorillas. http://www.livescience.com/55987-grauers-gorillas-are-critically-endangered.html http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/30/asia/sea-shepherd-japan-whales-new-ship/ The Sea Shepherds Australia have recently vowed to take a more aggressive standpoint against Japanese whalers this upcoming season. The United States were forced to reach an agreement with Japan where US Sea Shepherds can no longer physically intervene with Japanese whalers. Previously, the US Sea Shepherds would throw stink bombs onto whalers' ships causing the meat to go bad and the ship to become unpleasant. The Sea Shepherds even boarded the Japanese whaling vessels in order to stop whaling from happening. At one point, the Sea Shepherds even sacrificed their own boat in order to stop whaling. Whaling was actually outlawed in the 80's but Japan and a few other countries have taken advantage of a loop hole. This loop hole is that a country can hunt whales for scientific research. A resent study has confirmed that the claim Japan is making "whaling for research" is completely false and that they do indeed hunt to sell. Because of the recent setback the US has suffered, many deemed the Japanese the victors of the "Whale Wars." The Sea Shepherd community then proceeded to acquire Ocean Warrior, their fastest vessel yet. It was built for these missions of stopping whaling. Because the new agreement reached and applies to the United States, the Australian Sea Shepherd fully intend to physically intervene with Japanese Whalers.
This new agreement reached between Japan and the United States seems to heavily aid the Japanese in their whaling efforts. I have to say, I am disappointed that the US would reach this type of agreement. It seems to me that the United States would have only accepted these terms if the Japanese agreed to stop whaling. The fact the the Japanese are still whaling is repulsive as the majority of the rest of the world, including those with more extensive whaling history, have stopped the hunts. I am though excited about the Australia's strong position against whaling. Considering their ideal global positioning. The Ocean Warrior also makes me feel like a little kid on Christmas Morning. It can reach up to 25 knots compared to their previous ships that could only go 15 knots. The Japanese whaling ships can reach up to 22 knots so this upgrade is vital to stopping them. |
Alex Garcia-Environmentalist Archives
December 2016
Categories |