# data[].attributes.body
(click on the link below to view)

Eric Heidner

# data[].attributes.body
Since the beginning of ocean acidification the coral reefs have been disapearing, this will leave a huge gap in the food webs in the ocean. The coral reef provide a home and breeding grounds for thousands of species that have co evolved for millions of year but, cannot change in an instant. Interestingly the animals that as large like whale, sharks, dolphins and even gulls have adapted to live with plankton as a relyable food source, so with the absence of the coral reefs leading to the death of plankton, we will maybe see a decline in the larger aquatic populations. This marks the absence of not only a keystone species but also a home.

Brian Eddy
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/13115

# data[].attributes.body
The organization heal the bay is all about helping the rivers,oceans and beaches. they want a safe environment for the aquatic animals in the ocean. They want to prevent any solution from sewages and untreated plants to get in to the water so that the environment stays at its best. they also give information to the public about the armful affects that pollution has on the environment not just in the water but also on the land they are seeing up volunteer sights for any one that wants to keep our environment clean. i agree with this because the water in rivers and oceans are vary important to our enviorment. There are many things that can help or damage our environment so its up to us to keep it safe and pollution free.
http://www.healthebay.org/about-us
Matthew Demontevedrde

# data[].attributes.headline
Ocean acidification already slowing coral reef growth

# data[].attributes.subject
Ocean acidification already slowing coral reef growth

# data[].attributes.body
In the article,”Ocean acidification already slowing coral reef growth” by the Carnegie Institution, a team of scientists performed the first-ever experiment that manipulated seawater chemistry in a natural coral reef community in order to determine the effect that excess carbon dioxide released by human activity is having on coral reefs. Their results provide evidence that ocean acidification is already slowing coral reef growth. Reefs are havens for marine biodiversity and underpin the economies of many coastal communities. But they are at risk thanks to changes in ocean chemistry due to greenhouse gas emissions, pollution, warming waters, overdevelopment, and overfishing.

I believe we should do something about this because they are destroying many animals habitats and decrease the economies of many communities that rely on the animals.The government should come in and regulate the amount of carbon dioxide humans are creating to increase the coral reef growth. I don't really find this interesting because it doesn't impact me.

DAVID  QUINTERO PERIOD 1
2/24/2016
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160224145558.htm

# data[].attributes.headline
E-Commerce: Convenience Built on a Mountain of Cardboard

# data[].attributes.subject
E-Commerce: Convenience Built on a Mountain of Cardboard

# data[].attributes.body
Matt Richtel discusses the booming online shopping industry and the environmentally harmful byproducts of this popular consumer trend. Amazon Prime, Google Express, UberRush, Jet Delivery, and Instacart are just a few examples of instant delivery services companies have launched to get purchases  to people, fast. Consumers love the convenience and gratification of buying online - they get what they want with the click of a button in a short amount of time - in some cases, just minutes. The environmental costs, however, are concerning. Along with delivery emissions, the packaging is another concern. Often, tiny items are wrapped in plastic and placed in multiple cardboard boxes. In 2014, 35.4 million tons of containerboard were produced in the U.S. One might suspect that with more online shopping, consumers are driving less because they aren't physically going into stores. This, however, isn't the case. People still seem to be on the road a lot.

I think Richtel's article brings to light a really important topic that I believe we need to address - it's crazy how much packaging we rip off and throw away everyday! As we learned in our waste management unit, modern day consumerism is in conflict with the way the natural world operates. In nature, outputs become inputs and matter is constantly cycling through. Humans, on the other hand, have adopted a linear system of production and consumption, where people are encouraged to buy more and more so that companies can sell more and more. The e-commerce problem also ties into our study of biogeochemical cycles - specifically, the carbon cycle. The numerous stops trucks must make to keep up with peoples' demands adds lots of CO2 into the air. Of course companies should try to develop more efficient packaging methods and delivery routes. The real goal we should aim for is to slow down our consumption and stop feeling like we need to buy buy buy.

Sarah Yang
2/24/16

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recology, San Francisco's main recycling plant collects 100 tons of cardboard every day. Credit Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

Ruchit Garg, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, says that he worries that something isn't right with his Internet shopping habit. With each new delivery to his doorstep - sometimes several in a day - he faces the source of his guilt and frustration: another cardboard box.

Then, when he opens the shipment, he is often confronted with a Russian nesting doll 's worth of boxes inside boxes to protect his electronics, deodorant, clothing or groceries. Mr. Garg dutifully recycles, but he shared his concerns recently on Twitter.

A handful of scientists and policy makers are circling the same question, grappling with the long-term environmental effect of an economy that runs increasingly on gotta-have-it-now gratification. This cycle leads consumers to expect that even their modest wants can be satisfied like urgent needs, and not always feel so great about it.

The new arms race for Internet retailers is speed, making the old Federal Express commercial, "When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight," seem as quaint as delivery by horse and buggy. Amazon boasted in a news release in December about its "fastest order delivered to date" - a Miami customer's craving for a four-pack of Starbucks vanilla frappuccino was sated in 10 minutes flat.

In 10 major regions, Google Express delivers in a little less than two hours from dozens of stores - including toys, drugs, hardware and pet supplies. Postmates, a San Francisco start-up, promises deliveries in less than an hour. It dropped off nearly one million packages in December.

Over all, the $350 billion e-commerce industry has doubled in the last five years, with Amazon setting the pace. Its Prime membership service has grown to more than 50 million subscribers, by one estimate. (And its new faster service, Prime Now, can "get customers pretty much anything in minutes," its website says).

Uber calls its new UberRush service "your on-demand delivery fleet"; Jet Delivery offers "white glove" service in less than two hours; Instacart can deliver groceries to your door in less than an hour.

The environmental cost can include the additional cardboard - 35.4 million tons of containerboard were produced in 2014 in the United States, with e-commerce companies among the fastest-growing users - and the emissions from increasingly personalized freight services.

"There's a whole fleet of trucks circulating through neighborhoods nonstop," said Dan Sperling, the founding director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis, and the transportation expert on the California Air Resources Board. He also is overseeing a new statewide task force of trucking companies and government officials trying to reduce overall emissions from freight deliveries, including for e-commerce.

Dr. Sperling said that consumers shared as much responsibility for the environmental cost of the deliveries as the companies that provided the speedy services.

"From a sustainability perspective, we're heading in the wrong direction," he said.

But measuring the effect of the cardboard economy is more difficult.

There are possible trade-offs, for example. As people shop more online, they might use their cars less. And delivery services have immense incentive to find the most efficient routes, keeping their fuel costs and emissions down. For its part, Amazon said that delivering to consumers straight from huge warehouses cuts down the need to distribute to thousands of stores.

So far, though, shoppers appear to be ordering online while still driving to brick-and-mortar stores at least as much as in the past, according to Dr. Sperling and other academics. One recent study explored the environmental effect of Internet shopping in Newark, Del., and found that a rise in e-commerce in recent years by local residents corresponded to more trucks on the road and an increase in greenhouse emissions.

Image

E-commerce was responsible for much of the 35.4 million tons of containerboard produced in 2014 in the United States. Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

Ardeshi Faghri, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Delaware, said the increase of various emissions - which he estimated at 20 percent from 2001 to 2011 - "could be due to a multitude of reasons, but we think that online shopping and more delivery trucks are really one of the primary reasons."

"Online shopping has not helped the environment," he said. "It has made it worse."

Other scholars say that, at least for now, online shopping appears to be complementing brick-and-mortar shopping, not replacing it.

"People who shop online also like to see and feel things," said Cara Wang, an associate professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute who studies transportation issues and has written a paper about habits of online shoppers. "And they have to return things."

Dr. Wang and other researchers say the demand for instant delivery, in particular, creates challenges for trucking companies trying to be efficient. Instead of taking big truckloads to single retailers they now make more scattershot deliveries.

Many drivers deliver just one item. This is often the case for Postmates, which has a fleet of 15,000 freelance drivers signed up to make deliveries of whatever the customer orders - an Uber-like service, but for deliveries. The cost typically starts at $5, and a 9 percent service fee applied to the cost of the item. (The company says it also has about 5,000 deliverers who go on bike or foot in dense urban areas).

And the push for speed from marketers gives shoppers little incentive to wait.

"Why select one week if I can get it in one hour?" asked Miguel Jaller, an assistant professor at U.C. Davis who studies urban freight patterns.

Such is the case for Monica Rohleder, who admits to using Amazon Prime so much that "my husband jokes we keep Amazon in business."

Ruchit Garg and his 3-year-old son with produce ordered online through Google. Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

Ms. Rohleder, who lives in Los Angeles and works at a public relations firm, said she liked overnight delivery, but "within a couple of hours is best" because she is busy with work and her two young children. So she often does not order something until it's urgent. "There's the immediate gratification of getting something and checking it off your list," she said.

One afternoon she received six boxes, from Amazon and Nordstrom, for a Hawaii trip, including bathing suits, workout clothes and coloring books. Some of the clothes did not fit, so she returned them.

She thinks more about the cardboard that comes into her house than the truck emissions, she said. "It's embarrassing," she added of her mass of weekly recycling.

Dennis Colley, the president of the Fibre Box Association - the trade group for the corrugated paper, or cardboard, industry - estimated that the use of boxes for e-commerce was growing faster than most other market segments. However, he emphasized the industry's efforts to be environmentally conscious, and that 90 percent of corrugated packaging were recycled.

Amazon is aware of the cardboard issue. Since 2009, it has received 33 million comments, ratings and photographs about its packaging as part of its "packaging feedback program." Amazon said it used that feedback to make sure that cardboard box size was consistent with the size of the product. It also works with manufacturers to send some products without additional cardboard packaging, said Craig Berman, a company spokesman.

Though recycling can make consumers think they are helping the environment, the process has its own costs, including the emissions from shipping it to recycling centers, which use a lot of energy and water. Don Fullerton, a professor of finance and an expert in economics and the environment at the University of Illinois, said one possible solution would be to make the retailers responsible for taking back the boxes. That would create incentives for them to come up with solutions for less packaging.

"And maybe not put a box inside a box inside a box," he said

Robert Reed, a spokesman for Recology, San Francisco's main recycling processor, which collects 100 tons of cardboard every day, has a simpler solution: "Slow down consumption," he said. "Slow down."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
E-Commerce: Convenience Built on a Mountain of Cardboard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ruchit Garg, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, says that he worries that something isn't right with his Internet shopping habit. With each new delivery to his doorstep - sometimes several in a day - he faces the source of his guilt and frustration: another cardboard box.

# data[].attributes.body
There's tons of debate surrounding the issue of the black, plastic, possibly recyclable trays used by some schools in the Bay area recently. In the past couple of years, millions of the black lunch trays used for various food such as spaghetti, macaroni and cheese and other entrees served at lunch have been found to be completely recyclable, yet have ended up in the trash cans at these schools upon the instructions delivered by the schools themselves. They said they were told by Recology, the company who supplied the school with the black trays, to dispose of them in the garbage if they were unable to sufficiently rinse or clean them, and the school couldn't afford to rinse every tray, therefore they threw them in the garbage. For three years the trays were sent to the landfill with no one doing a thing about it, resulting in 5.4 million black plastic trays being sent to the landfill since 2013. Later, when Recology was asked about the matter they said that they only ask that students who don't finish some food in their tray shake out the remaining food in the composting bin that Recology, too, has provided. All in all, Nik Kaestner, the SF district director of sustainability, says that the goal is zero waste.
Seems like an overly ambitious feat for Recology in my opinion. I definitely agree with the idea that Recology and Kaestner is trying to execute in the Bay Area: Zero waste. That being said, I do think that Recology is taking a extremely relaxed view on this matter, especially the matter of the millions of black trays being transported to the landfill every year. In conclusion, I think that the people of San Francisco mainly, as well as the surrounding areas should rally together and really make a change through voices complaints, gathering petitions, etc.

By: Trevor Malik

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Millions of plastic trays from San Francisco school lunchrooms were sent to a landfill rather than a recycling plant over the past few years, an environmental blunder that city, school district and trash company officials scrambled to fix after The Chronicle questioned the practice.

The small black trays, which hold the spaghetti, macaroni and cheese and other entrees served at lunch, were fully recyclable, but were routinely dumped into cafeteria trash cans at schools across the city. The reason: The trays were dirty.

The leftover noodles and sauce can contaminate the recyclable paper that is commingled with the plastic, reducing the quality and, therefore, the financial value of the paper. And because the schools couldn't rinse or efficiently clean the containers, children and staff were instructed by Recology to toss them into the garbage, district officials said.

For three years, the trays piled up with neither the district nor Recology doing anything about it. The result, school officials said last week, was 5.4 million black plastic trays sent to the dump since 2013, when the district started contracting with Revolution Foods of Oakland.

"Recology has told us they don't want any plastics because they're too soiled," said Greg John, principal at Commodore Sloat Elementary School. "It's now institutionalized."
If food is left on tray
On Friday, though, after The Chronicle began reporting on the gaffe, Recology officials conveyed a different message.

" We accept all hard plastic food trays for recycling," spokesman Robert Reed said in an e-mail. "We only ask that students who do not finish their meals shake any uneaten food into the green composting collection bins that we provide." Wiping them clean as well would be "great," Reed added, but is "not required."

By the end of the school week, the message had yet to trickle through the campuses.

At 11:30 a.m. Friday, kindergartners at Sloat Elementary lined up for lunch, grabbing the black plastic trays filled with spaghetti and then, when they were done, tossed all of them into the silver trash can rather than the blue bin a few feet away.

"Plastic goes in the trash because it's plastic," said Sydney Volker, 6.

Why not the blue bin? "I don't know," she said.
'Scale is so enormous'
Shannon Edelstone, who has a son at the school, couldn't believe it when she saw hundreds of plastic trays heading to a landfill on a recent school day.

"It's not just the fact that it's happening here, it's that the scale is so enormous," she said. "How many thousands of kids are doing this? It's systemic. That's what's horrifying."

While everyone agrees the plastic trays should go in the recycling bin, the problem is what dirty plastic can do to paper. If oily food on the plastic lands in the recycling truck, it gets on the newspaper and other paper products that are also in there.

"If you were just lazy and tossed a plastic tray into the recycling that had spaghetti sauce on it, you would be diminishing the quality of the paper that's getting ultimately recycled," Reed said. "A paper mill is going to want clean newsprint."

Recology encourages city residents to "shake it out," so there is less food or salad dressing on the plastic.

"If it's hard plastic and it's soiled with food, we say the best thing to do is to wipe it off with a paper napkin or towel and put the soiled paper in the compost bin and put the hard plastic in the recycle bin," Reed said. "That's an advanced step in being a good recycler."
Recology's past message
But district officials say that hasn't been Recology's message for the past three years.

While some schools have been recycling the trays anyway - even wiping them clean - an estimated 80 percent are not, said Nik Kaestner, the district's director of sustainability. Many, like Sloat, have been putting all of them in the trash.

Some used the "mac and cheese test," Kaestner said. If the plastic container had food adhered to it, it went in the trash. If it was just rice or another food that could be knocked off into the compost bin, the container could be recycled.

But because food remained on virtually every plastic tray, they all went into the trash, per Recology's instructions, John said.

After The Chronicle contacted Recology officials for a comment, company managers met Thursday afternoon with the city Department of the Environment to address the problem and release a response, Reed said.

All plastic trays, preferably shaken free of loose food, will be accepted.
Recycling demonstration
Recology officials also sent a representative unannounced to Sloat Elementary on Friday, shortly after a Chronicle reporter and photographer left, to demonstrate how to recycle the trays, the principal said.

But even with the special visit, there was some confusion, John said.

"The rep who came here said that we would need to knock out all the food," John said in an e-mail. "So, I'm ready to roll with whatever the instructions are. A compostable container solves for all of the above in my view."

District officials are looking into whether they could serve all meals in compostable trays, which are currently used for less messy meals like burritos, Kaestner said. They cost more - a couple extra cents each.

That's about $100,000 more each year, he said, so "someone has to decide that's more important than teachers."
Goal is zero waste
The ultimate goal is a zero-waste program that serves up food from catering trays onto compostable plates, similar to school lunch lines from the 1950s, Kaestner said. A couple of San Francisco schools are testing that idea.

Even with the plastic trays landing in the trash, Sloat and many other district schools have strong recycling and composting programs, with an 80 percent diversion rate, meaning just 20 percent of school waste goes to the landfill, officials said.

Getting the plastic trays in the recycling bin would improve that number, John said.

"We're trying very hard as a city to do this right," he said. "It would be nice not to be contributing to a problem every day."
Jill Tucker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: jtucker@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @jilltucker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Big blunder over recycling school lunch trays in S.F.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Millions of plastic trays from San Francisco school lunchrooms were sent to a landfill rather than a recycling plant over the past few years, an environmental blunder that city, school district and trash company officials scrambled to fix after The Chronicle questioned the practice.

# data[].attributes.headline
Please add your name to the bottom of the post!

# data[].attributes.subject
Please add your name to the bottom of the post!

# data[].attributes.headline
The Human and Environmental Effects of E-Waste

# data[].attributes.subject
The Human and Environmental Effects of E-Waste

# data[].attributes.body
In the article "The Human and Environmental effects of E-Waste", Lucy McAllister informs us that over 40 million metric tons of e-waste is produced yearly around the world. The amount of e-waste is increasing largely, and breaking down e-waste causes substantial digestive, neurological, respiratory, and bone problems. Researchers found out that in Guiyu, the largest e-waste recycling site in the world, 80% of their population are born with respiratory ailments. The US is the leading producer in e-waste, and most of this waste is sent to developing countries, like China, from already developed countries, like the US. US is the only country that produces a lot of waste that has not ratified the Basel Convention.

I think that if the US ratifies the Basel Convention, therefore banning them from sending their waste to other countries without their permission, we will significantly cut down our waste production, because citizens will complain about their children's birth defects and pass a law to decrease their exposure to e-waste. I find it interesting that 4 out of 5 of the children in Guiyu are born with respiratory ailments but their government doesn't try to stop other countries from sending them the waste. I think the US should ratify the Basel Convention and decrease the production of e-waste. The manufacturers of the electronics should find a way to eliminate the use of dangerous toxins used to make electronics.

Yuka Perera

http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2013/e-waste.aspx

# data[].attributes.body
This article states that cattle and farming have huge environmental implications and can no longer be ignored. There are 1.5 billion cows and other ruminants (animals which regurgitates food and re-chews it) in the world and they are responsible for 180 billion kg of methane release or 396832104000 pounds of it annually. 198416052 Tonnes of methane! That's not even taking into account all the deforestation that comes along with cattle. 70 % of forests in south america have been cut down and turned into grazing land. Almost 30 % of the worlds land is now being used for livestock. This number is climbing! it's projected that meat and dairy consumption are going to double in the next year. The more demand the public has for these products the more land has to be converted to supply it.  A Japaneses study concluded that for every kg of beef enough methane is produced to equal the amount of CO2 needed to drive a car 250 kilometers, and enough energy is burned to light an 100 watt light bulb for 30 days. That's not to mention all the sulfur and phosphorus use through fertilizers. In conclusion the article states that the most effective way to reduce our personal carbon footprint is the eat less meat and dairy products.

I think this a definite problem.  This is an all too potent example of how we have monopolized live stock and the world to fit our linear system. At the end of the article they included a quote from Albert Einstein "Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.", and it really effected me personal because I do eat a lot of meat and dairy products. I personally need to reduce my consumption of these products so this article really hit home with me. I don't think the government would every be able to shut down the production of beef and dairy, but I think the amount sold in stores could be limited and we as a people can limit ourselves.

# data[].attributes.body
In the article, Ten Real-Life Examples of the Tragedy of the Commons, by Alecia M Spooner, she writes about the ten greatest real-life examples of the tragedy of the commons. She writes about fishermen overfishing, ocean pollution, and much more. My favorite example is in the 1930 and 1940s, the city of Los Angeles was rapidly growing in population size and the citizens increased the rate at which they pump water from the underground aquifer. They pumped so much that eventually the water supply was so low that their were risks of saltwater intrusion from the Pacific Ocean. However, the citizens solved this problem by creating an organization that focused on how to manage and conserve the groundwater for future use. I agree with the article because all of the examples they presented showed an accurate representation of the tragedy of the commons. I believe if people are shown the outcomes of taking advantage of shared resources, then they won’t act upon these actions and help save the common resources.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/ten-reallife-examples-of-the-tragedy-of-the-common.html

Andre Guadagno

# data[].attributes.headline
How the Buildings We Live In Add to the Threat From Global Warming

# data[].attributes.subject
How the Buildings We Live In Add to the Threat From Global Warming

# data[].attributes.body
How the Buildings We Live In Add to the Threat From Global Warming

In this LA Times article, Jenny Jarvie discusses the environmental impact the buildings that make up our society have on the atmosphere. She explains that while many people believe that burning fossil fuels is the reason for rising global temperatures, about 30% of greenhouse gas emissions come from buildings. We need to reduce the amount of energy buildings are consuming to decrease the amount of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere. Many countries are proposing laws to reduce greenhouse gas emissions caused by buildings. Even if we are able to control the air pollution caused by existing buildings, there’s still the issue of the massive construction growth predicted in the near future. Populations are growing exponentially, requiring more structures, and producing more carbon dioxide. Experts say that we must install  regulations and incentives in order to drastically reduce our emissions and prevent global warming from escalating to an even more massive problem than it already is.

I do agree with the article, I think that air pollution from buildings is a largely underestimated problem and governments must take action right away. I found it interesting that buildings are responsible for such a large percentage of greenhouse gas emissions, yet I’ve personally never been informed on the severity of the issue. I feel like the government could easily inform people that even small changes, like turning the lights off when they leave a room, really makes a difference. I know there are laws are in the process of being passed that should reduce energy use, but I think in the meantime, if governments could reach people on a deeper level they would see results as well

Maddie Fedor

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-climate-change-buildings-20151209-story.html

# data[].attributes.headline
A New Study Outlines How Obesity and Pollution Are Unexpectedly Linked

# data[].attributes.subject
A New Study Outlines How Obesity and Pollution Are Unexpectedly Linked

# data[].attributes.body
In the article it states that obesity and pollution are "somehow" linked. The study was conducted using rats and highly polluted air from Beijing, China. The study showed that the newborn rats exposed to the polluted air were a lot heavier than those of the clean air. The researchers claim that longterm  exposure to polluted air can be a factor in childhood obesity as well as later in life. The researchers found that the toxins in the air limit the body's ability to burn energy which makes it harder to burn calories and easier to store them as fat. The researchers concluded that pollution isn't the only factor of the obesity epidemic but it does add a factor and concern.

By Rene Zarate

# data[].attributes.headline
Supreme court temporarily blocks Obama's climate change plan

# data[].attributes.subject
Supreme court temporarily blocks Obama's climate change plan

# data[].attributes.body
In Obama's effort to aggressively reduce climate pollution by cutting carbon emissions from power plants, the Supreme court overruled the plan to protect states from further economic harm. The rule called for reducing carbon emissions from power plants by about 1/3 by 2030. Obama believed that as one of the leading producers in carbon emissions if the United States began to try and reduce their carbon footprint than maybe other countries would follow in their footsteps. Instead of using coal for electricity they want to pivot towards wind and solar energy. The supreme court's decision is a major set back, but many belief that there is every reason to anticipate that the court will realize the clean air act does have an impact on the changing global climate. An energy information administration predicts that  unregulated power plants will produce 1.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year where as regulated plants will only produce 1 million metric tons (1/3 of unregulated) .

I think that we have a responsibility to our future generations to keep this planet healthy and sustainable. Although "carbon cutting" would have a huge impact on the economy of states who produce coal energy, it is important that they realize what impacts carbon emissions have on our earth, and the impact it has on our climate. I am interested to see whether or not the supreme court will pass this rule in the future, because in order for our world to become sustainable we have to start somewhere.

By Ryan McMullen

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/us/politics/supreme-court-blocks-obama-epa-coal-emissions-regulations.html?_r=0

# data[].attributes.headline
Climate Change effects on The Water Cycle

# data[].attributes.subject
Climate Change effects on The Water Cycle

# data[].attributes.body
This article is talking about how Earth's climate is going through many changes due to natural variability, including solar variability, and increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols.

These changes are supposedly affecting the water cycle by changing water vapor concentrations, clouds, precipitation patterns, and runoff and stream flow patterns. This can be seen when the temperatures in the lower atmosphere increase, so does the evaporation rate , which means that there are higher water vapor concentrates . This causes much more rainfall. Another problem coming from this is since it causes more rainfalls early , when the seasons that need more water such as summer and spring , there is not much rainfall available. This tells us that these drastic climate changes could cause flooding and droughts at different times and different places.

I agree that climate change negatively affects our water cycle and that we need to closely watch what we are putting out in our atmosphere that is harming the ozone layer that is protecting us from these types of problems. I think it's really interesting that these climate changes are what causes our floods and droughts to be at random. The government should find and label what products affect the ozone layer and let the public know what is going on and that we should stop buying those products because of the potential risks. I also think they should take count on the amount of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere and try to come up with a system to better help this problem. This is relevant to our unit because it talks about the water cycle and gases affecting it.

Savana Mata

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Water/page3.php

# data[].attributes.body
In the article, Scientists Revive Extinct Zebra Species, by Mary Nichols, she writes about how scientists revived a rare species of Zebra called Quaggas. This species is very similar to the zebra, the major identifiable trait being the dimmed stripes on the hind legs. In 1883 the Quagga population diminished, the last known location was a zoo in Amsterdam. Reinhold Rau from the University of Cape Town founded the Quagga project in 1987. His plan was to bring back the Quagga population through a process of first finding zebras with fewer black and white stripes, and then selectively breeding them to produce offspring with markings like that of the quagga. Though the 30 year process, researchers now believe that they have selectively bred animals with all the same characteristics as the extinct quagga. Nichols shows that it is possible to revive an extinct species not just through the complex process of embryo transfers, but thought the rather simple process of selective breeding.

I agree with Nichols points on how we can revive a species without creating them in a lab. I found it was very interesting on how the Quagga was genetically identical to the zebra, after they tested a piece of skin from the original extinct species. This revival of the Quagga shows others that it is possible for other species to come back from extinction.

Jared McMullen

# data[].attributes.headline
Scientists Extract CO2 From Thin Air and Turn it to Fuel

# data[].attributes.subject
Scientists Extract CO2 From Thin Air and Turn it to Fuel

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/

Researchers from USC and a small energy company in Canada have found a way to extract CO2 from the air and turn it into usable fuel. The USC scientists convert CO2 (which is plentiful abound in the LA area) into methanol by filtering CO2 through concentrated nitrogen, carbon, and hydrogen. This process isn't new, but they've found a way to conduct the process at a much lower temperature, which opens up the possibility of industrialization. Meanwhile in Canada, Carbon Engineering is extracting CO2 from the air and converting it into burnable (but very low-emission) C02 gas by filtering it through potassium hydroxide. If industrialized, this process could remove 1,000,000 tons of C02 each year from the air, which would greatly benefit the environment, and balance out the carbon cycle.

While limited in its usefulness thus far, these innovations could prove extremely beneficial to our environment, and further push the world towards sustainable energy sources. It would also help control our problem of overproduction of C02. While this is not the solution to all of our problems, I am interested to see what scientists do with this new technology in the years to come.

Stone Roshell

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.npr.org/2014/02/22/280750148/closing-americas-largest-landfill-without-taking-out-the-trash
http://www.npr.org/2014/02/22/280750148/closing-americas-largest-landfill-without-taking-out-the-trash
In the article Closing America's Largest Landfill, Without Taking Out The Trash, by Liyna Anwar, it says that the largest landfill, east of downtown Los Angeles, is underway of being closed. The Puente Hills Landfill has collected trash from all over the Los Angeles county and has been the go to respository for almost all of Los Angeles' trash. Having been open for more than 50 years, the landfill has grown over 500 ft in height. After the landfill has been covered by 5 feet of soil, they plan to turn the landfill into a park. The average American produces 7 pounds of waste each day, that if 50% more trash produced by an American in 1960. Trash is actually America's biggest export by volume. The trash is that is being bought from America, is being bought by countries that make things, like mostly China.

I agree with them on saying that they should turn the Puente Hills Landfill into a park afterward because you aren't wasting space and because even after all the trash that has been put there, something beautiful like a park can come out of it. I think it is interesting that they are actually closing the largest landfill, where is the Los Angeles county going to put all of their trash now? People after given this information might want to stop making as much wast because they see that the largest landfill has been filled up and they hopefully think that making less waste will cause landfills to have a longer lifetime.

By Zack Werner

# data[].attributes.headline
Governor Declares Emergency Over Los Angles Gas Leak

# data[].attributes.subject
Governor Declares Emergency Over Los Angles Gas Leak

# data[].attributes.body
In the Porter Ranch neighborhood, in the suburbs of Los Angles, mass amounts of natural gasses have been spilling into the atmosphere. Many residents have relocated elsewhere for the time being because of the harmful gasses. The leak is being compared to the BP oil spill in damages. People have been trying to cap the leak with cement and other methods, but all have been of no success. Many residents of the suburb are threatening suing  the California Gas Company.

I think that California Gas Company should've run more test on their capped oil wells to make sure that they would not burst. I wonder what effect the leak had on the atmosphere around the area, because there was such a concentrated, steady flow of methane and other gasses being released.

By Owen Thames

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/07/us/california-governor-declares-emergency-over-los-angeles-gas-leak.html?_r=0

# data[].attributes.headline
Carbon dioxide stored underground can find multiple ways to escape

# data[].attributes.subject
Carbon dioxide stored underground can find multiple ways to escape

# data[].attributes.body
There are many reasons for which carbon dioxide is stored unground. Previously it was believed that there were a finite number of ways that CO2 could be released from the ground after being deposited into the soil, but this has recently been disproved. A group of researchers from Pennsylvania State University discovered that it was being released through porous rocks such as limestone and sandstone. The researchers chose to study these two rocks because they have drastically different chemical structures. Their primary concern when conducting experiments was to observe how the CO2 escapes from the type different types of sediment. Although researchers were previously aware of the release of CO2 upwards, they are now concerned about the threat of groundwater and ocean contamination. This a concern in the groundwater because it is a direct resource for many populations. When there is an imbalance in carbon dioxide input in the ocean the water becomes increasingly acidic, this is detrimental to the health of a mass amount of marine wildlife.

I agree with the author because of his seemingly urgent tone within his article. The imbalance of our carbon emissions are far beyond what is sustainable and we must recognize that but it is also important to be aware of natural disturbances.  This is an incredibly important matter in society today and the governments of the world need to make a vast improvement in their involvement in limiting carbon emissions. I found this article to be incredibly interesting because of the fresh perspective that it brought to the subject. I also though it was intriguing that there is a great deal of carbon dioxide released from cement in old oil wells bringing to light the matter of how we dispose of unused structures. The most alarming thing I learned from this article was that it can also lead to the contamination and acidification of our groundwater because this possibility has the most significant affect upon us as humans. Overall I thought the research done in this article was necessary in gaining a better understanding of the affect that we have on our environment and the carbon cycle.

By Daniel Solomon

http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/49362

# data[].attributes.body
In the article from the University of British Columbia, about 5.5 million people die prematurely due to " household and outdoor pollution"  every year. More than half of the deaths are within the countries of China and India. "Air pollution is the fourth highest risk factor for death globally and by far the leading environmental risk factor for disease," states Michael Brauer a professor from the University of British Columbia. Most of the air pollution comes from power plants, industrial manufacturing, vehicle exhaust and burning coal and wood, as tiny particles are sent out into the atmosphere potentially harming a person's life. Currently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science has had meetings mentioning pollution. They have calculated the amount of impact in the two specific countries stating,"  the two countries account for 55 per cent of the deaths caused by air pollution worldwide, about 1.6 million people died of air pollution in China and 1.4 million died in India in 2013." The best way to decrease air pollution is by reducing the amount of pollution sent up in the air, by deciding to ride the community bus, or decrease  the amount of paper, plastic or wood purchased.  After reading the article, I agree that since these two countires have a large population, factories, and poverty it makes sense as to why they majorly contribute to the world being over polluted. What I found interesting was that America wasn't one of the two countries largely affecting the global air pollution. Because we do have many factories, large population, poverty in some areas, and cars transporting us from place to place.

I believe the AAAS should begin  regulating the amount of pollution releasded into the atmosphere by creating more strict laws and consequences to the countries that are killing our biosphere. Government should also begin restricting certain products and goods if they violate the regulations, because in the end we only have one earth and we can always have many other products made daily. we cant renew our earth just like we renew or throw away our purchased items.

by Alania Salazar

http://www.enn.com/pollution/article/49364

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/el-nino-linked-drought-ethiopia-s-worst-50-years-n520686

The article, "El Nino Linked Drought is Ethiopia's Worst in 50 Years" discusses how Ethiopia is currently in the middle of the worst drought in 50 years and its all because of El Nino. El NIno is the warming phase of a phenomenon caused by a band of warm water that develops in the Pacific and affects the area around it. What causes the change in water temperature is still being studied. The change in water temperature affects the temperature around it through the water cycle and causes a lack of precipitation. This is very bad because Ethiopia is suffering from very harsh consequences and many crops and people are dying.

I completely agree that this  was caused by El Nino and it is a matter that should be addressed. I found that learning about El Nino was very interesting because I have heard of it before but never knew exactly what it was. The people and government should work together to send aid to the people of Ethiopia as they are already doing. This is very important to address as many people are at risk of being affected.

By Zach Winner

# data[].attributes.headline
Window To Reduce Carbon Is Small, Scientists Say

# data[].attributes.subject
Window To Reduce Carbon Is Small, Scientists Say

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160211143109.htm

This article discusses the issue of global warming and how it's effects may not be very visible now but they will only increase with time and will not cease for thousands of generations.  The main argument of this article was that sea levels will rise and disrupt many people's living arrangement all over the world.  For example, a rise of just one meter, with an estimated 400-500 thousand kilometers of coast results in a huge amount of lost land.  In addition this article brings to mind the fact that global warming's effects will only get worse with time.  In the last 50 years humans have changed the future of this planet for thousands of years to come and if we don't change direction it will become even more changed, perhaps reaching a tipping point of a near unlivable planet.

I think you can't really disagree with the fact that global warming is real and that we need to change our carbon emissions or face consequences for thousands of years to come.  On that note, I find it really interesting to read about how fragile the global ecosystem is and how such a small change like 1 degree in average global temperature can cause a huge difference.  I think governments need to mandate more restrictions to get on the zero/negative carbon emission track.  Changes must happen globally but global change must start at a local level or it will not succeed.

-Jerry Swider

# data[].attributes.headline
What Antonin Scalia's death means for Obama's climate plans

# data[].attributes.subject
What Antonin Scalia's death means for Obama's climate plans

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/14/10989694/scalia-obama-climate-plan

This article discusses what Supreme Court judge, Antonin Scalia's death means for the future of Obama's Clean Power Plan. Last Thursday the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to postpone the implementation of the Clean Power Plan, a rule that cuts carbon-dioxide emissions from the electricity sector. The 5 conservative judges, including Scalia struck it down. The Clean Power Plan will now go back to the DC Circuit Court, which will review it, and most likely pass it. This decision will most likely be made by fall. The case will then be looked at by the Supreme Court, who will almost surely accept it. They will be in a very different position as last time. It is likely that Obama will find a liberal replacement for Scalia before he is out of office. This judge will want the Clean Power Plan rule to be upheld and so probably will the 4 other liberal judges. It will be interesting to see if this all plays out before a new president is elected.

I found this article very interesting, because it is such a new situation that we could not have seen coming. I personally am very much in favor of the Clean Power Plan. It could be very helpful for air-pollution prevention and also raise awareness to how big a problem our air cleanliness is.

Nina Schaeffer

# data[].attributes.headline
Effects of Poor Waste Disposal in Nigeria

# data[].attributes.subject
Effects of Poor Waste Disposal in Nigeria

# data[].attributes.body
The article describes the situation in the African country of Nigeria where many people, who don't have access to nearby or affordable disposal centers, are piling up their trash and then burning it on their property. The writer describes the many harmful effects this practice has on the environment and the health of those nearby. Some of these problems include releasing cancerous gases into the air and contributing to global warming. The cancerous gases, if they don't end up in human lungs, will eventually get stuck to plants and then will eventually be consumed by humans in one way or another. The author suggests that a way to combat this problem is to ban the practice and enforce strict rules about burning garbage. He also suggests that if they need to burn trash then they should do it in waste-to-energy incinerators like Sweden does, that way they can at least get something out of burning the trash in a safer way. But, he says, the best way to reduce the problem is to apply the 4 R's: refuse. reduce, reuse. recycle. He say Nigeria should do this because they committed to a UN climate agreement to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 20%.

I agree with the author that this is a serious problem but I think his proposed solutions are too simplistic and unrealistic. Nigeria isn't comparable to Sweden, the country is very, very poor and underdeveloped and faces a myriad of other serious problems (like ISIS owning half the country) so they aren't developed enough or have enough resources to institute the kind of policies and regulations he's suggesting. A better, more long-term, solution would be for Nigeria to focus on sustainable development so it can one day get the infrastructure to begin to make these kinds of changes.

Ian Baucke

# data[].attributes.headline
Santa Barbara Country Eyes $50 Million Trash-to-Energy Project for Taigas Landfill

# data[].attributes.subject
Santa Barbara Country Eyes $50 Million Trash-to-Energy Project for Taigas Landfill

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.noozhawk.com/article/santa_barbara_county_eyes_50_million_trash_to_energy_project_20140816

In the article on Noozhawk "Santa Barbara County Eyes $50 Million Trash-to-Energy Project for Tajiguas Landfill" Joshua Molina explains a trash to energy project that would double the life of Tajiguas Landfill and redefine waste management. The project would sort organic and recyclable waste and use the organic waste to power onsite generators and the city grid with methane gas power. First District county supervisor Salud Carbajal called it a "regional solution to our solid waste problem." A large amount of waste disposed of in Santa Barbara is recyclable or organic. This project will be most helpful in removing what can be recycled and using organic material to create energy. The remaining waste will be buried, but it will be greatly reduced. At it's current rate, the landfill would be filled by 2026, but this new project may extend its life until 2038. The county diverts about 70% of trash from the landfill to be recycled or composted, but still buries 200,000 a year. This number could be reduced to 100,000 with the new project.

I agree with this new plan for the landfill. It would extend the life of the landfill and avoidance of starting a new landfill, while simultaneously creating power for the city. The county should approve this project to help the environment and people of Santa Barbara and the Gaviota Coast.

Zac Pfeifer

# data[].attributes.body
Find one article (online or print source) that connects to one or more concepts learned in our first 2 Units. Post the link to online articles or take a picture of the article (click the + sign). Write a brief summary of the article stating the main claims and the evidence that is used to support them. At the end, give your personal reflection--do you agree or disagree? what did you find interesting/relevant? what do you think people/government should do given this information? etc.