Coast Pipelines Face Damage as Gulf Oil Eats Marshes?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100525-gulf-oil-spill-pipelines-science-environment/




Straight lines of vegetation trace the path of a pipeline beneath the Gulf of Mexico (file photo).





The oil from the oil spill has now affected the marshes, and has damaged the pipelines beneath the surface. This disaster has been caused by the gulf oil spill. The oil is now affecting organisms living in these marshes as well as hurting the infrastructure of the oil industry. If this oil kills off all the plants in the marsh it will become open water witch can hurt the organisms and the oil industry, by making the coastal infrastructure susceptible to ships strikes, storms, and corrosive salt water. The Energy loss and marsh land loss are making this oil spill an even bigger problem than it already was. Natural gas pipelines and onshore oil travel around 26,420 miles through coastal countries. These pipelines were built in this vulnerable spot long ago because many people assumed that they would not be in open water, because they thought that these marsh environments were more stable than they really are.


Opinion: I was shocked when I read this article. I thought that I knew all of the outcomes of the BP oil spill. This problem that has also occurred because of the oil spill can cost oil companies a fortune on top of what they already have to pay to fix the problem of the oil leak. So many organisms from so many different species died from the oil leak. Now may more are dieing from the loss of marshes. I hope that we can fix this problem. Unfortunately I can think of much we can do to fix it. However I do think we should take this occurence into consideration if they build another oil pipeline, and dont build them in or near a marsh, swamp, or any other wetland.


Questions:
1. Can you think of anything that we can do to fix this problem in the coastal marshes? What are they?

2. What other effects has the oil spill had that most people do not know about?

3. What other things do you think will hapen because of the loss of marshes besides the loss of organisms and money?

Water Scarcity Affects Migratory Birds in Iraq

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/05/water-scarcity-threatens-migratory-birds-in-iraq.php?campaign=th_rss

Water Scarcity Affects Migratory Birds in Iraq

by:David DeFranza

Iraq Marsh

Migratory birds of Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East use marshes and wetlands in Iraq as critical roosting areas. These areas are in great danger of drying out and are very vulnerable because the country is having trouble encouraging development and preserving security. The scarcity of water in Iraq was kicked into high gear when Saddam Hussein had built a series of dams and diversion systems to drain 90 percent of the water in an area that used to be the world’s third largest wetland. These structures have now been removed, but the areas are still of great danger of drying out. The area is now being protected by new national park designations. However, the land is very vulnerable to upstream construction that Iraq is not the only one obligated to protect this area.

This is horrible! The migratory birds could go extinct because of this water scarcity! What was Saddam Hussein thinking? Why would anyone create dams to drain 90 percent of the water in a certain area! That could do horrible things to that area. This could change some of the most beautiful places to a dried up piece of land that no one cares about anymore.

What do you think will happen to migratory birds if this problem is not resolved?

Who would be responsible in fixing this problem?

Why are these areas so vital in the survival of migratory birds?

What's up?

So what's happening with the posting stuff? Was Annemarie supposed to post yesterday or not? I'll do it if you want me to, I just don't know what's going on!!!

In Yemen, Water Grows Scarcer

By: John Collins Rudolf

Posted October 25th, 2010

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/25/in-yemen-water-grows-scarcer/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Yemen has recently been having increasingly sharp water shortages. This could cost many people their jobs, 750,000 jobs to be exact. It will also decrease peoples incomes by 25% in the next 10 years. Yemen, a Middle Eastern Nation, is already very troubled and they don't need a problem like this too. This city could run out of water by 2025 and then what happens to them? Yemen relies mostly on groundwater and rainfall for its water supply. Also another city named Sana is 100 miles inland of Yemen and at about 7,400 feet elevation and is also very vulnerable to water shortages in a few years. They are expecting many of the wells to dry up very soon and they are either going to have to find a new water source, or keep drilling deeper.

I think that it is very bad that Yemen is almost out of water, and that Sana will be running out shortly. These people are going to need some help because it is already a very poor city and they will not be able to afford to keep drilling deeper or finding a new water source considering it may be very expensive. I know that if i were in Yemen right now, i would want others to come and help us out so that we could have enough water and have deeper wells. If no ones helps Yemen then i think they may have to find a new place to live since they cant afford drilling deeper.

Questions:

Is it possible for them to keep drilling, and drilling, and drilling, and just not hit any water at all?

What happens when they do run out of water, will there be another source they can get water from?

When do you think that this problem will start hitting other cities, besides just Yemen and Sana?

Hey guys....We didn't plan who was going to blog on which day. I think we should continue with the schedule that we had last time...let me know otherwise if we are not..because someone needs to blog tonight

Night-Time Lights Bring Insects, Disease

No Author Available
October 14, 2010
Click on Picture for Article Link!!


Bugs? Lights? Disease? How is this all supposed to relate? Well, it all relates quite perfectly! You see, bugs are attracted to nighttime lights because they are used to using the light from the moon and the stars to guide them. With all this artificial light around them during the time where barely any light should be reaching their eyes, they go nutzo! They turn into these evil, human blood-sucking creatures, like teeny tiny vampires! Only kidding, but bugs are attracted to artificial lights, and these bugs carry disease. Now, what do artificial lights allow humans to do? Stay out after dark! With all the big cities in the word, comes big (and many) lights. With all this entertainment and extra time in the twenty-four hour day, humans are out and about more and more exposed to these parasitic insects, are being bit more and more, and these insects are passing their germs, viruses, parasites, bacteria-whatever it is that they carry, into, and onto the human they bite. For example, say you just came out of a restaurant in New York, New York and you are walking two blocks in the summer heat to reach your car. Suddenly, you feel this sting on the back of your neck, swat at is, the sting goes away, and you arrive home safely. A week or two later, you start to get some symptoms and go to the doctors office. You are diagnosed with malaria. Little did you know that when you were walking to your car from the restaurant and felt a sting, you were bitten by a malaria infected mosquito. So, in conclusion, when there are nightlights, there are people. Also where there are night lights, there are bugs because bugs are attracted to the light. When there are night lights there are people and bugs; when there are people and bugs, there is a greater chance of disease being transmitted through insects.

In my opinion, this is a very interesting subject. It's quite neat how they can predict that more people are getting disease around bright lights because bugs are around bright lights, too. Even so, this doesn't have as much effect on them because they have great medical care and can, in most cases, just get some medicine and be all better. This observation about bugs and lights can even be simulated in your own home, by watching the lights outside your home, and seeing all the bugs that are attracted to those lights. This would probably work best in the summer, though, just because most bugs thrive better during warmer weather.

Here are a few questions for you to think about... or answer if you wish:

1) Should people take precautions when they are outdoors around lots of night time lights, or should they just go into the don't worry, be happy mode?

2)If someone were to take precautions, why should they, when they could just go and get some medicine at the doctors office if they were to get sick?

3)What is the point of this article? Why is there just this random article about bugs, lights, and humans and how people can get sick anywhere if they are out at night with a light on?

Dry Regions Becoming Drier: Ocean Salinities Show an Intensified Water Cycle

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100416094050.htm
By ScienceDaily with materials from CSIRO Australia
Written on April 18, 2010

This article's purpose is to show that the global water cycle has accellerated, or gotten faster. The people who did this research believe that because the water is warmer from global warming, the water is evaporated more quickly, and therefore can be deposited as precipitation in earlier than it used to be. They know that the water is being evaporated more quickly because the salinity is higher. This information is useful in validating ideas about global climate change. Simulations were apparently done years ago about global climate change affecting ocean salinity that match what has been found by the CSIRO. Basically, they are saying that because the earth is warmer, ocean water is being evaporated more quickly and deposited in other places more quickly. In other words, the water cycle is happening faster than it used to. This also means that areas that were already pretty wet are now even wetter, and areas that were pretty dry and evaporation happened quickly are now even drier!

Reading this article gave me a different look on global warming. It didn't say that global warming is bad and we need to stop it now, or that global warming is just the way the earth works. It just said that global warming speeds up the water cycle. I found it interesting that global warming can affect that as well, but I guess when you really think about it you can see how this can happen. It does make sense.

1) Will a faster water cycle cause any environmental concerns? What are they?

2) Could this be a way that global warming is good for the environment? How so?

3) Do you think that the water cycle will continue to accelerate, or will it slow down again?

Bald eagle soaring 'success,' but at what cost?

By: Peggy Mihelich CNN
http://articles.cnn.com/2007-06-07/tech/bald.eagle.delisting_1_bald-eagle-golden-eagle-protection-act-edmund-contoski?_s=PM:TECH

Summery: The U.S. Government for over three decades to help the Bald and Golden eagle revover from habitat destruction, hunting, and food contamination, DDT. The government was going to take these eagles off the threatened list, because their population is back up and still growing. However, their habitat was protected if they were considered threatened. If they were taken off the list, develpers would move back into thier habitat and make the eagles leave. This would cause a reduction in their numbers, and they could fall back into the threatened list. Many of them live near rivers. If their protection was gone, the eagles would be under a huge threat. The Government is going to put an act in place that will prohibit people from pursuit, shooting, shooting at, poisoning, wounding, killing, capturing, trapping, collecting, molesting and disturbing the eagles. The most common of these to occur in the past was shooting and hunting. Even with this act, Bald and Golden eagle's population could reduce, and they could fall back into the threatened category.

Opinion: I think what the government is doing is great. I think that this act for preventing the eagles ffrom being hunted, captured, ect, will have a tremendous impact on the eagles population. It will defenitely help prevent them from falling back into the threatened category, although I do not think it will be enough. I think their species should continue to be protected, until their population is thriving. In fact I believe that all species that have a decresing number in their population should have the same act.

Questions:
1. Do you think that this act could work to prevent eagles from going back to threatened? Why or Why not?

2. What other things should this act have to become more effective?

3. Do you think that taking the eagles off the threatened list is a good idea? Why or Why not?

Bird Declines Could Signal Coming Mass Extinctions

        

Bird Declines Could 

Signal Coming Mass Extinctions

 By: David DeFranza

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/10/bird-declines-could-signal-coming-mass-extinctions.php?campaign=th_rss

Cartoon showing biodiversity loss in birds.

The saying, “Every 20 minutes, we lose an animal specie,” isn’t accurate. It is difficult to collect the data prove that statement and to motivate people to take action. Researchers do, however, believe they can use an easily observed group of animals, birds, to predict ecosystem-wide rates of loss. Clive Hambler, professor at Oxford University’s Department of zoology and lead author of research, had said, “Until now, we had only crude estimates for very few types of organisms. Now we’ve got evidence that many groups of living things-lichens, bugs, moths, fish, plants, and so on- are going extinct at a very similar rate as birds.” Birds are a very diverse species; they occupy a wide range of habitats and fill multiple ecological niches. Also, they can adapt well to a loss of habitat. Researchers have also found a mores serious problem than was originally thought; more than 1,000 species were found to be very close to extinction. This study shows more evidence that a mass extinction may be on its way. This new discovery has given researchers a new way to easily predict the biodiversity loss in specific rejoins.

            I think that it is really interesting that scientists can collect data from only birds and predict the biodiversity loss of other species as well. The results they had found were terrible. A mass extinction would be terrible, and would impact the environment and the human species. I believe that scientists and people should take action to avoid this mass extinction.

            1.What can people do at home to help prevent this mass extinction?

            2.Would have ever thought that birds could help predict the biodiversity loss of other species? Explain.

            3.What would a mass extinction do to the environment? What would it impact? Explain.

The BP-Spill Baby-Turtle Brigade

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/magazine/03turtles-t.html?pagewanted=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Female sea turtles begin laying there hundred or more eggs, burying them into the sand of the beach in May. Then, the eggs incubate for 60 days. The hatchlings from this seasons first nest were going to be swimming into the Gulf of Mexico once the eggs hatched. This was only a few months after the explosion of the Deepwater explosion rig. In June, the Gulf was already heavily oiled and letting the baby turtles hatch there would just be a recipe for disaster. So the wildlife agencies came up with a plan to pack the sea turtle eggs layed on beaches in Alabama and Florida into styrofoam coolers and ship them to a climate-controlled warehouse that would keep them alive. After hatching, the baby turtles would then be released in to the oil-free Atlantic ocean. “We immediately knew it was more work than we could do on our own.” Luckily, there were many people out there who really loved turtles and were willing to help. They helped pack the turtles, relocate them and release them when it was time.

I think that it was really great that many people were willing to help out with the turtles and get them to safety. They should be considered heroes because without them, then the turtle population would have decreased since not all of the turtles would have been saved. But if it weren't for the whole oil spill in the first place, then none of this would have had to take place and the turtles would have been just fine. This shows that oil riggers either need to stop getting oil from near the ocean or they need to be a lot more careful so they can prevent something like this from ever happening again.

Do you think that BP will stop rigging near the ocean or keep on going?

What would have happened if the wildlife agencies hadn't came up with a plan to save the turtles?

Do you think something like this will happen again?

Will the turtles still be okay even though they are not near where they were suppose to be released if the oil spill had never happened?