Post by Sunday at midnight
Since Blogger.com has stopped allowing unlimited comment space, change one thing about your blog post: instead of pasting your article after your own comments, just past a small portion (if possible) and a link now. Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1. Martin Weiser
ReplyDelete2. Devil Facial Tumor Disease is threatening the population of Tasmanian Devils
3. With the general decline of Tasmanian devils in population of 60% in the last ten years an infectious disease leading to cancer is treating this species even more.
Because Tasmanian devils are genetically so close the cancer cells are said to be transmittable to another animal just by biting without getting rejected by the immune system.
Something I thought is impossible...
"Professor McCallum said that predicting the extinction of a species is difficult, but 'if things go the way they are, we may see extinction in the next 20-40 years in the wild"
------------------------
http://ecoworldly.com/2009/05/22/gruesome-facial-tumor-disease-threatens-taz-with-extinction/
http://tassiedevil.com.au/disease.html
1. Mikah Lee
ReplyDelete2. Great, more pollution
3. A US gov't report stated that CO2 levels will be increasing by 40% percent by 2030 if we don't do anything about our CO2 emission today. Apparently energy consumption is expected to grow by 44% if things keep going as they are, and developing countries like China and India will be the main 'causes'.
The report isn't all too positive about alternate energy sources, saying that "overall growth in demand will require continued reliance on fossil fuels, especially oil and coal".
Of course, this is only in the case that government regulations are not changed in favor of a better future. This report is not a death sentence, but more of a potential death sentence that can be avoided.
This is all old news to us, we already know that we ought to shift from our dependence on oil and reduce CO2 emissions, blah blah blah. But here are some concrete numbers on what will happen if we don't put our words into action soon.
---------------------------------------
U.S.: Carbon pollution to grow by 40 percent
U.S. agency says much of the rise expected to come from China, India
updated 11:32 a.m. ET May 27, 2009
WASHINGTON - The amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide seeping into the atmosphere will increase by nearly 40 percent worldwide by 2030 if ways are not found to require mandatory emission reductions, a U.S. government report said Wednesday.
The Energy Information Administration said world energy consumption is expected to grow by 44 percent over the next two decades as the global economy recovers and continues to expand. The biggest increases in energy use will come from economically developing countries such as China and India.
Reducing emissions
Congress is considering legislation that would reduce greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century. President Barack Obama has called for mandatory limits on greenhouse gases. An international conference is scheduled for December to try to work out a treaty requiring such emission reductions.
-------------
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30961637/
1. Dakyung Lee
ReplyDelete2. Safer BPA-free baby products
3. Chicago announced itself the first city in the U.S to ban the sale of baby products that are made from the chemical BPA. Past studies have shown that BPA is harmful and has been tied to increased risk for cancer and puberty acceleration. Despite this fact, F.D.A has reviewed BPA to be safe. In addition, the American Chemistry Council and other industries have lobbied against any ban on BPA, saying there is little evidence of harm in this chemical. In promoting the safety of children, Chicago’s retailers have began to sell new BPA-free products and the city is working to encourage the public to replace these new baby bottles and sippy cups with the old ones that contain BPA.
The thing that interested me about this article was the fact that F.D.A has reviewed BPA to be safe. While I can understand why industries are trying to keep products containing BPA for profit reasons, even though it may not be morally right, F.D.A’s role in reviewing safety of BPA should undoubtedly be questioned. Because F.D.A is responsible for regulating and supervising the safety of foods, cosmetics, drugs, vaccines, medical devices and etc, we all have the hope that we can trust F.D.A approved products when we purchase something. However, it seems that even F.D.A approved products should be questioned and re-examined. Because F.D.A’s powers and decisions are monitored by governmental and non-governmental organizations, I realized that F.D.A approved products may not be completely credible. This article once again showed that even what we like to believe as a credible and secure source may have its setbacks and flaws.
-------------
CHICAGO — The City Council on Wednesday unanimously adopted a measure making Chicago the nation’s first city to ban the sale of baby bottles and sippy cups manufactured with a chemical that some studies have linked to disease.
----
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14plastic.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
1. Yoon Hye Sung
ReplyDelete2. Microphones find whales in unusual spot
Endangered North Atlantic rights detected near Greenland
3. I am always really interested in animals.
So I often try to find some articles about animals.
And I found out many titles about whales. But all the articles were not good news and they were saying about whales in danger of deaths.
I saw some articles. And they said that lots of whales are dying or losing their ways. So they are off their usual routes. Why do these situations happen?
Why are whales often in trouble?
I guess these may be related to the environmental problems. Although the cause of these problems are not discovered exactly yet, all the troubles in the environment are probably because of human-beings. We have to save and protect animals. We are living together in the same nature!
-----------------------------
A group of endangered North Atlantic right whales has been identified near Greenland in an area where the species was thought to be extinct, using a system of underwater microphones.
The discovery of at least three individual whales, presented this week at a meeting of the Acoustical Society of America in Portland, Ore., is particularly important, researchers say, because it is in an area that may be opened to shipping if the melting of polar ice continues, as expected.
Right whales were hunted for their blubber and baleen until a world-wide ban on right whale fishing was put into place in 1937. Scientists estimate there are fewer than 350 of these whales left in the oceans, according to the New England Aquarium. Right whale deaths are largely attributed to ship collisions in the busy waterways of the eastern United States. Over the last decade, ship collisions have been responsible for about 40 percent of all known North Atlantic right whale deaths.
To locate the new group of whales, a team of scientists from Oregon State University and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) used a system of hydrophones that can record sounds from hundreds of miles away.
"The technology has enabled us to identify an important unstudied habitat for endangered right whales and raises the possibility that — contrary to general belief — a remnant of a central or eastern Atlantic stock of right whales still exists and might be viable," said OSU's David Mellinger, chief scientist of the project.
.......
----------------
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30888513/
1.Lee, Soo- Bin
ReplyDelete2. U.S. college students looking for summer internship in nature: NYT
3. I was a little bit shocked because the U.S. students work in farm for intership. There are thousands kinds of things to do on vacation. And such college students like me are going to the farm. It is hard to do by myself but I personally think, it is a good idea. Not only students can have social life together but also they can feel the nature and learn a lot of things from it.
In Korea there is a simmilar one but not as an intership. We commonly go to the farm for about 6 to 10 days. The host organization is mainly universities or clubs. The members go there because they want to learn about the agriculture. But actually the main reason must be to spend time with the memebr so that they can be closer to each other.(I didn't attend any of farm experiencing program, so I just guess it)
Also I heard in Ewha, you can get a chance to have yout own small own garden where you can grow something. Also you can have yout own tree to care. When I heard about it in chapel, I just thought I was nothing for me. But now I think it is one of the way to be little bit more nature-friendly. My mom and dad started to grow few plants in veranda. After trial and error they regard caring as one part of their life and stress that I should water when the thought come into my mind. That's because it makes my mind peacefully. But I never did.
well.... I'll try~ tomorrow^^;;;
---------------------
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/NEWKHSITE/data/html_dir/2009/05/28/200905280099.asp
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Kyuhee Shim
ReplyDelete2. The truth behind blockbuster drugs
3.
Recently we have been discussing the complex political and social processes in which the commodities existing in our market are pre-selected for the mass public to use. I thought this was an interesting article that shed some light on the competition and promotion of pharmaceutical drugs. According to the article, doctors and patients alike are easily convinced that new blockbuster drugs are more effective than drugs that were released earlier in the market.
This would not be a problem if the new drugs were a development; however the article states that some new so called drugs are only slightly modified to fit a new package and price tag. Much like many other commodities in our environment, it is difficult for patients to assess psychotropic drugs on their own. Mostly, they take the drugs offered by their physician. And how do the physicians know which drugs are best?
The article doesn’t go as far as to explain that, but it does state that physicians with ties to the ‘industry’ have a higher tendency to prescribe brand-name drugs over its generic version. When I read this I remembered how dentists were easily persuaded by mailed documents saying that fluoride had effects of strengthening children’s teeth even thought there was no medical basis. Of course that was an extreme case, but it made me think how even professionals rely on some external source of information (which they may believe to be trustworthy).
Another influencing factor is said to be the aggressive advertising campaigns by major drug companies, leading consumers to believe they are getting a better drug than before. Personally when I see a drug being advertised by a large corporation, for example Je Il Pharmaceuticals in Korea, I tend to be less aware that the ad is part of a marketing scheme aiming to increase profits. Because they tend to be more informative in nature and the drugs are represented and vouched by spokespersons who are doctors and professionals, it feels as though I am being advised by my physician rather being allured to buy a product. Moreover the reputations of major drug corporations are usually quite positive in my mind. They feel like institutions with strong R&D divisions producing drugs that I can trust.
Interestingly, the food and drug administration only requires a new drug outperform a placebo for it to be qualified for the market. I don’t know whether this is true for Korea as well, but it was still a surprise for me who thought drugs had to pass rigorous trials in order to enter the consumer market. As it turns out the government not contributing much in helping consumers and doctors wisely choose from the multitude of drugs forced onto them every season.
4.---------------------------------------------------
5.
New Drugs Have Allure, Not Track Record
By RICHARD A. FRIEDMAN, M.D.
7. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/health/19mind.html
1. Daniel Cheng
ReplyDelete2. Research reveals Pacific Ocean threats and solutions
3. We talked about the Pacific Gyre some time ago in class. I find this article interesting because in a lot of ways it is similar the film we saw. Most people don't know about the trash that lies within the Pacific Gyre. The main point of the article is that currently, there is insufficient information about what is going on in the Pacific (mainly specifics). Without this knowledge, the detrimental actions that humans are doing to the water may go unchecked, which will lead to severe consequences.
I find this fascinating, because it doesn't occur to me to think that scientists are still left with inadequate knowledge of what is going on in the oceans. I always thought that it was all figured out, it was a just a matter of implementing it. The consequences of damaging our ocean's ecology is severe.
------------------------
he Pacific Ocean, occupying a third of the planet's area, faces threats that will render some coastal areas uninhabitable.
Pollution such as sewage, runoff from land and toxic waste; habitat destruction; over-fishing; and climate change leading to sea level rise, ocean acidification and warming will all interact to damage the ocean's ecology and coastal economies.
These are among the findings of 'Pacific Ocean Synthesis', a report by the US-based Center for Ocean Solutions (COS) that reviewed more than 3,400 scientific articles and reports from 50 countries in the Pacific basin.
COS presented the report at the World Ocean Conference in Manado, Indonesia, this month (11—15 May).
The study divided the Pacific Ocean into seven regions, revealing threats and potential solutions for each.
Widely applicable solutions include capacity building in ocean management, efforts to adapt to climate change and reduce overfishing, and using information technologies to monitor and share information, says Noah Idechong, a COS researcher from the Pacific Island of Palau. All should be high priority, he adds.
"Synthesising information gives us a good idea of what is happening [in the Pacific Ocean]. I think one of the most important findings is that so much [research] has been done," he says.
The report also summarises various gaps in research, such as insufficient information about different pollution effects, the need for standardised biodiversity and water quality monitoring and poor information about the socioeconomic effects of sea surface temperature rises.
ADVERTISEMENT
The capacity to analyse and communicate information, and to make use of monitoring systems to network and share solutions, is one of the gaps that nations should work on, says Idechong.
Meg Caldwell, COS executive director, told SciDev.Net the report is an important tool for policymakers. "This [report] represents a vast information resource about what is occurring in the individual countries," she says.
Hundreds of scientists have already signed a consensus statement, 'Ecosystems and people of the Pacific Ocean — Threats and opportunities for action'.
It warns that, left unchecked, the threats could have "devastating consequences for coastal economies, food supplies, public health and political stability".
-------------------
http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/39989
1. Sohyun Park
ReplyDelete2. Newlyweds turn back clock on deforestation
3. I found an interesting article about planting trees in Garut, Indonesia. The government makes the newly married couples plant 10 trees and if they divorce they must plant 50 more trees. I thought this was a unique way of making people plant more trees. And I wondered if it would work in Korea.
---------------------------------------
On a hot and sticky morning in a village near Garut, 26-year-old Cucu carries a sapling to give to his bride. The young tree is not exactly a unique gift; it's part of a government initiative to bring back the Garut province's devastated forests.
Newly married couples must plant 10 trees under the program. If they divorce, they must plant 50 others.
-------------
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/05/05/indonesia.wedding.trees/index.html
1. Dakyung Lee
ReplyDelete2. Brazilian beef industry’s contribution to deforestation
3. While we may never consider boots and training shoes as contributors to deforestation, this article shows that things that are commonly found in our own houses play a critical role in the Amazon deforestation. The article focused on Brazil’s continuing actions to expand its cattle industry and how this leads to deforestation and climate change. Cattle industry requires cutting down trees in the Amazon to create large ranches. As world’s largest beef exporter, one third of Brazil’s cattle industry takes place in the Amazon where there are loose laws and cheap land. Having this awareness, Greenpeace is making efforts to communicate with President Lula de Silva, of Brazil, to stop deforestation in the Amazon rainforest.
This article was particularly interesting because I read another article on deforestation this week called “Rainforest Saver”. These two articles made me realize that there are many factors that lead to deforestation and that there needs to be stricter regulations and laws to protect the rainforests. While the rainforests are being over-exploited for economic purposes, people need to know that their selfish desires for profit are causing many environmental and long-run economic threats. On a personal level, reading these two articles made me contemplate on what we, as individuals, can do to help stop the deforestation problems. Because big companies like Adidas, BMW, IKEA and Kraft are buying products from suppliers in Brazil, it seems like they need to find alternative suppliers. However, the question that lingers is whether these big corporations are willing to take such actions in order to save the forests. While I hope these companies consider making changes to alleviate the current deforestation situation and what may worsen in the future if nothing gets done, I am not completely convinced that we are going to see immediate responses from them any time soon.
------------------
illegal deforestation and in some cases slavery, via giant processing facilities to the supply chains of some of the best known global brands. Shoe companies like Adidas, Reebok, Nike, Timberland and even Clarks are sourcing a significant proportion of their leather from the Amazon - and its big business.
But it's not only shoes. Products as diverse as handbags and ready meals, and companies as big as Tesco, BMW, IKEA and Kraft also rely on Amazon leather. Practically all Western world consumers have some by-product of Amazon destruction in our homes somewhere, whether we like it or not. Effectively, these brands are driving this destruction by buying beef and leather products from unscrupulous suppliers in Brazil points out the Greenpeace report.
----
http://en.mercopress.com/2009/06/01/brazilian-beef-industry-blamed-for-amazon-deforestation