Quantcast
Channel: Environment
Viewing all 2972 articles
Browse latest View live

Professor Invents The Best New Lightbulb In 30 Years

0
0

FIPEL

Lighting accounts for about 12 percent of total U.S. energy consumption

Part of the reason the figure is so high is that traditional incandescent bulbs (Edison's filament bulb) eat up a lot of power to produce light: 90 percent of the energy is wasted as heat. 

So far the main alternatives to the common bulb have been compact fluorescent lights, or CFLs, and light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, which can produce the same amount of light as traditional bulbs while using way less energy. 

Soon, a fourth lighting option will be thrown into the mix. It's called the FIPEL, which is short for field-induced polymer electroluminescent technology. 

"This is the first new light bulb in about thirty years," says Dr. David Carroll, a professor of physics at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, who developed the new light source.  

To understand how this technology functions, you can think of how a microwave works, Carroll explains.     

Take a potato, for example. When you place your potato in the microwave and press start, the device hits the potato with microwaves that induce what's known as a displacement current, meaning it makes the water molecules in the potato flip back and forth. This heats the potato up. What Carroll and his team have done is develop a special type of plastic that, when hit with an electric current, induces a displacement current in the same way. But in this case, it doesn't give off heat, it gives off light.

The new light source is made of several layers of very thin plastic. Each sheet is about 100,000 times thinner than the width of a human hair. The plastic is inserted between an aluminum electrode and a transparent conducting electrode. When a current is passed through the device, it stimulates the plastic to light up. 

Luckily for Carroll, FIPEL has entered the lighting technology ring at a time of unprecedented opportunity. The phaseout of traditional incandescent bulbs began to take effect at the start of the new year under the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act.  

As of Jan. 1, 2013, manufacturers can no longer sell 75-watt incandescents. The 40- and 60-watt incandescents will no longer be available starting Jan. 1, 2014.  

FIPEL technology

CFLs use about 75 percent less electricity than Edison's filament bulb to produce the same amount of light. LEDs use even less. This means to make the same light as a 100-watt incandescent, a compact fluorescent uses 23 watts and an LED uses 20. 

The FIPEL is slightly more efficient than a CFL bulb and on par with an LED, but comes with a few advantages over these other types of lights. CFLs and other fluorescent light bulbs contain a very small amount of mercury, which can be toxic if not disposed of properly. FIPELs do not use any caustic chemicals in manufacturing and can easily be recycled because they're made of plastic.

Some LEDs give off a blueish tint, which many people don't like to look at. FIPEL, on the other hand, can be made to have any tint, including the yellowish hue of the sun that our eyes have come to prefer, having evolved on Earth.  

"FIPEL can match the response of your eye more perfectly than any other lamp ever created," Carroll told Business Insider.

Although the new light source doesn't have the shape of a traditional light bulb — it's more a panel — it is moldable, so it can be customized to fit into conventional light sockets and work with many different types of lamp fixtures.   

The FIPEL light has a lifetime of between 25,000 and 50,000 hours, which is comparable to an LED.

Carroll notes one drawback to FIPEL.   

"From a pure physics point of view, the best efficiency that you could ever accomplish with this lamp is still going to be slightly lower than the best efficiency you could ever accomplish with an LED," says Carroll. Right now, LEDs do not perform at their theoretical best. But as both technologies mature, you can expect the LED to come out on top in terms of overall efficiency.  

The FIPEL technology is currently under an exclusive world-wide license by CeeLite Technologies. David Sutton, management consultant for CeeLite, said the first units for commercial use will be available by the end of 2013. The new bulb will cost less than LEDs and slightly more than CFLs. 

"In five years, instead of saying I've got to get a new bulb, you're going to be saying I've got to get a new FIPEL. I do believe that these are going to be ubiquitous," says Carroll.  

SEE ALSO: Roadmap To The Future

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »


Actually, That New Study Does NOT Prove That Genetically Modified Food Is Horrible For You

0
0

China farming corn

A paper released in December in the journal GM Crops and Food has created quite a stir — cruddy reporting in The Daily Mail and the anti-biotech blog Independent Science News have twisted a paper about GM crops into baseless scaremongering.

The Daily Mail's headline reads "Uncovered, the 'toxic' gene hiding in GM crops: Revelation throws new doubt over safety of foods" and the Independent's original — published Jan 2 — reads, "Regulators Discover a Hidden Viral Gene in Commercial GMO Crops"

The paper takes a computer model to analyze genetic data of GM crops. They were looking for stretches of the DNA that looked as if they could be toxic or allergenic. Because of the way that some genetically modified crops are made (a virus is used to insert a gene into the plant's genome) — it is technically possible that a viral gene known as gene VI could have been inserted as well.

Fifty-four of America's genetically modified crops are created in this way.

The researchers took genetic data from the crops and searched it for areas where a short stretch of this plant-virus genetic material inserted itself into the plant's genes. They then examined the DNA in that area to check if it matched the genetic code of the plant virus gene, or matched any known allergen or toxin.

They didn't find any genetic sequences that looked like allergens or toxins. Using a less-reliable method, they did find weak evidence that one of the sequences may have allergenic properties, but that wasn't confirmed by other tests.

Also it's important to note that not all stretches of DNA are turned into proteins, so it's possible that even if a bit of plant virus DNA got into the crop, it

Alan Dove has a great take down of the coverage at his blog:

That’s right, these hypothetical proteins that might not even exist don’t match any known allergens or toxins anyway. They did an additional test that sets the bar lower, and found that by this standard, one of the putative proteins might be allergenic. But it’s a stretch:...

So there you have it. This was a research paper that used bioinformatic methods to ask yet again if GM crops are any more dangerous than non-GM crops. It ended up adding to the large pile of established data showing that they are not. Through what can only be described as laziness and ideologically blinded reporting, it served as a handy news hook for stories claiming exactly the opposite.

Also, the virus used in the modification procedure is common in nature, found all over plants and soil. About 10 percent of cruciferous vegetables (like broccoli and cauliflower) that reach our food stores are infected with it. So, basically, you've definitely eaten some Gene VI before and survived. No plant virus has been proven to infect humans.

Even if there was a protein produced, it would have to survive your digestive system, make its way into your blood then into your cells before it could do any damage. That's a long shot.

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Why Mackerel Has Been Taken Off The Ethical 'Fish To Eat' List

0
0

mackerel fishThe North-east Atlantic mackerel fishery has joined the three quarters of worldwide stocks that are either declining or being fished beyond a sustainable level

Only yesterday, it seems, mackerel was the fish to gulp down without a twinge of guilt, good both for your pump and for the planet. Doctors recommended its oily flesh, rich in omega-3, to ward off heart disease. Environmentalists and celebrity chefs trumpeted its eco-friendliness. Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall launched a campaign in 2010 to persuade people to switch to it from overfished cod. The sustainable superfood was also cheap and tasty – and made up Scotland’s most valuable catch. What was there not to like?

Today, its sustainable image, at least, lies shattered, and its £205 million annual value to British fishermen is in jeopardy. The Marine Conservation Society has taken the species off its ethical “fish to eat” list because the catch is now “far in excess of what has been scientifically recommended”. And Fearnley-Whittingstall, while insisting that the supply had been robust enough to support his campaign, called the fish’s plight “a farce rapidly becoming a tragedy”.

In other words, north-east Atlantic mackerel fishery has now joined the three quarters of worldwide stocks that are either declining or being fished beyond a sustainable level. In European waters, blighted by the disastrous Common Fisheries Policy, the toll is even worse, with more than 80 per cent of fisheries over-exploited.

In fact, the crisis has long been brewing – and, in retrospect, fisheries campaigners seem to have been over-sanguine. It began more than four years ago, when Iceland started increasing its landings of the fish, unilaterally upping its quota from 2,000 tonnes in 2008 to 146,000 tonnes last year. The Faroe Islands followed suit, raising their own quota sixfold to 150,000 tons. They did so because for some reason (climate change has been blamed) mackerel have been moving northwards. There are now plenty of them in those warming waters, so the locals insist they have every right to harvest them.

The trouble is that when the vastly increased Icelandic and Faroese takes are added to what other countries are legally catching, some 900,000 tonnes of mackerel are being landed a year from a fishery that can only stand to yield 500,000 tonnes. That cannot go on for long without disaster – there is an awful precedent in the North Sea, where the fishery which yielded a one million ton take in the Sixties has since shrunk by 99 per cent – and Britain, which holds more than half the EU quota, stands to suffer most.

Negotiations have so far failed, and, in the absence of agreement, the EU and Norway last week cut their quotas by 15 per cent to try to relieve the pressure. And two weeks ago, Richard Benyon, the fisheries minister, told Parliament that EU trade sanctions against Iceland and the Faroes were now “on the table”.

These could be in operation by the summer, when new quotas are due to be set, directed at imports of mackerel and fishmeal to feed farmed salmon. But – as the former Daily Telegraph writer turned fisheries campaigner, Charles Clover, points out – a “mackerel war” might backfire, since much of the Icelandic and Faroese catch is landed, and processed, in Britain.

Last March the Marine Stewardship Council, which certifies fisheries, suspended its seal of approval for north-east Atlantic mackerel, and later last year Sainsbury’s, Marks & Spencer and the Co-op all boycotted it. So its downgrading on the “fish to eat” list – the Marine Conservation Society says it should now be only consumed “occasionally” – has long been on its way.

The saga is just one episode in an astonishing depletion of the once-rich fisheries around our shores. Prof Callum Roberts, of the University of York, has calculated that as late as 1889 British waters held up to 15 times as many cod, haddock and halibut as today. The devastation long preceded the Common Fisheries Policy, but it has made things worse: more than two thirds of the quotas it set over the past 25 years have exceeded official scientific advice. A minister once told me that the meetings in Brussels were like “Buffalo Bill and Wyatt Earp arguing over who should shoot the last buffalo”.

To its credit, the Government, led by Mr Benyon, has tried to change this. Largely because of its pressure, serious reform seems finally to be under way, with EU ministers and a European parliamentary committee last year agreeing to ban the grossly wasteful practice of “discarding”, dead or dying, nearly one in every 10 fish caught, while the MEPs also voted to stop the setting of quotas above scientific recommendations. But there is still a long way to go.

In the meantime the Marine Conservation Society suggests eating herring and sardine instead of mackerel; it also gives the green light to whiting from the Celtic Sea, coley from the North Sea and Dover sole from the English Channel.

Bon appétit.

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Man Describes The '14 Seconds Of Mayhem' Before His Legs Were Destroyed In A Skiing Accident

0
0

Arc'teryxRoger Strong has more than 42 years of skiing experience under his belt. 

But even a lifetime of training on the slopes is no match for an avalanche.

In April 2011, Roger was climbing up his favorite backcountry run when he triggered a snow slide that hurled him and two of his friends several hundred feet down the mountain.

See Roger's incredible story > 

Roger's horizontal skis were clotheslined by a tree, and his tibias, the bone that connects the knee to the ankle, were ripped from his femurs.

Over the past decade an average of 25 people died each year in avalanches in the United States. The list of fatalities has ballooned in the last half-century alongside the growth of ski tourism.  

Fortunately Roger survived. He returned to the spot that mangled his legs and bound him to a wheelchair for more than three months exactly one year after the horrific accident

Roger's memory of that terrifying day — and inspiring recovery — are chronicled in a short film by ARC'TERYX. 

April 6, 2011, started out as a standard skiing day on Mount Snoqualmie in Washington.

Watch the full video > 



Roger and four friends, all experienced backcountry skiers, hit the trail at around 6 a.m.

Watch the full video > 



Backcountry skiing generally refers to skiing ungroomed snow, outside of designated ski resorts. It is therefore more challenging and more dangerous.

Watch the full video > 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

'Blade Runner' Or Beijing?

0
0

Air pollution levels in the Chinese capital of Beijing have hit hazardous levels. It's both scary to breathe in and to look at.

Several people have pointed out that an eerie of photo of Beijing shrouded in a dense smog with a video running on the side of a building looks like a scene from the 1982 science fiction movie "Blade Runner." 

"Blade Runner" is a neo-noir film starring Harrison Ford. It takes place in the future city of Los Angeles, 2019, where it is perpetually dark and rainy. 

What do you think?

Here's the photo of Beijing:

Beijing Smog

And here's a screengrab from "Blade Runner":

Blade Runner

SEE ALSO: This Old Picture Of Manhattan Smog Looks Just Like Beijing Today

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

It Is Going To Feel Like It Is 2 Degrees In New York On Thursday Morning

0
0

freezing face cold ice girl woman

A nasty cold snap has descended on the Eastern Seaboard and it's not going to get any better, if the meteorologists are right. Expect even colder weather over night and strong winds on Thursday.

Here's what NBC New York is saying:

The high Wednesday was 19, and for the evening commute, expect it to feel like about 6 degrees. When you wake up on Thursday, there won't be any relief in sight -- the morning will kick off with a real-feel temp of 2 degrees.

Highs will go back up into the 20s on Thursday, but winds will be stronger, so it's still going to feel brutally cold.

Outside of NYC, temperatures are even colder and more than a foot of snow is supposed to fall as lake-effect snow blankets the region.

The temperatures are 10 to 15 degrees below mid-winter averages, the National Weather Service says. These aren't record lows, but they can be dangerous, so make sure to cover up your hands and head when headed outside. At least it's not snowing. Things will warm up over the weekend, possibly reaching 50 degrees a week from now.

SEE ALSO: Firefighters Leave Chicago Warehouse Covered In Ice [PHOTOS]

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Tar Sand Mining And The Keystone XL Pipeline Have A Huge Impact On Future Climate Change Predictions

0
0

Tar Sands

James Hansen has been publicly speaking about climate change since 1988.

The NASA climatologist testified to Congress that year and he's been testifying ever since to crowds large and small, most recently to a small gathering of religious leaders outside the White House last week.

The grandfatherly scientist has the long face of a man used to seeing bad news in the numbers and speaks with the thick, even cadence of the northern Midwest, where he grew up, a trait that also helps ensure that his sometimes convoluted science gets across.

This cautious man has also been arrested multiple times.

His acts of civil disobedience started in 2009, and he was first arrested in 2011 for protesting the development of Canada's tar sands and, especially, the Keystone XL pipeline proposal that would serve to open the spigot for such oil even wider.

"To avoid passing tipping points, such as initiation of the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, we need to limit the climate forcing severely. It's still possible to do that, if we phase down carbon emissions rapidly, but that means moving expeditiously to clean energies of the future," he explains.

"Moving to tar sands, one of the dirtiest, most carbon-intensive fuels on the planet, is a step in exactly the opposite direction, indicating either that governments don't understand the situation or that they just don't give a damn."

He adds: "People who care should draw the line."

Hansen is not alone in caring. In addition to a groundswell of opposition to the 2,700-kilometer-long Keystone pipeline, 17 of his fellow climate scientists joined him in signing a letter urging Pres. Barack Obama to reject the project last week. Simply put, building the pipeline—and enabling more tar sands production—runs "counter to both national and planetary interests," the researchers wrote.

"The year of review that you asked for on the project made it clear exactly how pressing the climate issue really is." Obama seemed to agree in his second inaugural address this week, noting "we will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations."

At the same time, the U.S. imports nearly nine million barrels of oil per day and burns nearly a billion metric tons of coal annually. China's coal burning is even larger and continues to grow by leaps and bounds. Partially as a result, global emissions of greenhouse gases continue to grow by leaps and bounds too—and China is one alternative customer eager for the oil from Canada's tar sands.

Neither developed nor developing nations will break the fossil-fuel addiction overnight, and there are still more than a billion people who would benefit from more fossil-fuel burning to help lift them out of energy poverty. The question lurking behind the fight in North America over Keystone, the tar sands and climate change generally is: How much of the planet's remaining fossil fuels can we burn?

The trillion-tonne question

To begin to estimate how much fossil fuels can be burned, one has to begin with a guess about how sensitive the global climate really is to additional carbon dioxide. If you think the climate is vulnerable to even small changes in concentrations of greenhouse gases—as Hansen and others do—then we have already gone too far.

Global concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have reached 394 parts per million, up from 280 ppm before the Industrial Revolution and the highest levels seen in at least 800,000 years.

Hansen's math suggests 350 ppm would be a safer level, given that with less than a degree Celsius of warming from present greenhouse gas concentrations, the world is already losing ice at an alarming rate, among other faster-than-expected climate changes.

International governments have determined that 450 ppm is a number more to their liking, which, it is argued, will keep the globe's average temperatures from warming more than 2 degrees C. Regardless, the world is presently on track to achieve concentrations well above that number.

Scientists since chemist Svante Arrhenius of Sweden in 1896 have noted that reaching concentrations of roughly 560 ppm would likely result in a world with average temperatures roughly 3 degrees C warmer—and subsequent estimates continue to bear his laborious, hand-written calculations out.

Of course, rolling back greenhouse gas concentrations to Hansen's preferred 350 ppm—or any other number for that matter—is a profoundly unnatural idea. Stasis is not often found in the natural world.

Concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may not be the best metric for combating climate change anyway. "What matters is our total emission rate," notes climate modeler Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University, another signee of the anti-Keystone letter. "From the perspective of the climate system, a CO2 molecule is a CO2 molecule and it doesn't matter if it came from coal versus natural gas."

Physicist Myles Allen of the University of Oxford in England and colleagues estimated that the world could afford to put one trillion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere by 2050 to have any chance of restraining global warming below 2 degrees C.

To date, fossil fuel burning, deforestation and other actions have put nearly 570 billion metric tons of carbon in the atmosphere—and Allen estimates the trillionth metric ton of carbon will be emitted around the summer of 2041 at present rates. "Tons of carbon is fundamental," adds Hansen, who has argued that burning all available fossil fuels would result in global warming of more than 10 degrees C. "It does not matter much how fast you burn it."

Alberta's oil sands represent a significant tonnage of carbon. With today's technology there are roughly 170 billion barrels of oil to be recovered in the tar sands, and an additional 1.63 trillion barrels worth underground if every last bit of bitumen could be separated from sand.

"The amount of CO2 locked up in Alberta tar sands is enormous," notes mechanical engineer John Abraham of the University of Saint Thomas in Minnesota, another signer of the Keystone protest letter from scientists. "If we burn all the tar sand oil, the temperature rise, just from burning that tar sand, will be half of what we've already seen"—an estimated additional nearly 0.4 degree C from Alberta alone.

As it stands, the oil sands industry has greenhouse gas emissions greater than New Zealand and Kenya—combined. If all the bitumen in those sands could be burned, another 240 billion metric tons of carbon would be added to the atmosphere and, even if just the oil sands recoverable with today's technology get burned, 22 billion metric tons of carbon would reach the sky. And reserves usually expand over time as technology develops, otherwise the world would have run out of recoverable oil long ago.

The greenhouse gas emissions of mining and upgrading tar sands is roughly 79 kilograms per barrel of oil presently, whereas melting out the bitumen in place requires burning a lot of natural gas—boosting emissions to more than 116 kilograms per barrel, according to oil industry consultants IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates.

All told, producing and processing tar sands oil results in roughly 14 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than the average oil used in the U.S. And greenhouse gas emissions per barrel have stopped improving and started increasing slightly, thanks to increasing development of greenhouse gas–intensive melting-in-place projects. "Emissions have doubled since 1990 and will double again by 2020," says Jennifer Grant, director of oil sands research at environmental group Pembina Institute in Canada.

Just one mine expansion, Shell's Jackpine mine, currently under consideration for the Albian mega-mine site, would increase greenhouse gas emissions by 1.18 million metric tons per year. "If Keystone is approved then we're locking in a several more decades of dependence on fossil fuels," says climate modeler Daniel Harvey of the University of Toronto. "That means higher CO2 emissions, higher concentrations [in the atmosphere] and greater warming that our children and grandchildren have to deal with."

And then there's all the carbon that has to come out of the bitumen to turn it into a usable crude oil.

Hidden carbon

In the U.S. State Department's review of the potential environmental impacts of the Keystone project, consultants EnSys Energy suggested that building the pipeline would not have "any significant impact" on greenhouse gas emissions, largely because Canada's tar sands would likely be developed anyway.

But the Keystone pipeline represents the ability to carry away an additional 830,000 barrels per day—and the Albertan tar sands are already bumping up against constraints in the ability to move their product.

That has led some to begin shipping the oil by train, truck and barge—further increasing the greenhouse gas emissions—and there is a proposal to build a new rail line, capable of carrying five million barrels of oil per year from Fort McMurray to Alaska's Valdez oil terminal.

Then there's the carbon hidden in the bitumen itself. Either near oil sands mines in the mini-refineries known as upgraders or farther south after the bitumen has reached Midwestern or Gulf Coast refineries, its long, tarry hydrocarbon chains are cracked into the shorter, lighter hydrocarbons used as gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. The residue of this process is a nearly pure black carbon known as petroleum (pet) coke that, if it builds up, has to be blasted loose, as if mining for coal in industrial equipment.

The coke is, in fact, a kind of coal and is often burned in the dirtiest fossil fuel's stead. Canadian tar sands upgraders produce roughly 10 million metric tons of the stuff annually, whereas U.S. refineries pump out more than 61 million metric tons per year.

Pet coke is possibly the dirtiest fossil fuel available, emitting at least 30 percent more CO2 per ton than an equivalent amount of the lowest quality mined coals. According to multiple reports from independent analysts, the production (and eventual burning) of such petroleum coke is not included in industry estimates of tar sands greenhouse gas emissions because it is a co-product.

Even without it, the Congressional Research Service estimates that tar sands oil results in at least 14 percent more greenhouse gas emissions than do more conventional crude oils.

Although tar sands may be among the least climate-friendly oil produced at present—edging out alternatives such as fracking for oil trapped in shale deposits in North Dakota and flaring the gas—the industry has made attempts to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, unlike other oil-producing regions.

For example, there are alternatives to cracking bitumen and making pet coke, albeit more expensive ones, such as adding hydrogen to the cracked bitumen, a process that leaves little carbon behind, employed by Shell, among others.

More recently, Shell has begun adding carbon-capture-and-storage (CCS) technology to capture the emissions from a few of its own upgraders, a project known as Quest. The program, when completed in 2015, will aim to capture and store one million metric tons of CO2 per year, or a little more than a third of the CO2 emissions of Shell's operation at that site.

And tar sands producers do face a price on carbon—$15 per metric ton by Alberta provincial regulation—for any emissions above a goal of reducing by 12 percent the total amount of greenhouse gas emitted per total number of barrels produced.

The funds collected—some $312 million to date—are then used to invest in clean technology, but more than 75 percent of the projects are focused on reducing emissions from oil sands, unconventional oils and other fossil fuels. And to drive more companies to implement CCS in the oil sands would require a carbon price of $100 per metric ton or more. "We don't have a price on carbon in the province that is compelling companies to pursue CCS," Pembina's Grant argues.

In fact, Alberta's carbon price may be little more than political cover. "It gives us some ammunition when people attack us for our carbon footprint, if nothing else," former Alberta Energy Minister Ron Liepert told Scientific American in September 2011.

Adds Beverly Yee, assistant deputy minister at Alberta's Environment and Sustainable Resource Development agency, more recently, "Greenhouse gases? We don't see that as a regional issue." From the individual driver in the U.S. to oil sands workers and on up to the highest echelons of government in North America, everyone dodges responsibility.

Price of carbon

A true price on carbon, one that incorporates all the damages that could be inflicted by catastrophic climate change, is exactly what Hansen believes is needed to ensure that more fossil fuels, like the tar sands, stay buried. In his preferred scheme, a price on carbon that slowly ratcheted up would be collected either where the fossil fuel comes out of the ground or enters a given country, such as at a port.

But instead of that tax filling government coffers, the collected revenue should be rebated in full to all legal residents in equal amounts—an approach he calls fee and dividend. "Not one penny to reducing the national debt or off-setting some other tax," the government scientist argues. "Those are euphemisms for giving the money to government, allowing them to spend more."

Such a carbon tax would make fossil fuels more expensive than alternatives, whether renewable resources such as wind and sun or low-carbon nuclear power. As a result, these latter technologies might begin to displace things like coal-burning power plants or halt major investments in oil infrastructure like the Keystone XL pipeline.

As it stands, producing 1.8 million barrels per day of tar sands oil resulted in the emissions of some 47.1 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent in 2011, up nearly 2 percent from the year before and still growing, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. In the same year coal-fired power plants in the U.S. emitted more than two billion metric tons of CO2-equivalent. "If you think that using other petroleum sources is much better [than tar sands], then you're delusional," says chemical engineer Murray Gray, scientific director of the Center for Oil Sands Innovation at the University of Alberta.

In other words, tar sands are just a part of the fossil-fuel addiction—but still an important part. Projects either approved or under construction would expand tar sands production to over five million barrels per day by 2030. "Any expansion of an energy system that relies on the atmosphere to be its waste dump is bad news, whereas expansion of safe, affordable and environmentally acceptable energy technologies is good news," Carnegie's Caldeira says.

There's a lot of bad news these days then, from fracking shale for gas and oil in the U.S. to new coal mines in China. Oxford's Allen calculates that the world needs to begin reducing emissions by roughly 2.5 percent per year, starting now, in order to hit the trillion metric ton target by 2050. Instead emissions hit a new record this past year, increasing 3 percent to 34.7 billion metric tons of CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

Stopping even more bad news is why Hansen expects to be arrested again, whether at a protest against mountaintop removal mining for coal in West Virginia or a sit-in outside the White House to convince the Obama administration to say no to Keystone XL and any expansion of the tar sands industry.

The Obama administration has already approved the southern half of the pipeline proposal—and if the northern link is approved, a decision expected after March of this year, environmental group Oil Change International estimates that tar sands refined on the Gulf Coast would produce 16.6 million metric tons of CO2 annually, along with enough petroleum coke to fuel five coal-fired power plants for a year.

All told, the increased tar sands production as a result of opening Keystone would be equal to opening six new coal-fired power plants, according to Pembina Institute calculations.

Even as increased oil production in the U.S. diminishes the demand for tar sands-derived fuel domestically, if Keystone reaches the Gulf Coast, that oil will still be refined and exported. At the same time, Obama pledged to respond to climate change and argued for U.S. leadership in the transition to "sustainable energy sources" during his second inaugural address; approving Keystone might lead in the opposite direction.

For the tar sands "the climate forcing per unit energy is higher than most fossil fuels," argues Hansen, who believes he is fighting for the global climate his five grandchildren will endure—or enjoy. After all, none of his grandchildren have lived through a month with colder than average daily temperatures.

There has not been one in the U.S. since February 1985, before even Hansen started testifying on global warming. As he says: "Going after tar sands—incredibly dirty, destroying the local environment for a very carbon-intensive fuel—is the sign of a terribly crazed addict."

MUST SEE: These Pictures May Give You Nightmares About The Canada Oil Sands

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

London Has Also Spent Time Engulfed In Deadly Smog

0
0

London smog 1952

Today I found out about a shocking weather incident that happened in London not very long ago.

In December of 1952, the city of London experienced a 5-day bout of “fog” that killed at least 4,000 people and made an estimated 100,000 sick.

Fog? Isn’t that what London is known for?

This was no ordinary fog. Dubbed “The Big Smoke” or “The Great Smog of ’52,” it was actually a severe air pollution event that was the result of a perfect storm of critical factors.

Since it was wintertime and there had been a period of very cold weather, Londoners had been burning more coal than usual to stay warm.

Add to this an anticyclone hanging above London (a dense high pressure system) plus almost totally stagnant, windless conditions- in effect, a layer of cold, stagnant air was trapped over London under a layer of warmer air above.

The colder weather layer right over the city collected airborne pollutants from the coal and other smoke below. This formed a dense layer of fog and pollution over London that cocooned the city for nearly a week.

On the surface, it seemed like a non-event. Londoners (sometimes called “pea soupers”) were certainly no strangers to fog. However, this was not your run of the mill fog. For one, it was far thicker than usual. It caused major visibility disruption, making it difficult to drive or even walk anywhere.

It was reported to have penetrated into homes and was even visible in enclosed, indoor spaces. People began feeling short of breath and having other respiratory symptoms.

Adding to the severity was the fact that, at this time, the coal that was being used was a cheap, low-grade variety that was especially sulphurous and noxious. This dramatically raised the amount of sulphur dioxide and other pollutants in the smoke.

There were numerous coal-fired power stations in London at the time adding to the acrid pollution in the air. Diesel-powered vehicles also belched toxic exhaust into the air, and industrial and commercial sites expelled more toxins into the mix.

During those five days, much of the public transportation system was halted, including ambulance services. The sick and injured were forced to transport themselves to the hospital. Since the smog could be seen even from just a few yards away, many indoor events had to be canceled.

The fog/smog finally cleared up after about 5 days when the weather shifted abruptly and winds dispersed it. However, in the weeks that followed, government medical reports estimated that at least 4,000 people died prematurely as a direct result of particulates inhaled from the smog. 100,000 more were made sick due to the polluted fog’s effect on the lungs and respiratory system.

Most of the people affected were either very young, elderly, or had pre-existing respiratory issues. More recent research paint an even grimmer picture of the event with some estimates having the number of “Big Smoke” fatalities as high as 12,000!

Most of the deaths were caused by hypoxia which led to respiratory tract infections. There were also obstructions of air passages due to the pus that resulted from the lung infections. Lung infections were generally either bronchopneumonia or acute purulent bronchitis on top of a person’s previous chronic bronchitis condition.

When the smog finally lifted, a blackish-gray layer of slimy soot was left on virtually all outdoor surfaces. The sooty grime remained until a few days later when the first rains after the fog finally came. The soot layer was rinsed off the city and into gutters and drains. A pungent smell filled the atmosphere in London which some described as being similar to acrid, wet soot, making the eyes and nostrils burn for those who ventured outdoors at this time.

Not surprisingly, it is considered the worst air pollution incident in the history of Great Britain. It also had a profound impact on raising awareness of the connection between air quality and health. It influenced environmental research about air quality, weather, and pollution that was to follow in many countries, including the United States. It also had a significant effect on government air quality awareness practices and regulations that would be crafted in later years, including the Clean Air Act of 1956.

This tragedy has fed the modern impetus to environmentalism. Air pollution began to be taken seriously, as the smog clearly demonstrated its lethal and tragic potential. New regulations were implemented and the use of dirty fuels in industry as well as black smoke emissions were banned.

Coal fires in homes were also phased out and gave way to gas, oil, and electric heat.  Even with all the changes, a decade later a similar event happened in London, though there weren’t nearly as many deaths associated with this latter event.  However, during the smog of 1962, the highest levels of sulphur dioxide in the air over London were recorded.

SEE ALSO: This Old Picture Of Manhattan Smog Looks Just Like Beijing Today

SEE ALSO: China's Smog Emergency Can Be Seen From Space

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »


A Shroud Of Arctic Air Has Parked Itself Over The US

0
0

After the hottest year on record, cold is making a comeback. 

Four people have died in the Midwest as records were set in the Chicago Botanic Garden (minus 3 degrees Fahrenheit ) and Cook County, Minn. (minus 34 degrees Fahrenheit), according to The New York Times.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) notes there is a daily cycle of heating and cooling, "but the pattern is clear: much of the U.S. is pretty cold."

This video from the NOAA shows the wave of Arctic air that's caused temperatures to fall dramatically. Areas colored blue are below freezing.

Andrea Thompson of OurAmazingPlanet notes a kink in the jet stream brought the deep chill, which is expected to meet with some warmer air this weekend to create some snow and icy weather as temperatures rise about freezing.

SEE ALSO: Why So Many People Get The Flu In Winter

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

In The Future, We Will Eat 60-Day-Old Bread

0
0

Bread

Mold is the bane of any bread-lover's existence. 

The fear of green fuzzy splotches making baked goods unfit to eat within days of purchase may soon be relieved. 

MicroZap, a company based in Texas, has developed a method to keep bread mold-free for 60 days. That's about six times longer than the shelf-life of regular packaged bread.

"We probably could have gone farther, we just didn't try it," CEO Don Stull told Business Insider.  

Either way, a longer lifespan helps cut down on food waste, while encouraging manufacturers to get rid of preservatives.

The Technology

MicroZap's units work like a standard home microwave by bombarding food with microwaves. Only in this case, the high-energy particles are created to steralize food, instead of cooking or heating the product.     

The bread is placed inside a chamber that looks like a long, square tube with an 18-inch wide conveyor belt. The product is then blasted with microwaves for 10 seconds, which the company claims keep mold spores from forming for 60 days, increasing the bread's shelf life.  

Microzap

The key to MicroZap's technology is the even distribution of energy inside of the unit. It doesn't have the same hot or cold spot problem common that conventional microwaves do, Stull said. 

Bread treated in a kitchen microwave might kill spores on one edge of the product, but MicroZap's special chamber radiates uniform electrical signals so that the mold or pathogen is eliminated all the way through.  

The unique zapping process doesn't stop at bread mold. It has also been used to kill salmonella, without disrupting freshness, in peanuts, ground turkey, jalapenos and pet food. The technology has even been adapted for washers and dyers to treat hospital linens and towels that might be infested with a dangerous superbug known as MRSA.    

"We don't care what the pathogen is, we want to take a look at it and see if we can help that company with our technology," said Stull.

MicroZap, formed in 2008, received $1.5 million from Texas' Emerging Technology Fund in 2010 to work on its technique, which originally focused on getting rid of salmonella in egg shells. Mindy Bashears, a professor and director of the university's International Center for Food Industry Excellence, played a key role in development.  

The company is currently looking to partner with a bread manufacturer to place the MicroZap machine in their facility in a pilot production trial. 

An in-home unit with a sterilization cycle for fresh produce is also on the drawing board, said Stull.  

A longer shelf-life

The product would help both consumers and companies, by lengthening the shelf life of foods. Each year, 1.3 billion tons of food — more than one-third of all food produced on the planet — goes to waste, in part, because of spoilage. 

Bread does not account for all of that discarded mass, but it certainly adds to the pile. The U.S. commercial baking industry hauls in approximately $30 billion in revenue each year, and fresh bread is a large chunk of that business. According to estimates from Nielson Co., in 2010, Americans bought close to 3 billion packages of the sandwich essential

Bread, like many processed foods, is a desirable breeding ground for mold because of its high moisture content, which attracts dry mold spores floating in the air. The spores get on the bread either before packaging or once you open the bag. Once the mold spores land on the surface of bread, they are provided with all the nutrients that encourage growth — at which point you start to see a coat of green fur.  

Unrefrigerated packaged bread typically lasts for one weekFresh bakery bread without preservatives has an even shorter lifespan. So if you don't have time to plow through an entire loaf of bread in seven days, this can all add up to a lot of food waste. 

Mold spoilage isn't only a nuisance for individual consumers; it's also a costly problem for bakery manufacturers, contributing to around 200 million pounds of lost product each year, according to study published in the International Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biological Archives. 

Commercial manufactures use preservatives to combat mold spoilage, but it's still a major shelf-life limiting factor. MicroZap's technology gives major bread producers the gift of time. One UK processor told Stull that just four days would can change the way they distribute product and eliminate a lot of waste — not to mention the need for preservatives and the cocktail of additives used to mask the unpleasant taste of those preservatives. 

"The best part of this technology is that consumers can now go out and buy an all-natural, preservative-free sandwich bread. That's the product I'm looking for," said Stulll.  

Passing the taste test

In the lab, a treated piece of bread had the same mold content after 60 days as a piece of fresh bread out of the package. Of course, that doesn't mean much if people refuse to buy or eat it. But MicroZap says their treated bread passed the ultimate taste test. Consumers found no discernible difference between 60-day bread and fresh bread out of the package in a sensory panel, said Stull. 

MicrozapScientifically, the 60-day bread had less moisture than the younger bread, but that was not detected by consumers. 

And don't forget, treated bread is still bread.  

If you remove it from the package, it will dry up like regular bread whether or not it has been zapped. When exposed to air, it will also collect living mold spores, which could still reproduce.

"Once you open the package, then any mold in the air could get back into it," Stull said. "We're not eliminating everything in the environment." 

And, there's still the question of whether consumers can cozy up to the idea of eating 60-day-old bread. But Stull thinks that skepticism will fade once see they see the true benefits. 

"They might be a little weary in the beginning," Stull admitted. "The better product for a bakery would be to keep a similar shelf-life, but to remove all the preservatives so they have a natural bread. That may be more acceptable to consumers." 

SEE ALSO: Roadmap To The Future

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Historic Antarctic Expedition's Nightmare Scenario Almost Came True

0
0

The Coldest Journey

Last month, a group of explorers set off on an expedition to be the first to cross the Antarctic during winter

A six-man Ice Team, led by legendary British explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes, will travel more 2,000 miles across a polar plateau in mostly permanent darkness and temperatures that regularly dip to minus 76 degrees Fahrenheit.  

63-year-old Anton Bowring is the expedition's co-leader. He won't take part in the actual crossing, but accompanied the Ice Team to Crown Bay in Eastern Antarctica aboard a polar ship called SA Agulhas. 

The ship made landfall on Jan. 22 and has spent the last week unloading around 90 tons of heavy equipment. 

Writing from the ship, Bowring tell us that the biggest risk happens before the proper journey even begins. 

The worst possible scenario is that "we lose a vital piece of equipment as we unload onto the ice shelf," Bowring says.

The SA Agulhas has been sitting with her nose in a 13-foot high ice edge as a big crane moves equipment from the ship to land, including two heavy snow vehicles, sledges, shelters, jet fuel and food.

"If the ice broke away, we could lose one of these items and the expedition would be scuppered!" 

There was at least one point during the unloading process when it seemed like Bowring's nightmare scenario was about to come true. 

A large rubber bladder for storing fuel fell off a pallet as it was being craned from ship to shore. 

"It looked as though it was going to land in the sea, but, thankfully it dropped into soft snow on the edge of the shelf ice and lodged there," Bowring wrote in a blog post. A team member lowered himself down with ropes and a harness to rescue the bladder. "We have no spares. To lose it would have been a disaster." 

SEE ALSO: Antarctic Explorers Last Days With Civilization Before The Hardest Journey Ever [PHOTOS]

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Cats Are Killing Everything

0
0

Cat

Humans think of cats as fuzzy and cute. Birds and small mammals have a vastly different perception.  

Domestic cats kill between 1.4 and 3.7 billion birds and between 6.9 and 20.7 billion mammals (mostly mice, shrews, rabbits, squirrels and voles) each year, according to a new study published Tuesday, Jan. 29, in Nature Communications. 

Both stray and owned cats are responsible for a far greater number of bird and mammal deaths in the contiguous United States than previously estimated, outpacing other threats such as collisions with windows, buildings, communication towers, cars and poisoning, the report notes.  

Free-ranging cats are "likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic (man-made) mortality for US birds and mammals," according to the report. 

Un-owned cats (farm cats, feral cats, and stray cats that are fed by humans, for example) are the main perpetrators, but owned cats do their fair share of killing, too.  

Researchers guess that a single cat may kill between 100 and 200 mammals annually, meaning a population estimate of between 30 and 80 million un-owned cats would result in the death of 3 and 8 billion mammals, if you were to look at the low-end kill estimate. And that's just un-owned cats. The researchers calculated around 84 million owned cats, the majority of which are allowed outdoors. 

"The magnitude of our mortality estimates suggest that cats are likely causing population declines for some species and in some regions," the study authors write.  

The timing of the study is uncanny. Just last week, a prominent New Zealand economist upset the international cat community when he called for the eradication of cats, citing their threat to the country's unique wildlife. 

Meanwhile, the study authors are critical of current tactics to control feral cat populations, including Trap-Neuter-Return, a project aimed at capturing and sterilizing feral cats instead of euthanizing them. 

SEE ALSO: New Zealand Economist Calling For The Eradication Of Cats Tells Us Why They Have To Go

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

'Suicidal' Polar Journey Reaches First Milestone [PHOTOS]

0
0

The Coldest Journey - DNU

Once Sir Ranulph Fiennes and his five-man team set off to cross the Antarctic continent during the winter months, the only thing standing between them and the finish line will be 2,400 miles of ice.

The trek has never been attempted before, and for good reason. 

Temperatures can plunge to minus 130 degrees Fahrenheit, cold enough to instantly freeze exposed skin. Hidden chasms can devour tractors heavier than three elephants combined. Winds can hit 155 mph.

Click here to see pictures of their journey so far >

Total isolation may be an even bigger terror than extreme weather.  

Once their voyage over the ice begins, the team is completely on their own. A rescue is impossible, at least until summer. 

Planning for the expedition, dubbed The Coldest Journey, began five years ago. After a team of Norwegian explorers crossed the Arctic during winter in 2010, Fiennes has considered traversing the Antarctic during its coldest season to be the last great polar challenge. His original idea was to cross the Antarctic on skis supported by food and other supplies that had been dropped off by parachute the previous summer. 

The British Government flat-out rejected this arrangement. It was deemed too dangerous — even suicidal.  

In order to comply with the safety standards, the veteran explorer, now 68, had to secure two heavy snow vehicles, living quarters, and a polar ship to get all the equipment to Antarctica.  

Permits from the British government to green-light the expedition were granted just 12 days before the SA Agulhas, a South African ice vessel, left London on the first leg of the journey to Antarctica.  

The Coldest Journey team has been chronicling their progress through a series of blog posts and pictures posted to the expedition's website

The following slides present their incredible journey, thus far.  

The Coldest Journey team leaves London on Dec. 6, 2012, departing down the Thames on a 6,800-ton polar ship dubbed SA Agulhas.

The first winter Antarctic crossing begins 3.21.2012. 



Prince Charles, standing next to expedition leader Sir Ranulph Fiennes, or "Ran," gives the team a hearty sendoff.



The ship has a crew of about 30, as well as 50 South African navy cadets, seven scientists, and seventeen expedition members.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Cats Kill Billions Of Animals Each Year — But We're Not Suggesting We Eliminate Them

0
0

Kitten

A report published Tuesday in Nature Communications pinning the yearly death of up to 3.7 billion birds and as many as 20.7 billion mammals in the continental United States on domestic cats, has rattled pet owners and animal rights advocates, many of whom interpreted the study as a manifesto for the justifiable slaughter of the fluffy human companion.

That is inaccurate.

After publishing the numbers on our site, I received several emails ridiculing me for condoning the eradication of cats (that was a different guy in a different country) or incentivizing cat-haters to "go out and shoot and kill the species at random." 

That isn't the reason for the research. The purpose of the study, conducted by scientists from the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute and the Fish and Wildlife Service, was to quantify the impact of steadily increasing populations of owned, stray and feral cats on wildlife.

The threat of cats to birds and native animals like squirrels, rabbits and chipmunks has been largely glossed over in the past for two reasons. First, cats were thought to have a minuscule impact on animal deaths compared to man-made dangers like wind turbines, cars and poisoning. Second, the existing data on cat populations, particularly those that don't have a home, is kind of blurry. 

The authors came to their findings by analyzing 21 studies that looked at cat population sizes, the proportion of owned cats with outdoor access, and the proportion of cats that hunt wildlife, among other factors.  

The results suggested that cats, whether stray or owned, are likely the single biggest threat to birds and native mammals. This was a suprise to scientists. The idea that humans should, in turn, grab their torches and pitchforks and hunt down groups of psycho-killing cats, however, was never implied. Though better management is needed.

Wayne Pacelle, president of the Human Society of The United States, acknowledges that free-roaming cats pose a real problem to wildlife, but is dubious of the study's stats.

"Despite the scientific rigor with which this report was prepared, like others recently published, it tries to attach a number to something that is almost impossible to credibly quantify. While further data collection and analysis is important, the larger issue here is finding practicable and humane actions to mitigate the impact of cats in our communities,"Pacelle said in a statement.

The researchers seem to agree, while being critical of current tactics to control feral cat populations, including trap-neuter-return programs that capture and sterilize feral cats as an alternative to euthanasia. This stops cats from reproducing, but not from killing wildlife, so it doesn't attack the central problem. Moreover, the programs don't reduce cat populations enough to have a meaningful impact on death rates. They're expensive, too. Again, highlighting the ineffectiveness of one program is not the same as a call to arms. 

Rather, the study authors, like Pacelle, recommend that we come together to think of a more effective (and presumably humane) way to get at the heart of the problem: "Our estimates should alert policy makers and the general public about the large magnitude of wildlife mortality caused by free-ranging cats...Simple solutions to reduce mortality caused by pets, such as limiting or preventing outdoor access, should be pursued." 

In other words, let's go to the drawing board instead of grabbing our guns. 

SEE ALSO: Cats Are Killing Everything

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

Spectacular 360-Degree Aerial Footage Of The Tolbachik Volcano Erupting

0
0

This is the best thing I've seen in some time: A zoomable, panable 360-degree VIDEO of the erupting Tolbachik Volcano, taken from a helicopter. The video goes along with this article in Speigel Online [in German].

Play with the video for yourself. Do it. It's awesome.

You can control the video with the arrow keys and with shift to zoom in and command/Windows key to zoom out.

The Tolbachik volcano formation is located in the Kamchata Peninsula in Russia. When this helicopter was flying over there were FOUR volcanoes erupting simultaneously in the area, of the 29 active volcanoes. It is also home to the largest active volcano in the Northern Hemisphere, Klyuchevskaya Sopka.

The volcanoes started erupting on Tuesday. The last eruption was last November after the volcano was dormant for almost 40 years.

Here are some incredible screenshots from the video:

Tolbachik volcano eruption screenshotTolbachik volcano eruption screenshot

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »


Man Tightropes 200 Feet Above Asphalt With No Harness

0
0

tightrope

Nik Wallenda completed a 200-foot high tightrope walk above a highway without wearing a harness on Wednesday. It took him 9 minutes to stroll 600 feet from start to end. 

The stunt took place in Wallenda's hometown of Sarasota, Florida.  

Wallenda said it was particularly treacherous because there were no buildings to block the wind. 

But he handled it like a pro.

"Right before I step on a wire, I say a prayer with my family, give my wife and kids a hug and a kiss, and then I go to work,"he told the AP. "It's my job, it's my career, it's my passion, it's what I love to do," he added. 

Sure, just another day at the office. 

Watch the death-defying stunt below, courtesy of The Telegraph

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

'Unusual' January Storms Ravaged The East Coast Yesterday

0
0

weather

Wednesday was a strange day for weather across the nation. Tornadoes hit the Midwest, thunderstorms shot up the East Coast, and multiple places in New York and New Jersey experienced record-high temperatures.

As of this morning The Weather Channel is reporting that there were:

13 confirmed tornadoes in 8 states

676 high wind/wind damage reports

13 reports of large hail

We've collected some of the most striking pictures of the storms and their aftermath. The weather has left 215,000 powerless in the Northeast after high winds — reaching up to 81 miles per hour in some areas — took down power lines.

If you have any others you would like to share, feel free to send them to jwelsh@businessinsider.com or tweet them at us @bi_sci.

This map shows all the reports of high winds, hail and tornadoes from Jan 30.



Breana Trampus Terry captured video of a tornado as it tore through Adairsville, GA, Wednesday morning. The tornado could be an EF4, the first ever seen in Georgia in January.



Tornado damage in Sonoraville, Georgia.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Living In Beijing Is Worse Than Living In An Airport Smoking Lounge

0
0

Atlanta Airport smoking lounge cigarette smoke

The air in Beijing is worse than the air inside a U.S. Airport smoking lounge — you know, the special rooms where nicotine fiends suck down cigarette after cigarette in preparation for their smokeless flights, and where the ceiling tiles are stained yellow from all the tar in the air.

A new chart from Bloomberg News indicates that Beijing's PM2.5, a measurement of tiny particles that pollute the air and sicken people, is worse than the PM2.5 of the average U.S. airport smoking lounge. That's worse than the World Health Organization's recommendation to not exceeding a PM2.5 of 25 micrograms per cubic meter for longer than 24 hours.

In contrast to those recommended levels, Bloomberg reports, Beijing's average is much worse:

The 2013 daily average was 194 micrograms per cubic meter, with an intraday peak of 886 on Jan. 12, the data show. By contrast, PM2.5 levels averaged 166.6 in 16 airport smoking lounges in the U.S., said a 2012 study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. Levels exceeded 1,000 in Fairbanks, Alaska during a 2004 wildfire that engulfed 6.6 million acres, the state’s website says.

See the shocking chart at Bloomberg News.

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

These Are Holland's Beautiful Tulip Fields

0
0

Normann Szkop took to the skies to capture the beautiful patchwork of colors that are Holland's tulip fields in full bloom. Here are some of the great images he captured. The photos were taken in April of 2011 but we just saw them. You can see the entire set of images on his flickr page.

The fields below are in Anna Paulowna a municipality and a town in the Netherlands, in the province of North Holland. A press release from 2006 says that about 80 percent of the thousands of varieties of tulips come from Holland, which exports more than $700 million worth of the flowers every year — about 3 million per year. Most are exported as bulbs, which are the result of an average of four growth seasons.

Supposedly the bulbs come in a wide variety of colors, pretty much every one except pure blue. See the awesome variety in the images below.

Holldand's Tulip fieldsHolldand's Tulip fieldsHolldand's Tulip fieldsHolldand's Tulip fieldsHolldand's Tulip fieldsHolldand's Tulip fields

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

10 Animals That Were Hunted To Extinction

0
0

Tasmanian Tiger

The last known Tasmanian Tiger, a dog-looking creature with a striped body, died in an Australian zoo in 1936.

Although a long-held theory suggested that an unknown disease was partly to blame for the the animal's demise, a new study, published online on Thursday, Jan. 31, in the Journal of Animal Ecology, found that humans alone were responsible for the marsupial's extinction.  

Sadly, the Tasmanian Tiger is just one animal in a long list of species that have been wiped out directly or almost directly by the hands of humans. 

Animals face many natural threats, including changing temperatures, predators, and unexpected disasters. But no external stresses have proved more destructive to the survival of other living things than man. 

Tasmanian tiger (Extinct since 1936)

The Tasmanian tiger, also called the thylacine, was a marsupial native to Australia and the island of Tasmania.

The carnivore was seen by farmers as a threat to sheep and therefore hunted, trapped and poisoned for government bounties.

"Many people, however, believe that bounty hunting alone could not have driven the thylacine extinct and therefore claim that an unknown disease epidemic must have been responsible," researcher Thomas Prowse, of Australia's University of Adelaide, said in a statement.

Using population models to simulate the direct effects of bounty hunting and habitat loss, the new study found that humans alone were responsible for the animal's doom. 

The last wild Tasmanian tiger was captured in 1933 and taken to the Hobart Zoo, where it died three years later.  



Woolly Mammoth (Extinct for ~10,000 years)

The woolly mammoth disappeared about 10,000 years ago, after roaming Siberia and North America for around 250,000 years.

Although there's been some disagreement about what delivered the final blow, a recent study found that hunting by humans, on top of environmental stresses like climate and habitat change, spelled the end for the furry beast.  



Dodo Bird (Extinct since ~1681)

For centuries, the flightless Dodo bird lived undisturbed on the island of Mauritius off the coast of Africa. Because they had no enemies on the island, the wingless birds were easy prey when humans arrived in the early 16th century. 

Although the exact date is uncertain, people believe the last dodo bird was killed in 1681. 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow Science on Twitter and Facebook.

Viewing all 2972 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images