Problems of the Deep

Through technological advances, the ocean deep is becoming more and more available to human use. However, scientists are now warning against the exploitation of it for various reasons. For example, every decade, we are able to fish an average of 62.5 meters deeper than the decade before because of advances. But fish that deep reproduce slower, so even taking a smaller amount of these fish than ones that live shallower in the ocean affects them greatly. Also, pollution that floats out to sea and sinks deeper is now proving to affect the fish that live there and are brought up for us to eat, as well as the fisher men. The most common use of the deep ocean is mining, but this is harmful for the earth as well, because sometimes the drilling stirs up the ocean floor and sends up a sediment plume which can harm the water for miles, and not simply at the site.

The obvious solution would be to set up rules limiting fishing and mining and other uses for the ocean deep, but there's a problem to this. Most deep parts of the ocean are in international territory, where no particular nation has jurisdiction. The scientists who wrote the report on the exploitation of the ocean deep say that the next step is to attach an economic value to the services the deep provides us (such as natural resources) and decide if the value outweighs the potential cost to the earth.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140730094308.htm

Noise Kills Sea Slugs!

I just read an article about how boat noise is affecting the cellular development of sea hares, specifically sea slugs. These creatures aren't just the ordinary slug... They are crucial to the environment in that they eat toxic alga that can end up harming fish that we so dearly love! Boat noise was played next to half a batch of sea slug eggs and the other half enjoyed calming reef sounds. The side with the boat noise had a success rate that was more than 20% less than the reef side. The boat sounds not only harm the development inside the egg but make the sea slug less likely to survive! A possible solution is to control boat usage in critical areas. Simply don't allow boats in during the spawning and developing period. This could be a problem because the sea slugs might spawn in a very desirable area for boating. I personally believe that this is just a problem we are going to have to face.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140731095013.htm

Too Much Trash

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/30218-really-big-things-americas-landfills-video.htm

Americans produce the equivalent to 82,000 football fields 30 feet deep per year in trash. This amount is astounding and think about how much it would be in one hundred years (8,200,000 football fields of trash.) Considering the population is growing more rapidly than one would imagine, this number per year could easily increase next year, and every year after that. An easy solution to this growing issue would obviously be to recycle. The problems to the solution are that most people have to pay to get a recycling truck to come to their house and some people don't want to spend the extra money. Another problem is that a lot of people are just too lazy to put a plastic bottle in a recycling bin rather than the trashcan. My opinion is that people should put forth a little extra effort and recycle to improve the earth and use up less wasted space on creating growing landfills.

Groundwater reservoirs are being depleted too quickly

Scientists have recently discovered that groundwater reservoirs are being depleted more and more rapidly. It has been found that 90 percent of water is being used for farming and irrigation purposes, and only the remaining 10 percent is used for drinking water. This action has caused various issues for ecosystems as well as a growing lack of sufficient groundwater resources. Researcher Petra Döll explains that some farmers have begun to use techniques to help conserve groundwater resources, but even so, the amount of reservoirs that are being depleted continues to increase. It has been found that current groundwater depletion is twice as high as it was from the last forty years of the twentieth century, and that the highest amount of consumption currently occurs in India, America, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China. One possible solution to this issue could be for people to work together to create more awareness for water conservation throughout the world. However, this may be difficult because some people may not agree that there is a need to reduce water consumption, especially if the primary use for water for some people is for sustenance. Personally, I believe that water conservation is very important, because everything on the Earth depends on it. If we do not conserve our groundwater reservoirs, we will use it up before it can be replenished naturally. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140717094824.htm

Vulnerability of sharks in relation to longline fishing.

Vulnerability of sharks in relation to “bycatch” fishing

A study done by researchers at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science and UM Abess center for Ecosystem Science and Policy observed the survival rates of twelve different sharks after being captured unitentionally in commercial longline fishing practices. The researchers not only took into account their survival, but also their capability to reproduce. They found that species of shark with slow reproductive potential and unusual body features are most at risk after being caught in these fishing lines. This includes but is not limited to the scalloped hammer head and the bigeye thresher. UM Research Assistant Professor neil Hammerschlag suggests that “techniques that reduce [the sharks] interactions with fishing gear in the first place may be the best strategy for conserving these species.” This includes stricter government regulations on where fishing companies can fish especially if those areas are known to be home to many of these species of sharks. One barrier to this would be that many big fishing companies have political ties and can easily manipulate their politicians. My opinion is that this is becoming a huge issue as commercial fishing becomes bigger and bigger and without a solution, these species of sharks will soon go extinct.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140722142702.htm

Replacing coal, oil with natural gas will not help fight global warming, expert argues

      Several theories have been accumulated over time in which state that simply replacing coal, oil with natural gas could drastically decrease the consumption of the planet earth with global warming, but recently Dr. Robert Howarth has discovered some results that are contrary to the previous results. Dr. Robert Howarth has done some research of his own and discovered that methane (including shale gas and conventional gas) were by far more robust opposed to the coal oil. Meaning that simply making the transition from the coal oil to other natural gasses will not lessen the time period or effects of global warming. In fact Dr. Howarth basically states that the replacement of the gas will actually jump-start the reaction,and in fact quicken the process. 

    Though it would be highly more admirable by a greater majority of scientist, I must say that I agree with Dr. Howarth. For one thing, it is almost a delusion in the aspect that one would think that simply switching a gas to another type of gas could drastically reduce the speed of a reaction. The gas is still gas , no matter how an individual views a gas, at the end of the day it is still a gas ( meaning that it will contribute to the overall speed of the global warming process. Another thing is I as an individual would be hesitant to changing the types of gas in a system, and cutting out the one type of gas completely that the planet has been accustomed to for so long. The way I view it is just like a human's diet; if an individual grows up only eating solid foods, the diet cannot switch over to a sole liquid diet because it would damage the system ( just as it could damage the earth's natural system). I am not a scientist, but I would think that switching the substances released to the environment would put the system and shock, and result in an unstable climate , and terrible weather conditions. So not only is the new gas more potent than the previous, but it could also damage the system a a whole. So is it truly worth it to attempt to slow global warming?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140721181805.htm

Los Angeles River becomes Urban Oasis

Located in the middle of the Elysian Valley, a manmade flood barrier is soon to become a place for locals to kick back and relax. Although the river is located in the middle of a booming city, there are some more quiet areas that led environmentalists to propose the idea in 1985. Now that the campaign passed in late May of this year, a one billion dollar project, Omar Brownson, head of the River Revitalization Corporation says, “It will be seamless in terms of how the city and river blend together… the wetlands, picnic spots, flood control terraces, and bird habitats spanning 51 miles.”  In addition to this, the team plans to tear down roughly 9 miles of concrete and replace it with a series of walking paths and bike trails, and turning 4,200 acres into Griffin Park.

In my opinion, this is a brilliant way to revitalize a major urban area, and allow the people in surrounding areas to experience nature in their backyards. Although the project will take a couple years before it gets off the ground, it has potential to become a regional natural resource.  However, I can imagine it will be slightly complicated to get the final approval from Congress to move forward with the plan.

Fun Fact: Any ‘Grease’ fans? John Travolta’s iconic car race took place here, just south of City Hall!

(http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140719-los-angeles-river-restoration-kayaking-greenway/?rptregcta=reg_free_np&rptregcampaign=20131016_rw_membership_r1p_us_se_w#)