http://discovermagazine.com/2012/apr/07-does-rain-come-from-life-in-the-clouds/?

Summary:  In an April 2012 article in Discover magazine called “Does Rain come from Life in the Skies,” Douglas Fox reports on a growing number of scientists who believe that there are biological ecosystems in the clouds.  These scientists claim that it is these biosystems and how they work that answers the question, why certain clouds form raindrops and other very similar clouds do not.  Scientists already know that pure water can drop in a cloud to -40 degrees F before it freezes and forms ice which is the beginning of rain.  It confused some scientists to find that with dirt or other seeding of the clouds, that rain could form earlier.  The reason it is confusing is that sometimes even though there isn’t enough dust and other debris to form rain and the temperature is not cold enough, it still rains.  Fox flew with atmospheric chemist Kimberly Prather who along with others believe that it is the amount and type of bacteria that gets kicked up with the dust that determines whether raindrops are formed.  When studying clouds they have found bacteria with “ice genes” which make it easy for these bacteria to form ice.  Microbiologists are now finding and listing bacteria that have this particular ability to cause rain and believe that it is an entire ecosystem that creates rain.  Even more amazing is that it is bacteria and dust from Asia and Africa which effect rain in the United States and bacteria from the United States that effect Europe.  Also, the cloud systems are interesting because clouds that may look as though they are not moving or doing anything special are still involved in the constant process of evaporation and condensation.  The maximum amount of time a water droplet can condense before evaporating is 1 hour and clouds last and travel for many hours.  Scientists have discovered that there is a particularly strong bacteria found on rotting leaves called Pseudomonas syringae that can make water freeze at a relatively warm 28 degree F temperature. Obviously there are other scientists which disagree on the importance of bacteria in the clouds and it still remains a question as to whether it is a true biosystem or if it is just another thing that seeds the clouds and makes the weather harder to predict.

Reaction:  The reason I found this article interesting is that it always seems like the weather people struggle to predict the weather correctly. Maybe some how determining the amount and type of microbes in the clouds, meteorologists could better predict weather patterns. Also, it is weird to think that bacteria in the clouds could influence the weather and rain amounts. If it turns out to be true, maybe we can control the weather and how much rain certain areas get.

Questions

1)      Will this information someday help us to figure out ways around droughts since we can now use more than chemicals to seed clouds?

2)      Could this information be helpful to control flooding by decreasing rainfall when an area is already over come with too much water?

3)      If there are microbes in clouds, then how does air pollution effect them?

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/04/30/no-easy-scapegoat-for-hong-kong-pollution/?KEYWORDS=air+pollution

No Easy Scapegoat for Hong Kong Pollution

Summary: It seems Hong Kong's long smoggy skies cant be blamed on polluting factories in mainland China no longer. A new analysis has been released showing the city's air pollution is all to blame on Hong Kong itself. According to a recently released report for air quality Pearl River Delta area, their skies have been improvement over this past year.  Cleaner industrial production, better energy efficiency can all be thanked for this improvement.  But according to then Clean Air Network (local environmental group) the city's pollution has actually worsened, especially roadside pollution. The Delta region's nitrogen dioxide (a big part of roadside pollution) has dropped 13% but in Hong Kong a rise of 28% was seen, and this was from 2006 data! " Indeed, for concentrations of nitrogen dioxide, Hong Kong ranks second among 32 major Chinese cities, surpassing even notoriously smoggy Beijing, according to official Chinese data." For such a wealthy city many people are disappointed in the lack of leadership there. Many measures have started to be taken except for ones that could be one of the biggest contributors, boats and ships. The Clean Air Network has posted the blame on the city's rising car ownership and the aging of its car fleet. Several cities are taking action against this by paying people to retire their old cars and many experts say Hong Kong should join them.               

Reaction: I found this article interesting because before reading it I had no such knowledge of this problem in Hong Kong let alone several other Chinese cities. This really concern me that the problem is so bad its own residents walk around with masks on so they don't have to breathe the air! To see this problem in such a wealthy city it disappoints me they haven't done anything earlier. Tourists let alone the people have been scared off by the smog. I really hope to see follow ups on this, I would like to know how much progress they make and how it might really help us to have such knowledge of methods. And to improve upon these methods if our own cities see this horrible drop in air quality.

Questions:              

1. Except for the car retirement, what else do you think are some effective methods for lower the air pollution?
2. How would you feel as a resident? Who you breathe this air knowing of the pollution, or would you wear a mask like the women we see in this picture?
3. What is the number one most air polluted city in China?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203986604577257770238882852.html?KEYWORDS=alternative+energy+sources

Natural Gas to Power Pickups

 

 Summary: "U.S. auto makers are introducing pickup trucks powered by natural gas as they look to catch the growing wave of interest in the fuel as an alternative to gasoline"(Bennett).  Several motor companies have started to feature CNG-powerd cars, which run on both natural gas and gasoline. Chrysler Group LLC has just annouced the first production line pickup truck powered by natural gas. They are promising at least 2,000 heavy duty ram bi-fuel trucks, by the end of the fourth quarter. General Motors is also offering a bi-fuel Chevrolet Silveroda and GMC Sierra. They will be made by GM and sent to a supplier that willl refitt them for compressed gas use. Ford Motors has been offering a CNG prep kits for at leats six of thier vechiles. And will soon expand this to its large Ford 650. Honda Motor Co. is also in on the CNG market, it has been selling a only natural gas car since 1998.  The biggest problem with CNG cars is refueling. "Today there are fewer then 400 public CNG fueling stations in the US"(Bennett).

Reaction: I think this could be a great way to cut our oil use and emissions assuming the emissions from the CNG aren't as enviromentally harmful as those from regular gas engine cars. I really like these because I love hearing new ways to sway us from our gas operated cars and bring to a cleaner way of transportation without taking away the convenence of our personal cars. The only problem would be establishing public fuel stations all around th US. Overcoming this problem with all the money it would cost would most likely make a huge amount of jobs, experts say this industry could produece a huge 600,000 jobs by the end of this decade alone. Which is just a great plus along with helping our enviroment.

Questions:

1. What did president Obama have to say about this?
2. If this industry takes off what effect do you think it will have on the oil indusrty?
3. Would the natural gas for these cars be cheaper then oil?
 

Article: 4 Bold Ideas to Make America’s Energy Supply Safer, Cleaner & Virtually Inexhaustible

 http://discovermagazine.com/2011/nov/04-bold-ideas-energy-safer-cleaner-inexhaustible

Summary:  This article indicates that there is a new way to view our “energy crisis” These author characterize an “energy transition” between the types of energy used and the way we produce it.  We cannot rely on imported oil being 42 % of our trade deficit, nor fossil fuels being 95% of carbon emissions.  The four ideas are to reengineer the grid around electric vehicles.  The author argues we need to integrate our electric grid with the transportation infrastructure, so that electric cars can help reduce our carbon emissions.  Some of the savings to the system will be to provide incentives to have people charge their cars during off hours, so that electric companies will be using green, less carbon dependent fuel to make the electricity.  The technology to enhance the efficiency of batteries is coming of age and cost of these types of cars will decrease.

Reaction:  I really liked this article because as I have indicated before I like creative ways to solve problems.  Rather than just trying to use less gas or less fossil fuels this assumes we will use at least as much energy as before but we will be smarter about it.  We will be using electric cars that are better on emissions and we will build an infrastructure that allows people to  charge their cars and do it at non-peak times when costs are less and the fuel used to produce the electricity are more from sun/wind or nuclear.  We would not only improve pollution but make great headway on our dependence on foreign oil.  This reduction in trade deficit means that the country will have less debt which will stimulate the economy further.

Questions:

1)      Would employers be willing to help employees charge cars at would by building parking lots connected to their electrical grids, if they were allowed to vary the electric power draw based on when they could get energy cheaper?

2)      Could we get politicians of both parties in Washington to create tax breaks to help create an infrastructure of electricity around the country to someday replace gas stations?

3)      What responsibility does government have in trying to retrain the people who would be displaced by the decline in oil use?  That is with less refineries and gas stations how do we convert those jobs into a whole new industry?

Is what we're recycling actually getting recycled?

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/conservation/issues/recycling-reality.htm

Picture: A landfill full of decomposing waste.

Summary: When you throw your recyclables or trash into the proper bins, do you actually think for a second about where it all goes? Do the companies actually recycle, or do they just dump it into landfills along with all of the other waste?  The movement of recycling in America came around in 1973, and it soon became a very large public service. Recycling is great for the environment because it reduces the amount of waste going into landfills. Recycling can also be very beneficial to the people recycling and other big companies. Recyclables are considered a commodity, or goods that can be sold, and these recyclables are broken down into raw materials and then sold to companies to make certain products. But does everything you recycle actually make it this far, or is it sometimes a fraud?

Sometimes recyclable materials can be soiled with other materials that make recycling them a big deal. When it becomes difficult to separate the two, it also becomes extremely expensive to do so. Some items such as pizza boxes with grease on it cannot be recycled due to foreign materials. Also, broken glass in many different colors can be extremely difficult to separate and recycle. Naturally, companies and schools do not want to spend extra money to recycle, so they have the bins that are to be recycled, but end up putting it all in the trash anyway. This leads people to be quite unsure about exactly where their recyclables are going to end up.  

Opinion/Reflection:

I was slightly surprised at the idea that my recyclables might not end up where they are intended to go, but I am not surprised that people would not recycle due to costs. I understand that it can be a lot of money to recycle, especially in these rough times, but people need to realize the benefits greatly outweigh the minor financial setbacks. Although this is how people are, and it does not just happen with recycling.

Questions:

11)      What are some reasons why recycling companies cannot make recycling more affordable?

22)      How can recycling companies make recycling more affordable?

33)      What are some other examples of companies not following  recycling laws?

44)      What is a trash audit?

Global Limits of Biomass Energy

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080611181214.htm 

Picture: This picture gives some examples of sources for biomass energy.

Summary: My article discusses the pros and cons of biomass energy. Biomass energy is the burning of any wastes or living things to obtain energy. Biomass is a very good source of energy. It is an alternative to fossil fuels, is clean, and is renewable. It is also a good way to clear some of our waste, and make it useful. In fact, 30% of Brazil's car fuel comes from sugar cane. Although, biomass does have some problems too. To use biomass energy, we need a lot of space in abandoned crop fields which could be used for farming. We could also add gases to the atmosphere that could affect global warming, and we could threaten food supply.

Opinion/Reflection: I think that biomass is a great way to obtain energy. It is easy compared to other energy-obtainin methods, and helps get rid of some of our wastes. It is cheap and is a great alternative to fossil fuels. Although it does some problems, I believe that biomass would be a great way to obtain energy for our country. 

Questions:

1) Do you think that using biomass is a good way to obtain energy?

2) How can you use biomass energy at home?

3) What do you think would be a better source of energy, if any? 

Brazil Fights Against Deforestation
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/04/26/brazil-congress-votes-to-relax-deforestation-laws/

Deforestation in Brazil

Summary:
Brazil is undergoing major deforestation issues. So far it's lost about 20% of it's forests. Over the years there have been struggles between citizens and congress regarding how much deforestation is taking place. People have been trying to get laws put out or other plans to help protect the environment.

Not too long ago there was a bill that was being passed allowing farmers to gain more land. However, this would result in even more trees being demolished. The citizens of Brazil though, fought with the congress to get the bill to change a bit. Luckily, they won and saved most of the forests from any more harsh destruction.

Reaction:
It's great to see people stick up for something like this. Knowing that there was actually going to be a bill passed basically saying that deforestation is okay is crazy! If they were going to follow through with it I could only imagine what the forests would look like afterwards. Forests are extremely important for habitats for animals so poor creatures are either forced to find a new place to live or end up suffering. Overall I think its great that the congress agreed to make some of those changes to the bill.

Questions:
1) What did the bill say exactly?
2) How do you feel about the bill without the changes? do you think that the changes were better or worse?
3) How can people help lower the deforestation rate?