Earth Wise

By Randy SimonScience Education Self-Improvement Natural Sciences Nature

Earth Wise episodes

February 01, 2019 Saved By The Trees
The island of Kokota, part of the Zanzibar Archipelago off the coast
of Tanzania, is tiny – only one square kilometer and home to just 500
people. For centuries, its residents
subsisted by harvesting the islet’s natural resources, including its trees.
By the early 21st century, the deforestation had become unsustainable and the islanders faced a crisis. Fisheries were depleted, and rivers ran dry. The changing climate brought rising sea levels, more erratic rainfall, and coral bleaching in the surrounding waters. The situation looked hopeless.
But in recent years, the island has come back from the brink of
ruin. Reforestation efforts began in
2008 on the larger island of Pemba and on Kokota itself, led by a Pemba local
and a Canadian tree planter who formed the non-profit Community Forests
International. Since then, nearly 2
million trees have been planted on the two islands. Enthusiastic volunteers on Kokota usually
help plant trees during the rainy season, when water is plentiful.
Community Forests International, along with spearheading the tree
planting effort, also built Kokota’s first school, and installed rainwater
storage tanks for the community.
The conservation group is now devising ways for Kokota to make more
money by diversifying its agriculture with crops that grow well in its climate
including spices like cloves, cinnamon, and nutmeg. They are also helping locals to grow more and
different vegetables in their gardens.
Small, poor communities are often the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as drought, powerful storms, and depleted fisheries. Tiny Kokota provides an example of an environmental comeback. Fighting climate change requires economic solutions along with environmental solutions. For this one tiny island, it appears to have been saved by the trees.
**********
Web Links
This island was on the brink of disaster. Then, they planted thousands of trees.
Photo, posted July 18, 2015, courtesy of Marco Zanferrari via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 31, 2019 A New Way to Make Hydrogen
Many people consider hydrogen to be the fuel of the future, both for
powering vehicles and for storing energy generated by renewable sources. Hydrogen itself is a clean and green fuel. Generating energy from it using fuel cells
results in only water as a byproduct.
The biggest problem with hydrogen is that the most economical way to
produce it and therefore the way most hydrogen is produced today, is by
reforming natural gas, which is a process that generates carbon emissions.
The desirable way to make hydrogen is to produce it by breaking apart
water into its hydrogen and oxygen components, a process known as
electrolysis. There are many ways to do
it, but none of them to date measures up in terms of efficiency, cost, and
longevity.
Researchers at the University of Toronto have recently developed a new
catalyst that uses abundant, low-cost elements to split water molecules into
hydrogen and oxygen. The catalyst is
made from copper, nickel, and chromium, all of which are more abundant and less
costly than platinum, which is the usual electrolysis catalyst.
The new catalyst performs well under pH-neutral conditions, which means it could even work on seawater without incurring the expense of desalination. The Toronto researchers also believe their catalyst could be used as part of a process to make hydrocarbon fuels from hydrogen and CO22. Their group is among the five finalists in the Carbon XPrize competition, which has a grand prize of $7.5 million for finding a way to convert waste CO2 into fuel.
Finding a low-cost, energy-efficient, and reliable way to make
hydrogen out of water will be a big deal if it can be done on an industrial
scale.
**********
Web Links
U of T researchers discover low-cost way to produce hydrogen from water
Photo, posted July 23, 2015, courtesy of Magnus Johansson via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 30, 2019 Cloning Ancient Redwoods
During the 19th and 20th centuries, many of the world’s largest and oldest tress were cut down for their lumber. Some of these coast redwoods were 3,000 years old and measured 35 feet in diameter.
Today, giant stumps of these ancient redwoods dot the landscape from
Oregon to northern California and are a remnant of the old-growth forest that once
stretched across much of the Pacific Northwest.
An organization called the Archangel Ancient Tree Archive is dedicated
to reestablishing ancient redwood forests to help combat climate change. Coastal redwoods are not only huge but can
grow an average of 10 feet a year. One
of these enormous trees can sequester 250 tons of carbon dioxide over its
lifetime, more than 200 times the amount for an average tree.
While many experts thought that the giant stumps were lifeless,
arborists at Archangel collected DNA from the stumps of five giant coast
redwoods, all larger than the largest tree living today. They then used this genetic material to grow
dozens of saplings, which are clones of the ancient trees, in a process that
takes about two-and-a-half years.
To date, the Archangel Ancient Tree Archive has planted nearly 100 of
these saplings in the Eden Project garden in Cornwall, England, a couple of
hundred in Oregon, and most recently, has planted 75 in the Presidio National
Park in San Francisco.
According to arborists at the nonprofit organization, these saplings
have extraordinary potential to purify our air, water, and soil for generations
to come. Their hopes are that the new
San Francisco ‘super grove’ will be allowed to grow unmolested by manmade or
natural disasters and thus propagate forever.
**********
Web Links
Arborists Have Cloned Ancient Redwoods From Their Massive Stumps
Photo, posted April 8, 2013, courtesy of Michael Balint via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 29, 2019 Food Production And Climate Change
According to a University of Oxford study recently published in the journal Science, food production is a major driver of climate change as it’s responsible for 26% of all greenhouse gas emissions. But the research team found that the environmental impact of different foods varied greatly.
Meat and other animal products are responsible for 58% of all
food-related greenhouse gas emissions, despite only providing approximately
one-fifth of the calories we consume.
The researchers found that beef and lamb in particular have the most
damaging effect on the planet, responsible for half of all greenhouse gas
emissions from animal agriculture.
These findings echo recommendations from the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change about how individuals can reduce their carbon footprint
through diet. The IPCC suggests we
consume less meat and dairy products, consume more locally-sourced seasonal
foods, and throw less food in the trash.
Avoiding meat and dairy products can reduce an individual’s carbon
footprint from food by two-thirds. The
effects of doing so include everything from conserving water and preserving
biodiversity to reducing pollution and deforestation.
Interestingly, the same food can have major differences in terms of environmental impacts. For example, beef raised on deforested land is responsible for 12 times as many greenhouse gas emissions as that raised on natural pastures. But even the most climate-friendly meat options are still responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than the highest-impact vegetable proteins, like beans and nuts.
Big differences can also be made by avoiding chocolate and coffee
produced from deforested lands.
To learn more about the climate impact of your diet, follow the link
to the ‘Climate Change Food Calculator’ on our website:
Earth-Wise-Radio.org.
**********
Web Links
Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers
Climate change food calculator
Photo, posted June 21, 2011, courtesy of USDA NRCS Montana via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 28, 2019 Sustainable Plastics
According to the United Nations, plastic accounts for up to 90% of all the pollutants in the ocean. Conventional plastics take hundreds of years to decay, so all the plastic that gets into the oceans piles up and endangers marine life and pollutes the environment. Unfortunately, there are few comparable, environmentally friendly alternatives.
An often-proposed solution is bioplastics, which are not made from
petroleum and degrade quickly. The
downside of bioplastics is that growing the plants or bacteria used to make the
plastic requires fertile soil and fresh water, which are scarce commodities in
many places.
One such place is Israel. So,
researchers there at Tel Aviv University have developed a process to make a
bioplastic polymer that doesn’t require land or fresh water. The new polymer is derived from
microorganisms that feed on seaweed. It
is biodegradable, produces zero toxic waste and recycles into organic waste.
The polymer is called polyhydroxyalkanoate, or PHA for short. The raw material is multicellular seaweed, cultivated in the ocean. These algae are eaten by single-celled microorganisms, which also grow in salty seawater and produce a polymer that can be used to make bioplastic. PHA is already produced in commercial quantities, but it is currently made from plants that require agricultural land and fresh water. The new process would enable countries with limited fresh water, such as Israel, China and India, to switch from petroleum-based plastics to biodegradable plastics.
Plastics from fossil sources are one of the world’s biggest pollution problems. The new study shows that it is possible to produce bioplastic completely based on marine resources in an environmentally-friendly process.
**********
Web Links
Sustainable ‘plastics’ are on the horizon
Photo, posted March 14, 2015, courtesy of Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 25, 2019 Your Children’s Yellowstone
Yellowstone National Park was the first national park in the US and according to some sources, the first in the world. It is the home of charismatic megafauna and stunning geysers that attract over four million visitors a year. It is the only place in the United States where bison and wolves can be seen in great numbers. And it is changing.
Over the next few decades of climate change, Yellowstone will quite likely see increased fire, less forest, expanding grasslands, shallower, warmer waterways, and more invasive plants. All these things will alter how and how many animals move through the landscape.   Ecosystems are always changing, but climate change is transforming habitats so quickly that many plants and animals may not be able to make the transition at all.
Since 1948, the average annual temperature in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem has gone up by 2 degrees Fahrenheit.  On balance, winter is 10 days shorter and less cold. The Northern Rockies snowpack has fallen to its lowest level in eight centuries. Summers in the park are warmer, drier, and increasingly prone to fire.
Non-nutritious invasive plants like cheatgrass and desert madwort have replaced nutritious native plants. When plants like these take over, they suck moisture out of the ground early so that bison and elk cannot be sustained throughout the summer.
The behavior of elk and other animals is already changing, with many staying outside the park to nibble lawns and alfalfa fields. In turn, wolves go where the elk go.   Forests and waterways are changing as well.
The rapid changes going on at Yellowstone mean that the park that our children and grandchildren will visit in the future is likely to be a very different one from the Yellowstone we remember.
**********
Web Links
In Yellowstone National Park, warming has brought rapid changes.
Photo, posted September 7, 2016, courtesy of Mike Yang via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 24, 2019 Wildfire Pollution
California’s record-breaking wildfires this past season have been an unmitigated disaster with respect to loss of life, property, impact on human health, and in multiple other ways. And as if all of that was not bad enough, the impact on carbon emissions into the atmosphere was equally catastrophic. The wildfires were deadly and cost billions of dollars but were also terrible for the environment and for the public’s health.
According to estimates from the U.S. Department of the Interior, the California wildfires released emissions equivalent to about 68 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. That is equal to the emissions from generating one year’s worth of electricity in the state, or about 15% of the total annual emissions in the state of California.
It is a vicious circle in which the changes to the climate that have lengthened the fire season and shortened the precipitation season are creating additional contributions to the warming of the climate.
Over the past century, California has warmed by about 3 degrees Fahrenheit. That extra-warmed air sucks water out of plants and soils, resulting in trees, shrubs, and rolling grasslands that are dry and primed to burn. That vegetation-drying effect compounds with every additional degree of warming. Plants lose their water more efficiently as temperatures get higher.
The result is that wildfires are increasing in size both in California and across the western United States. Fire experts at Columbia University estimate that since the 1980s, the warming climate has contributed to an extra 10 million acres of burning in western forests – an area about the size of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined.
It’s a bad situation that is getting worse.
**********
Web Links
California’s 2018 Wildfires Have Emitted A Year’s Worth of Power Pollution
Photo, posted October 11, 2017, courtesy of Bob Dass via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 23, 2019 Support For A Green New Deal
Shortly after the November election, activists held a sit-in at Nancy Pelosi’s office calling for a Green New Deal – a plan to transform the U.S. energy economy in order to mitigate the effects of climate change as well as address various issues of economic justice. While a number of Congress people have pledged to back the creation of a select committee to develop such a plan, it remains a political football and it remains to be seen whether anything will come of the idea.
There appears to be much less reticence on the part of voters, at
least according to a survey conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change
Communication at the end of November.
The survey gave a brief explanation of the Green New Deal and asked
respondents “How much do you support or oppose this idea?”
The result was that 81% of registered voters either “strongly” or
“somewhat” supported it. Support was
stronger among Democrats at 92%, but a majority of Republicans were also in
favor. Some 57% of self-identified
conservative Republicans even thought it was a good idea.
The Green New Deal would accelerate the transition from fossil fuels
to clean, renewable energy. The goal
would be to generate 100% of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources
within the next 10 years; upgrade the nation’s energy grid, buildings, and
transportation infrastructure; increase energy efficiency; invest in green
technology research and development; and provide training for jobs in the new
green economy.
Even though most Americans have strong support for the ideas of the Green New Deal, it is quite uncertain whether such an initiative could become a reality, given that very influential special interest groups – notably the fossil fuel industry – will be fighting it tooth and nail.
**********
Web Links
81% of Voters Support a Green New Deal, Survey Finds
Photo, posted March 19, 2012, courtesy of Kate Ausburn via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 22, 2019 Smog And Solar Power
China has been struggling with some of the worst air pollution in the world. Beijing frequently sits under a brown blanket made of exhaust gases from industry, cars and coal fires, which dump harmful particulate matter, soot, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides into the air.
The human health consequences are severe. According to the World Health Organization,air pollution contributes to about 1.6 million premature deaths in China each year. World-wide, air pollution is implicated in over 7 million deaths annually.
Faced with this air pollution crisis, China has undertaken a wide variety of measures to improve its air and curb carbon dioxide emissions alongthe way. Among other things, China has invested heavily in the deployment of solar power and has plans for ever greater expansion of solar power in the future.
A study by researchers at ETH in Zurich looked at the impact of China’s air pollution on the production of solar energy. The smog in China’s cities reduces the amount of solar radiation that reaches the ground and therefore significantly reduces the power output of solar energy systems. According to the study, solar radiation would increase by an average of 11% nationwide as a result of strict air pollution control measures. In some places, cleaning up the air would result in 26% more energy production.
China’s electric power industry is the world’s largest electricity producer, having passed the United States in 2011. Two-thirds of the electricity in China still comes from coal, which, apart from the serious climate and health consequences associated with its use, continues to make it more difficult to switch to clean solar power. Much work remains to be done.
**********
Web Links
Fighting smog supports solar power
Photo, posted February 7, 2014, courtesy of Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min
January 21, 2019 Science And False Beliefs
There are sizeable numbers of people who hold to beliefs that run counter to overwhelming contrary evidence. Flat Earthers and Holocaust deniers are well-known examples and, more recently, people – some of them in high places – who reject the evidence for climate change.
New research published in the journal Open Mind by developmental psychologists at UC Berkeley suggest that feedback, rather than hard evidence, boosts people’s sense of certainty when learning new things or trying to tell right from wrong. People’s beliefs are more likely to be reinforced by the positive or negative reactions they are exposed to than by logic, reasoning, and scientific data.
People’s learning habits can limit one’s intellectual horizons. According to the study, if you think you know a lot about something, even though you don’t, you’re less likely to be curious enough to explore the topic further and will fail to learn how little you know.
This phenomenon plays out in social media and cable-news echo chambers and explains how some people are easily duped by charlatans. Receiving positive feedback for what they are saying can make people believe they know more than they actually do. This confidence makes them less likely to seek out and learn more information about the subject, as well as take into account contradicting opinions or facts.
Another factor is that what influences people’s certainty is that their confidence tends to depend on what they heard most recently rather than on long-term cumulative data. A few pieces of recent information tend to get much more attention than an extensive body of data. If a crazy theory is able to make a correct prediction a few times, people tend to get fixed in their belief in that theory and be less open to other information.
**********
Web Links
Here’s Why People Advocate False Beliefs, Conspiracy Theories Despite Evidence
Photo, posted February 2, 2007, courtesy of Tim J. Keegan via Flickr.
Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.
2 min

About Earth Wise

From the publisher's feed

From green business and new environmental legislation to how nature impacts our environment in ways never before considered, Earth Wise offers a look at our changing environment.