Author Archives: Bikor11

7 Sneaky Plastic Items to Stop Using

This Earth Day, reducing our plastic consumption is a huge step we can take toward making the planet a better place?and this huge step is actually comprised of several itty, bitty steps! Addressing this part of our lives doesn?t mean we have to immediately and completely shun plastic in all its forms (although, if you?d like to go cold turkey, have at it!).

By being more aware of the everyday situations wherein plastic can sneak into our lives, we can opt to be better prepared and to ultimately reduce how much plastic creation we are supporting.

1. Produce bags

These have an easy way of sneaking their way into our lives while grocery shopping. Even if we commit to not using them for firm fruits and veggies, it is hard to resist a plastic casing for delicate herbs and greens. However, arming ourselves with reusable (and washable) cotton or mesh bags for this purpose is a great step toward never having to use those wasteful plastic bags again.

2. Straws

The sneakiest! They show up in our restaurant and bar drinks without having to ask. Yet, remembering to ask for ?no straw, please? can be quickly learned. If you still like the feel of sipping through a straw, several glass and stainless steel versions exist (some with their own cloth bags for portability).

3. Items that could be purchased in bulk

Hungry for pistachios? Need some pine nuts for a new recipe? Most of these items (and more) can be found in bulk at health food stores and, more often nowadays, more mainstream grocers, as well. Bringing a cloth or mesh bag for nuts and grains (and then transferring to glassware at home) and even glassware for items like nut butters, maple syrup and olive oil (have an associate weigh your container first) are great Earth-friendly ways to reduce plastic waste and the demand for more plastic creation.

4. Bottles of water

It cannot be said enough: always have a water bottle with you! This will reduce temptation to buy water bottles or accept offers for one (?No thank you, I have my water bottle?).

5. Snack bags

Instead of storing snacks (or fridge leftovers) in little plastic bags that will probably be thrown away after one use, invest in some quality reusable packaging: cloth wraps, glassware, stainless steel boxes, etc.

6. Plastic tampon applicators

The only item on this list I?m sure is only used once and definitely thrown away, instead of recycled. Instead of relying on these, consider investing in a menstrual cup that can be used for years – less waste, less hassle and less moments of panic when you realize you don?t have any tampons on hand. If that doesn?t float your boat, several companies are now creating panties that absorb menstrual blood so tampons needn?t enter the equation.

7. Gifts from others

Surprises are wonderful, as are gifts from loved ones. Yet, those who may not be aware of our mission to make the world a plastic-free place may provide gifts chock full of the stuff. As meaningful dates approach, you can gently let your loved ones know that you would greatly appreciate spending time together to make new memories and, oh, by the way, you?re working on reducing your plastic consumption so there?s no need to gift anything with plastic ingredients.

Related Stories:

Here’s What Happens to a Plastic Bag After You Throw It Away
Check the Label for These Sneaky Non-Vegan Ingredients
10 Ways to Get Plastic Out of Your Kitchen

Photo credit: Thinkstock

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View this article:

7 Sneaky Plastic Items to Stop Using

Posted in alo, bigo, eco-friendly, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Presto, PUR, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 7 Sneaky Plastic Items to Stop Using

Do People Really Dislike Jeopardy Champ Arthur Chu Because He Hits the Buzzer Too Hard?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Let’s talk about something completely trivial for a bit: Arthur Chu, the polarizing Jeopardy! champion currently on a 7-game winning streak. Caitlin Dewey explains why so many people don’t like him:

Since time immemorial — read: September 1984 — “Jeopardy!” has followed a simple pattern: Contestants pick a category; they progress through the category from top to bottom; they earn winnings when they, through their hard-earned and admirable intellect, get the questions right.

Chu has turned that protocol upside down … and shaken the change out of its pockets. For one thing, he sometimes plays to tie, not win, thereby guaranteeing he brings a lesser competitor to challenge him the next day. He skips around the board looking for Daily Doubles, gobbling them up before competitors find them, in the process monopolizing all the high-value questions. Most unforgivably to many, Chu tries to squeeze in the most questions per round by pounding the bejesus out of his buzzer and interrupting Alex Trebek.

It’s the bolded comment I’m curious about. I understand why people could be annoyed by Chu skipping around the board so aggressively. Aside from a sense that he might be taking unfair advantage of his experience vs. a pair of newbies, it makes it a little harder to follow the game at home. I also get why some people might not like the idea of playing to tie. Both of these complaints may be overstated—Chu isn’t the first guy to go searching for Daily Doubles, and playing to tie only affects a few seconds of game play—but I understand them.

That said, what’s up with the complaint that he tries to ring in aggressively? That doesn’t even make sense. Everyone tries to ring in aggressively. Being fast on the buzzer is one of the cornerstones of the game. It might even be more important than knowing lots of answers. (Pretty much everyone who makes it onto the show knows lots of answers.)

So where does this come from? Am I missing something?

POSTSCRIPT: I myself initially found Chu a little annoying, though mostly for his affect more than his actual game play. But I’ve warmed to him just because he’s so damn good. He’s a serious buzzsaw at the game, and it’s hard not to admire that. I noticed last night, though, that the other contestants were starting to mimic his strategy. I wonder if that will be his undoing before long?

See more here:  

Do People Really Dislike Jeopardy Champ Arthur Chu Because He Hits the Buzzer Too Hard?

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Do People Really Dislike Jeopardy Champ Arthur Chu Because He Hits the Buzzer Too Hard?

Which Hollywood-Style Climate Disasters Will Strike in Your Lifetime?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a just-released report, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has taken an extensive look at the scary side, the dramatic side…let’s face it, the Hollywood side of global warming. The new research falls under the heading of “abrupt climate change”: The report examines the doomsday scenarios that have often been conjured in relation to global warming (frequently in exaggerated blockbuster films), and seeks to determine how likely they are to occur in the real world.

So here’s a list of some of the most dreaded abrupt changes (where abrupt means occurring within a period of a few decades or even years), and the probability that they’ll happen—even if nothing like the Hollywood version—before the year 2100:

20th Century Fox/Wikimedia Commons

Disruption of the Ocean’s “conveyor belt”

As Seen In: The scientifically panned 2004 blockbuster The Day After Tomorrow.

What Would Happen: The great overturning circulation of the oceans, driven by the temperature and the salt content of waters at high latitudes, transports enormous amounts of heat around the planet. If it is disrupted or comes to a halt, there could be stark changes in global weather patterns.

Chances It Will Happen This Century: Low. For future generations, however, The Day After Tomorrow might be slightly less laughable (if still wildly exaggerated). In the longer term, the NAS rates the probability of a disruption as “high.”

CBS/Wikimedia Commons

A sharp increase in extreme precipitation events

As Seen In: The over-the-top Category 7 and the even more over-the-top Sharknado.

What Would Happen: The frequency and/or intensity of extreme precipitation events—including heavy rains, damaging flooding, droughts, and hurricanes—would show a relatively sudden increase. The consequence would be not only the potential for more weather disasters and their associated costs but also, the NAS warns, the possibility of “increased conflict” following disasters. No Category 7s, but still something worth worrying about.

Chances It Will Happen This Century: According to the NAS, we can already detect a clear trend towards more extreme flooding, although trends in other extreme weather phenomena, such as droughts and hurricanes, are more murky for the moment. As for an abrupt change this century? NAS rates the outlook as “moderate.”

Universal/Wikimedia Commons

Extreme Sea Level Rise Due to Polar Ice Sheet Collapse

As Seen In: The 1995 Kevin Costner classic Waterworld.

What Would Happen: Here is arguably the scariest global warming scenario—the collapse of all or part of the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica, leading to rapid and extreme sea level rise. (But no, the continents would not disappear as in Waterworld. Not remotely.)

Chances It Will Happen This Century: Fortunately, this risk is not likely to materialize before 2100, according to the NAS—with one possible exception, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which contains the equivalent of 3 to 4 meters of sea level rise. The NAS judges that an abrupt change here during this century is “plausible, with an unknown although probably low probability.” In the longer term, meanwhile, the probability is high that some of the great ice sheets of the planet will indeed melt substantially and drive sea level rise on a scale measured in meters, rather than inches.

Universal/Wikimedia Commons

Worse Heat Waves, More Often

As Seen In: Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing (which isn’t directly about global warming, of course, but is definitely about heat).

What Would Happen: Heat waves can be devastating. Not only can they kill significant numbers of people (and spark conflict), but they also can imperil agriculture and water supplies.

Chances It Will Happen This Century: According to the NAS, a climate-related trend towards more intense and frequent heat waves has already been detected. And the outlook for an abrupt change for the worse in this century is “moderate.”

Catastrophic Methane Release from the Arctic

As Seen In: Amazingly, to our knowledge Hollywood hasn’t made use of this one yet.

What Would Happen: One oft-touted climate fear is that undersea Arctic deposits of methane hydrate will be destabilized or even explode, releasing large volumes of gas into the atmosphere that, in turn, trigger rapid global warming. This scenario is particularly frightening because methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. By worsening global warming, an Arctic methane “bomb” would also increase the risk of other dangerous abrupt climate changes.

Chances It Will Happen This Century: “Low,” says the NAS. Over the longer term, however, the risk rises to “moderate”; and when it comes to a related threat—the release of stored carbon from the thawing of northern permafrost, which would also amplify global warming—the long-term risk is “high.”

Warner Bros.

disappearing Arctic sea ice

As Seen In: The 2012 Imax film To the Arctic (yes, a documentary).

What Would Happen: The loss of summer Arctic sea ice has profound effects, ranging from opening up dramatic new opportunities for shipping and resource exploitation, to reshaping ecosystems and native cultures, to changing global weather patterns.

Chances it Will Happen This Century: The NAS considers the ongoing changes in the Arctic region to be an abrupt climate change that is already upon us. So you can watch this one in a documentary, or even in satellite images.

Originally posted here:

Which Hollywood-Style Climate Disasters Will Strike in Your Lifetime?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Which Hollywood-Style Climate Disasters Will Strike in Your Lifetime?

Marcellus Shale fracking wells use 5 million gallons of water apiece

Marcellus Shale fracking wells use 5 million gallons of water apiece

cotterpin

Frackers are slurping this right up.

Forget about residents. Forget about fish. The streams and rivers of Pennsylvania and West Virginia are being heavily tapped to quench the growing thirst of the fracking industry.

According to a new report, each of the thousands of fracking wells drilled to draw gas and oil out of the Marcellus Shale formation in those two states uses an average of 4.1 to 5.6 million gallons of fresh water. That’s more than the amount of water used by fracking wells in three other big shale formations around the country:

EarthworksClick to embiggen.

And with approximately 6,000 wells in Pennsylvania alone, the industry is taking a heavy toll on the region’s waterways. The map below shows drilling permits in Pennsylvania and West Virginia; note the heavy concentration within the Susquehanna River basin.

EarthworksClick to embiggen.

Much of the water is being skimmed off the tops of rivers and streams. In West Virginia, the researchers concluded that 80 percent comes from these surface waterways.

From the report [PDF], which was produced by researchers at San Jose State University and consulting firm Downstream Strategies for the environmental nonprofit Earthworks:

[T]he entire flow of the Susquehanna River contributes 26 billion gallons of water per day to the Chesapeake Bay. The cumulative volume of water used by all wells in Pennsylvania is roughly equal to the daily flow from the entire river basin. These cumulative impacts are especially important because such a large percentage of the water injected does not return to the surface and is lost to the hydrologic cycle. The volume of water injected to date in Pennsylvania is also roughly 1% of the 2.5 trillion gallons of total surface water in Pennsylvania alone. While overall, 1% might be seen as only a marginal impact, these volumes could be critical in times of drought. Also, as drilling expands, the cumulative impacts are likely to grow proportional to water use. The development of the deeper and thicker Utica Shale that underlies the Marcellus with similar techniques will require substantially more water.

The report notes that much of the data its researchers had sought was unavailable. Lax water-reporting rules mean the region is swimming in uncertainty over how much water is actually being used by Marcellus Shale frackers, and how much wastewater they’re dumping or injecting into disposal wells.

“Our analysis of available data and identification of missing data indicates that, even with new reporting requirements, we still don’t know the full scale of impacts on water resources,” researcher Dustin Mulvaney of San Jose University said. “States should require operators to track and report water and waste at every step, from well pad construction to fracturing to disposal.”


Source
Water Resource Reporting and Water Footprint from Marcellus Shale Development in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, Downstream Strategies

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Continue reading – 

Marcellus Shale fracking wells use 5 million gallons of water apiece

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Marcellus Shale fracking wells use 5 million gallons of water apiece

Obama Names 4 to Review Group on NSA Surveillance

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

ABC News reports that President Obama has chosen a group of four people to “assess whether, in light of advancements in communications technologies, the United States employs its technical collection capabilities in a manner that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust.” Here they are:

A group of veteran security experts and former White House officials has been selected to conduct a full review of U.S. surveillance programs and other secret government efforts disclosed over recent months, ABC News has learned.

The recent acting head of the CIA, Michael Morell, will be among what President Obama called a “high-level group of outside experts” scrutinizing the controversial programs. Joining Morell on the panel will be former White House officials Richard Clarke, Cass Sunstein and Peter Swire. An announcement is expected Thursday, a source with knowledge of the matter told ABC News’ Jon Karl.

I don’t think any of us expected Glenn Greenwald or Noam Chomsky to be appointed to this review group, but it would have been nice to have at least one person on board who’s a strong voice for reining in the surveillance state. The closest we have among this group is Peter Swire, who was Bill Clinton’s privacy guy. I don’t know much about him, but here are some excerpts from an interview he gave last month about Edward Snowden’s disclosure of NSA surveillance programs:

The telephone information database story, to me, is big news….In human history, the government has never really had a database of your location that way, and this database apparently does that….The problem with great big databases is, once they exist, people find ways to use them….Having studied the uses and abuses of the data during the anti-communist era up through the 1970s that led up to Watergate, I think that having those kinds of databases is a real problem.

….I think it’s really time for a re-evaluation of whether the FISA rules are the ones we should have going forward….We should have less secrecy about the legal theories. A Freedom of Information Act request suggests that we’ve actually had secret court decisions that say something is unconstitutional, but we don’t know what the court said was unconstitutional and we don’t even know its legal theories. When it comes to secret law, that shouldn’t be the way that it works in the United States.

….Another area that’s ripe for change is to have more reporting in public, especially of summary statistics, so we have a sense of how much the investigations are about some particular person or small group of people, and how much instead the investigations are really about, “Give us every e-mail that you have in this huge database.” In a world of clouds, that an investigation can get the whole database is really going too broad. The whole idea in the Fourth Amendment is we’re supposed to avoid general warrants. We’re supposed to have particularity for the searches.

This is fairly mild stuff, but at least these are the right noises to make. We’ll see how hard he pushes these ideas and whether the rest of the group agrees to take them seriously.

Visit site:  

Obama Names 4 to Review Group on NSA Surveillance

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Names 4 to Review Group on NSA Surveillance