GreenEnergy4.us

Please

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

Your odds of getting struck by lightning just increased

Original source:

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Pines, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged (Lightning, berkeley, climate, climate & energy, florida, hurricanes, journal, lai, Ona, organic, state | Comments Off

This map shows where we’ve screwed the oceans most

by JefferyDRJ Posted on November 13, 2014

Here be ocean acidification

This map shows where we’ve screwed the oceans most

By Amelia Urry

13 Nov 2014 4:30 PM

This map shows where we’ve screwed the oceans most

We’ve gotten a lot better at mapping the oceans since the days of “Here There Be Monsters” — thanks, satellite overlords! — and now we have a new map to add to the stack: an up-to-date chart of exactly where the oceans have acidified the most.

A team of geochemists led by Taro Takahashi at Columbia University just published the research in the journal Marine Chemistry as a series of colorful maps (incidentally, our favorite form for groundbreaking scientific research to take). Takahashi and colleagues spent the past four decades collecting the data, which will serve as a benchmark for future measures of acidification.

Here’s a map of pH values in February 2005. Click to embiggen.Takahashi

As you probably know, ocean acidification is the underwater flip side of our atmospheric emissions problem: The oceans have absorbed a quarter of the CO2 released into the atmosphere over the past 200 years. This has led to plunging pH levels (read: spiking levels of acidity) across the oceans as a whole, and in certain places more dramatically: The Indian Ocean is 10 percent more acidic than the Atlantic and Pacific, and the Bering Sea scores highest overall – as you can see from that scary purple blob above.

But the Bering isn’t that acidic all year. In addition to where, the charts also show when the oceans are more or less acidic — since month by month, pH values rise and fall at different parts of the ocean’s surface, with the largest fluctuations found in the waters off Siberia, Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and Antarctica.

In addition to the where, the maps also show when the oceans are more or less acidic — since month by month, pH values rise and fall at different parts of the ocean’s surface, with the largest fluctuations found in the waters off Siberia, Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and Antarctica. Blame massive plankton blooms that pull CO2 from waters in the spring and summer, causing seawater acidity to drop. Then winter brings CO2-rich upwellings from the deep, swinging the pH pendulum of surface waters back toward acidic.

We may not know how much the oceans will acidify in the long run, or how bad that picture looks — but for now this study paints a portrait of our rapidly souring relationship to the sea

Source:
New Global Maps Detail Human-Caused Ocean Acidification

, Columbia University.

This Is Where Humans Have Made Our Oceans Most Acidic

, Motherboard.

Find this article interesting?

Please

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

This map shows where we’ve screwed the oceans most

Visit site:

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, PUR, solar, solar panels, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged anchor, indian, king, ocean, research, siberia, solar, takahashi, university | Comments Off

3 Ways Meatless Monday Helps the Earth

by SheldonRawls Posted on November 2, 2014

Source:

3 Ways Meatless Monday Helps the Earth

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged eating for health, green, green divas podcast, health, healthy eating, meatless monday, Ona, organic, the green divas podcast, vegan | Comments Off

Sorry, but your shrimp platter didn’t come from the Gulf

by WilmerBelanger Posted on October 30, 2014

shrimply appalling

Sorry, but your shrimp platter didn’t come from the Gulf

By Amelia Urry

30 Oct 2014 6:50 PM

Sorry, but your shrimp platter didn’t come from the Gulf

We already knew about the mangroves. We knew about the bycatch and habitat destruction. Heck, we knew about the whole SLAVERY thing, but that didn’t stop us from gobbling shrimp scampi like they’re going extinct. And, still, we hoped there might be a better way.

Now, clearly sensing we might need another deterrent to stop eating ALL THE SHRIMP all the time, the world sent us some new bad news about the tasty, tasty crustaceans: They’re probably not what you think they are.

In a report released Thursday, ocean-advocacy group Oceana conducted a survey of 111 restaurants and grocery stores across the U.S., and found that more than a third of the sampled shrimp were vaguely labeled, or else mislabeled entirely.

The confusion begins with the fact that there are 41 species of shrimp sold in the U.S., but any of them may just be labeled as “shrimp.” It deepens when it turns out that many of those labeled “Gulf” or “wild-caught” were really a species of farmed shrimp. It’s easy to prawn off these crustaceans as more valuable versions of themselves when more than 90 percent of the U.S. shrimp is imported, and only a small percent of that is ever inspected. Still, the depth and variety of deception is shrimply staggering. Consider this from the Guardian:

Unexpectedly, some of the shrimp that were identified in the survey were genetically unknown to science, and one sample taken from a bag of frozen seafood even turned out to be a banded coral shrimp — a species renowned on reefs and coveted as a ‘pet’ shrimp by aquarium enthusiasts, but certainly not as food. “It’s one of the things you look for on a reef,” Warner says. “How it ended up in a bag of salad-size shrimp, I have no idea.”

New York had one of the highest rates of shrimp-fraud, with 43 percent of samples misrepresented — but no one got off scot-free.

The only possible way to feel WORSE about eating shrimp is to go eat 101 of them at Red Lobster’s Endless Shrimp promotion. That’s REALLY going to hurt.

Source:
A third of US shrimp is ‘misrepresented’

, Guardian.

Find this article interesting?

Please

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

Sorry, but your shrimp platter didn’t come from the Gulf

From –

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, organic, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged anchor, endless, food crime, g & f, Ona, organic, please, shrimp, solar power, still, work, world | Comments Off

18 Crazy & Inspiring Facts About Water

by NganElkington Posted on October 27, 2014

Link to article:

18 Crazy & Inspiring Facts About Water

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged conservation, eco-friendly tips, environment, green, health, home, Ona, videos, water | Comments Off

Dividing and Conquering the Trash

by Myrna Posted on October 25, 2014

Rubicon Global, a waste consultant, finds a lucrative niche in helping its business clients cut their hauling costs, and to recycle whatever they can. Original post: Dividing and Conquering the Trash ; ; ;

Continue at source:

Dividing and Conquering the Trash

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Monterey, ONA, organic, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged alo, department, empire, environment, glottkin, helping-its, monks, rubicon global | Comments Off

Whole Foods Announces Program for The Conscious Consumer

by AlyciaS06gtz Posted on October 23, 2014

Visit link:

Whole Foods Announces Program for The Conscious Consumer

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged biodiversity, climate, eating for health, Flowers, healthy aging, Ona, vegan | Comments Off

The Midwest’s Vast Farms Are Losing a Ton of Money This Year

by ErwinHanson Posted on October 22, 2014

Mother Jones

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

Think you have it tough at work? Consider the plight of the Midwest’s corn and soybean farmers. They churn out the basic raw materials of our food system: the stuff that gets turned into animal feed, sweetener, cooking fat, and even a substantial amount of our car fuel. What do they get for their trouble? According to a stunning analysis (PDF) by Iowa State ag economist Chad Hart, crop prices have fallen so low (a bumper crop has driven down corn prices to their lowest level since 2006), and input costs (think seeds, fertilizers, pesticides) have gotten so high, that they’re losing $225 per acre of corn and $100 per acre of soybeans. So if you’re an Iowa farmer with a 2,000-acre farm, and you planted it half and half in these two dominant crops, you stand to lose $325,000 on this year’s harvest.

Over on Big Picture Agriculture—the excellent blog that alerted me to Hart’s assessment—Kay McDonald wonders: “Is organic corn the way to go next year?” She points out organic corn receives a large premium in the market, and key input costs—seeds, fertilizers, and insecticides—are much lower, making the economics better.

Another possibility is one I’ve been banging on about for years: why not take some of the Midwest’s vast stock of farmland—say, 10 percent?—and devote it to vegetable and fruit production? And take another slice of it and bring it back to perennial grass for pasture-based beef and pork production? Both vegetables and pastured meat deliver much more income pre acre than commodity corn and soybeans, once the systems are up and running and the infrastructure in place. And considering how much of our produce comes from drought-stricken California, that would likely be a wise move from a food security standpoint.

Alas, none of this is likely to happen, at least not anytime soon. That’s because crop subsidies, enshrined by the farm bill signed in February, will likely wipe out much of the huge gap between farmers’ costs and what the market gives them. According to Bloomberg, taxpayers are set to pay “billions of dollars more to subsidize farmers than anticipated just months ago,” before crop prices plunged.

I don’t begrudge federal support for farming. As I argued in a post last year, large-scale commodity farming is a vicious business—farmers are caught in a vice between a small handful of buyers (Archers Daniels Midland, Cargill, Bunge) that are always looking to drive crop prices down, and a small handful of input suppliers (Monsanto, DuPont Pioneer, Syngenta, etc) always looking to push the price of seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides up. It’s no wonder, as Iowa State’s Hart has shown, that the “long run profitability” of such farming is “zero.”

But as it’s structured now, the subsidy system keeps farmers chugging along on the corn-soy treadmill. Meanwhile, transitioning to organic ag and diversifying crops to include vegetables and pastured meat would also require much more hands-on labor and a new set of skills for Midwestern farmers, who have been operating in a corn-soy-chemical system for decades. It would also require the rebuilding of infrastructure—small-scale slaughterhouses, canneries, cold storage, etc.—that were dismantled as corn and soy came to dominance. Supporting such a transition, and not propping up an unhealthy food system suffused with cheap corn and soy, seems like a good use of the billions of federal dollars that are about to be spent.

Link to original:

The Midwest’s Vast Farms Are Losing a Ton of Money This Year

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dr. Bronners, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged archers-daniels, federal, infrastructure, king, lai, midwestern, pdf, radius, state, supporting, syngenta | Comments Off

Pumpkins’ biggest threat isn’t Mischief Night or Billy Corgan

by Harvey50Gffjqmb Posted on October 22, 2014

Out of our Gourds

Pumpkins’ biggest threat isn’t Mischief Night or Billy Corgan

By Sam Bliss

22 Oct 2014 1:53 PM

Pumpkins’ biggest threat isn’t Mischief Night or Billy Corgan

California’s neverending drought spares no plant, animal, or holiday tradition. The record-setting dry spell threatens organic dairy, craft beer, grass-fed beef, almonds, lawns, hay, greens, rice, and people who depend on water sources appropriated by bottled water companies. To that list you can now add pumpkins.

Less water has meant smaller pumpkins for some farmers, and heat waves ripened many potential jack-o’-lanterns earlier than usual this year. NBC News’ coverage indicates that our yellow-orange carving gourds aren’t super resilient:

Most pumpkins are grown on smaller farms. And they don’t go far from the fields. Despite their tough exterior, pumpkins bruise easily and are rarely shipped across state lines. Most are sold locally.

Sounds like those early-ripening crops might end up as canned pie filling.

Also, pumping more groundwater to quench parched pumpkins means higher costs for growers. And we know pricier produce isn’t the only problem caused by slurping more aqua from aquifers.

So parents, you may want a stiff beverage on hand while helping your kids carve jack-o-lanterns from red kuri squash this year. Enjoy the ornamental gourd ale.

Source:
California Drought’s Newest Target: The Great Pumpkins

, NBC News.

Find this article interesting?

Please

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

Pumpkins’ biggest threat isn’t Mischief Night or Billy Corgan

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged anchor, article, chief, corgan, jack-o'-lanterns, lai, ms-, pumpkins, work | Comments Off

Is the new Whole Foods rating system creating an inferiority complex for zucchini?

by ncf01r Posted on October 15, 2014

Is the new Whole Foods rating system creating an inferiority complex for zucchini?

By Liz Core

15 Oct 2014 6:37 PM

Is the new Whole Foods rating system creating an inferiority complex for zucchini?

On Wednesday, Whole Foods started issuing ratings for its fruit, veggies, and flowers to measure the quality of farming practices. The rating system is simple: Fresh food is divided up as “good,” “better,” and “best.” It’s like getting gold, red, or green stars from your kindergarten teacher! Except it’s Whole Foods, instead of Mrs. Carter, grading you — and it’s judging greenhouse gas emissions, ecosystem management, and farmworker treatment, instead of coloring book pages.

Here is some of what Whole Foods is measuring (click here for the full list):

[F]arming practices that evaluate, protect and improve soil health. Examples include composting, rotating crops and using the latest science to measure and enhance nutrients in the soil.

[F]arming practices that create better working conditions. Examples include reducing pesticide risks, providing protective equipment and participating in third-party auditing programs to promote safe conditions and fair compensation.

[F]arming practices that protect and conserve water. Examples include rainwater collection and drip irrigation.

[F]arming practices that protect native species. Examples include planting “bee-friendly” wildflowers, improving conservation areas and taking steps to protect beneficial insects from harmful chemicals.

Fruits, flowers, and vegetables that come from overseas also have to comply with the rating system — yes, Whole Foods imports produce from overseas — even when the country’s standards for pesticides and soil composition are different.

Retrieving the information to issue the labels is complicated, too, and some farmers have insinuated that the system may be taking things a teeny bit too far. Sellers have to undergo a thorough certification process, answering questions about the minutia of each farms’ practices. Reports the New York Times:

“For instance, they want to know about earthworms and how many I have in my soil,” said Mr. Lyman, whose family has grown apples, peaches, pears, and various berries on their farm in Middlefield, Conn., since 1741. “I thought, How do I count every earthworm? It’s going to take a while.”

So while farmers are counting worms in the dirt to scramble for the coveted “best” title, Whole Foods says that it’s just trying to be more honest. Or, here comes the buzzword, more transparent. Plus, the fancy organic food seller now has to compete with cheaper super-companies like Walmart, McDonald’s, General Mills, and Cargill, who are starting up similar transparency campaigns (*cough* marketing ploys) — like McDonald’s recent social media blitz — in order to appeal to curious consumers such as those meddling kids, millennials.

Whether the transparency campaign will make a difference for Whole Food’s sales is still up in the air, but farmers can rest assured that they will be certain to score, at the very least, “good.”

Find this article interesting?
Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox