Blue Marble - June 2009

Caribou Numbers Decline Steeply Worldwide

| Thu Jun. 11, 2009 5:25 PM PDT

The first ever worldwide census analysis of caribou/reindeer numbers reveals a nearly 60 percent decline worldwide in the last three decades.

This dramatic decline across the circumpolar world is a result of a bad intersection between global warming and industrial development, according to the data published in Global Change Biology.

Global warming is affecting the herds in three of four season. The spring green-up in the Arctic now arrives earlier—before the migrating herds arrive, depriving mothers and calves of quality feeding. Warmer summers cause more intense insect blooms that harass the herds and affect their ability to feed. Winters produce more freezing rains that ice over and make inaccessible the lichens the animals feed on during the dark months. I wrote about a particularly bad freezing rain event a year ago.

Meanwhile industrial development in the boreal forest has driven the decline of many herds.

The analysis raises serious concerns not only for the animals but also for people in northern latitudes who depend on caribou/reindeer for their livelihood.

For all of us, really.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Digital Transition Eco-Challenge: Repurpose Your Rabbit Ears

| Thu Jun. 11, 2009 3:22 PM PDT

We're just hours away from saying goodbye to rabbit ears for good. Are you one of the nearly 3 million that isn't ready? Will tomorrow begin a new era in hi-tech government surveillance? Could you care less? Well, however you feel about the boob tube, the consequences of such a massive switchover are significant, particularly for all the parts we'll no longer use.

Hopefully all those government-subsidized converter boxes will keep millions of old-fashioned sets out of electronic wasteland, but what of the beloved antennae? Ever thought of designing a use out of the elegant, retractable numbers? Maybe we could all donate them to music schools to be repurposed as batons. Would they work on drums? As pointers for teachers? Tomato cages?

Toss me your bright ideas in the comments.

Did Disney Dump Toxic Waste?

| Thu Jun. 11, 2009 12:00 PM PDT

From the annals of the dark side of Disney, we bring you news that citizens of Burbank, California, are suing the media giant for allegedly dumping toxic chemicals, including a known carcinogen, in their community since 1998.

According to the Burbank Leader, citizens hired Delaware-based watchdog group Environmental World Watch Inc. to test local waterways for chromium 6 (also known as hexavalent chromium), which increases risk of lung cancer in those who inhale it. The group reported “significant quantities” of the toxin downstream from Disney's facilities.

Unsurprisingly, Disney has been tight-lipped about the case so far, but a spokesperson did call the allegations "completely baseless."

This all comes on the heels of the company's big we're-going-green announcement earlier this year, when execs outlined plans to conserve energy and reduce emissions and waste. If it turns out the dumping accusations are legit, Disney'll have quite the PR problem to imagineer its way out of.

 

Crap Fish

| Wed Jun. 10, 2009 4:25 PM PDT

Farmed fish taste like crap. Now we know they're crap for the environment too. Consider this: Steelhead trout bred in hatcheries are so genetically impaired that even if they survive and reproduce in the wild their offspring are significantly less successful at reproducing.

The study in Biology Letters suggests adding hatchery fish to wild populations could hurt efforts to sustain the wild runs.

The data reveal that fish born in the wild from hatchery-reared parents averaged only 37 percent the reproductive fitness of fish with two wild parents. Fish born in the wild from one hatchery-reared parent and one wild parent averaged only 87 percent the reproductive fitness

Most significantly, these differences were detectable after a full generation of natural selection in the wild.

The problem arises from the fact that fish who do well in the safe world of the hatcheries are selected to be different from those that do well in the predatory real world.

And, no, using wild fish as brood stock each year does not solve the problem. Exactly that type of steelhead were used in this study. Yet apparently even one generation of hatchery culture produces strong negative effects on wild fish.

The implications reach far beyond steelhead. Captive breeding is a cornerstone of recovery efforts for many endangered species. This study raises doubts that such programs actually work.

This research was based on years of genetic analysis of thousands of steelhead trout in Oregon's Hood River in field work since 1991. Scientists genetically fingerprinted three generations of returning fish to determine who their parents were and whether they were wild or hatchery fish.

That's the beauty of long-term research. May we fund more of it.

Want to know what's better to eat—if you must eat the wildlife of the sea? There's even an iPhone app to guide you through the menu.

McCain Was Right

| Wed Jun. 10, 2009 11:03 AM PDT

During his failed campaign for president, John McCain had some pretty clever ideas about climate change. And no, not "drill, baby, drill." In an uncharacteristic moment of clarity, McCain proposed that the US government offer a reward of $300 million to any individual who invented a more efficient car battery.

Will President Obama embrace McCain's idea and urge Americans to get creative about clean tech? As environmental sustainability becomes an ever hotter issue, individuals and companies have come up with bright, green ideas, including more accessible solar panels, smarter suburbs, and more creative vehicle designs.

Such strategies have been incredibly helpful in terms of reducing what we use, but none so far have introduced the kind of significant technological innovation that is needed to reverse our gas guzzling, energy hoarding culture. As Secretary of Energy Stephen Chu told Congress in March, the scientific community needs technology that is "game-changing, as opposed to merely incremental." MIT chemist Daniel Nocera, for example, invented a chemical catalyst last year that distills hydrogen from water to produce energy. Nocera explained that on a large scale, this process "could take care of the world's energy needs." President Obama should give Americans an incentive to create such energy-saving technologies in other environmental fields as well.

San Francisco To Make Recycling and Composting Mandatory

| Tue Jun. 9, 2009 4:01 PM PDT

"Don't Mess With Texas," perhaps the most famous state slogan in history, began as an anti-littering campaign. Having grown up in the Lone Star State, I remember a TV ad showing two fighter jets swooping over a highway, presumably about to strafe some guy who tossed a can out of his pickup. Well, turns out San Francisco is about to do Texas one better. Today, the city's Board of Supervisors made it illegal not only to throw that can out the window, but also in the trash; a new law will require you to recycle it. I can't wait for the bus ads featuring a gun-packing hippie: Don't mess with San Francisco.

Of course, San Francisco's strong recycling norms aren't unique along the Left Coast, which, as we noted in our recent Waste Issue, takes those curvy green arrows much more seriously than folks in New York. Recycling is already mandatory in San Diego and Seattle, where trash collectors shame offending homeowners by posting notes on their trash bins and leaving them unemptied on the curb. Still, San Francisco might up the ante. SF Weekly notes that its proposed fines for not recycling--$100 to $500--are ten times higher than Seattle's.

San Francisco is already the least trashy city in America. In May, it announced that it recycles 72 percent of its waste.  And most homeowners and more than a fifth of apartment dwellers compost (under the new law, everyone will). Fascinated by how the city where I live achieves such high numbers, I recently began following my garbage. I've tracked it from the can at my apartment building to its eventual reincarnation, learning a lot along the way about the obstacles to going "zero waste," as the city hopes to by 2020. Check back tomorrow for the first installment of this colorful--and stinky--trash saga, which will appear on this site throughout the week.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

Dioxins Impair Breastfeeding

| Tue Jun. 9, 2009 3:32 PM PDT

Exposure to dioxins during pregnancy harms the cells in breast tissue which in turn impairs the ability to initiate breastfeeding or to produce enough milk.

The data are demonstrated only in mice at this point. But the researchers from the U of Rochester Medical Center believe dioxin exposure may account for at least some of the 3 to 6 million mothers worldwide who cannot breastfeed.

The study is published online in Toxicological Sciences and shows that dioxin has a profound effect on breast tissue by causing mammary cells to stop their natural cycle of proliferation as early as six days into pregnancy and lasting through mid-pregnancy. Exposure to dioxin causes mice to produce 50 percent fewer new epithelial cells. Normally mammary glands cells proliferate rapidly during early to mid-pregnancy. Dioxin also alters the induction of milk-producing genes that occurs around the ninth day of pregnancy.

Dioxins are generated by the incineration of municipal and medical waste, especially plastics, and emitted through the air to settle onto crops, pastures, and waterways. People acquire the toxins through eating contaminated meat, dairy products, fish, and shellfish. The toxin settles in the fatty tissues and natural elimination occurs extremely slowly.

The team is looking into whether the harm occurs directly in the breast or if it's found throughout the body but manifests uniquely in the fatty mammary tissue. They're also studying a hypothesis that dioxin exposure might cancel the protection pregnancy normally awards against breast cancer.

Makes the UN's call to ban all plastic bags seem farsighted. So how about banning municipal- and medical-waste incinerators?

UN Wants ALL Plastic Bags Banned

| Tue Jun. 9, 2009 1:49 PM PDT

Quick hit: a UN environment official wants ALL the plastic bags in the world banned immediately due to the damage they cause to oceans and wildlife. Plastic bags, as we've reported before, is a problem in oceans not only because there's so much of it, but because wildlife eat it and feed it to their young, resulting in starvation. The UN official's statement was accompanied by a new UN report that shows plastic makes up 80% of all litter found in the ocean.  

A Titanic for These Times

| Tue Jun. 9, 2009 12:43 PM PDT

Guest blogger Mark Follman writes frequently about current affairs and culture at markfollman.com.

The June issue of the Atlantic has a look at the mind-blowing Oasis of the Seas, a gargantuan ocean liner forthcoming from cruise company Royal Caribbean International. Its unprecedented scale of apparent luxury surely required feats of engineering. But any awe that inspires would seem to wash away with apprehension of the ship’s untold economic and ecological hubris.

A decade ago, a large cruise ship typically carried in the neighborhood of 2,000 passengers and 1,000 crew members. But in an industry intently focused on swelling its profits no matter the non-fiscal costs, bigger is always better. Ordered in 2006 for $1.4 billion (on the crest ahead of the economic meltdown), the Oasis leaves those old numbers far in its wake. “In November,” writes Rory Nugent, “Royal Caribbean will take delivery of a true sea monster. Now in its final phase of construction, the Oasis of the Seas will be the biggest (longest, tallest, widest, heaviest) passenger ship ever built—and the most expensive. It will dwarf Nimitz-class aircraft carriers and cast shadows dockside atop 20-story buildings. A crew of 2,165 will tend the expectations of up to 6,296 passengers.” 

This Week in Frog (Take That Domino and Inkblot)

| Fri Jun. 5, 2009 3:34 PM PDT

It all started at happy hour. Most wise decisions do. With a bunch of us gathered around a twelve pack of Red Stripe and bag of stale Tostitos, Kevin Drum's cat blogging became the topic of conversation. Earlier in the day, I'd bragged that we, the latest crop of MoJo interns, could overtake Kevin's traffic, and after consuming a single screwdriver the brilliance hit me for real. What's the only thing better than a cat blog? The only thing better than the Obama dog blog? A frog blog.
 
Within an hour, we found ourselves at the 6th Avenue Aquarium in San Francisco’s Inner Richmond district. When we asked the clerk if there were any frogs available, he nonchalantly pointed to an empty, unmarked tank and said, "Sold out." Despair. We'd come all this way for a frog and didn't want to wait a week for another shipment to arrive. As my colleagues pondered purchasing an amphibian of a less-rhymophile friendly genus, I took one final look at the "empty" frog tank. Inside, I noticed a pair of eyes slightly protruding from below the water's surface. It was no mistake; one frog remained who’d been left for dead. When I explained the situation to the employee, he said, "Grab a net." After first removing some bettas (Siamese fighting fish) from their perch atop the frog tank, we successfully extracted the frisky little fellow from his lonely home and immediately treated him to a feast of three crickets.
 
After spending the night in my apartment and enjoying amenities such as my roommate's singing, man's new best friend found his way into MoJo's offices this morning after a 40 minute bus ride. (You know how guys who walk their dogs get tons of attention from women? It doesn’t apply to guys with frogs.)

So welcome to our inaugural post of Friday frog blogging. We hope that readers will pitch in to choose a name for our new friend. Balloting will close in one week, on Friday at 6am Pacific Time.  Thereafter, look for This Week In Frog.