The Red, White, and Green » Science + Technology

A case for anti-radiation: Pong Research

Jennifer Grayson — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 07:05:22 +0000

With all the talk about cell phones and cancer, I’ve been constantly reminding myself to use a headset with my BlackBerry Curve, which was disturbingly ranked one of the worst phones (highest radiation risk) by Environmental Working Group.

Problem is, I don’t always remember to bring my headset with me wherever I go, so I’m left to: a) conduct a conversation using the Curve’s crappy speakerphone (my mom insists she can only hear every other word I say); b) cringe as I finally give up and hold the phone a couple inches from my ear; and c) try to get the other person off the line as fast as humanly possible.

The solution: An anti-radiation BlackBerry case from Pong Research (also available for the iPhone), which has been shown by FCC-certified laboratories to reduce exposure to cell phone radiation by 60 to 85 percent. Admittedly, the technical jargon on the website reads like pseudoscience, but rest assured that the gadget really works: After publishing an initially skeptical review last year, Wired magazine had to eat its words after taking a Pong case to a radiation lab and confirming that the company’s claims are indeed credible.

The debate rages on as to whether cell phones are actually harmful to one’s health, but the possibility has enough people worried that legislators in San Francisco just passed a law requiring retailers to label phones for radiation risk. I’m not taking any chances: I’ll be ordering my Pong case before the 50 percent discount offer ends on July 31.

–Jennifer Grayson

P.S. I am still BlackBerry-free, true to my Earth Day promise: I disconnected the email service, so I only use the device as a phone.

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Uh-oh: Heat waves could make parts of US uninhabitable

Jennifer Grayson — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 07:05:46 +0000

Photo via Flickr: { pranav }

So the news came in last week from the Union of Concerned Scientists, and it ain’t optimistic: Evidently, harsh heat waves like the one to recently strike the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states are going to become all-too common; so much so that in the not-too-distant future, large regions of the earth — including parts of Africa, China, and the United States — could become uninhabitable.

According to Matthew Huber, professor of earth and atmospheric sciences at Purdue University and a member of UCS, if nothing is done to curb fossil fuel emissions at their current level, then the earth could see a rise in average global temperatures by as much as 15 degrees Farenheit over the next 200 to 300 years. His research shows that under those conditions, if a heat wave were to occur in the hotter/more humid regions of the world, most people would not be able to survive outside for more than a few hours.

A recent Stanford University study warns that we may not even have to wait centuries; we could see a marked increase in the number of heatwaves in as little as 30 years.

So what can you do, right now, to help stop this from happening? It’s simple, won’t cost you anything (in fact, it might even help you save money), and will reduce your greenhouse gas footprint as much as if you went out and leased a Prius: Join the Meatless Monday movement.

–Jennifer Grayson

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Plastic pollution: The other oil in our oceans

Jennifer Grayson — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 07:05:50 +0000

[Watch video on YouTube]

Right now, we’re all focused on the immediate threat of the BP oil spill. After all, 60,000 barrels of crude a day are pretty tough to ignore. But there’s another, more insidious type of oil pollution threatening the future of our oceans, and that’s the accumulation of petroleum-based plastics.

You may have heard of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch — a massive floating landfill (roughly the size of Texas) in the Pacific Ocean comprised of 3.5 million tons of plastic trash — but that’s not the only one: There are four other patches, or gyres, spanning our globe.

Amazingly, there hasn’t been a whole lot of media coverage of these five gyres; maybe images of six-pack rings and plastic rope floating in the water aren’t as dramatic as, say, those of birds and other marine life drowning in thick oil. But that doesn’t mean this trash isn’t having as equally a detrimental effect: Forty-four percent of all seabird species have been documented with plastic in or around their bodies, leading to blockages, starvation, and even death.

This, from the new organization 5 Gyres, which is partnering with organizations like the Algalita Marine Research Foundation and the Surfrider Foundation to actively explore and document the plastic pollution in our oceans.

Want to see for yourself what an oceanic garbage patch looks like? Check out the video, above, from a 5 Gyres expedition to the North Atlantic Gyre earlier this year. Then, click here to find out ways to reduce your own plastic trash footprint.

–Jennifer Grayson

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Oh, great: Methane from BP oil spill may worsen global warming

Jennifer Grayson — Fri, 28 May 2010 22:43:06 +0000

Photo via Flickr: Jeferonix

Methane. It’s what led to the explosion that caused the Deepwater Horizon to burn and sink in the first place, unleashing a torrent of crude into the ocean that has now surpassed the Exxon Valdez as the worst oil spill in United States history. The gas is also still being released along with the oil: According to BP, the mixture spewing from the ocean floor is about half methane and other gases, and half petroleum compounds. Oh, and it’s a greenhouse gas that’s 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.

A powerful greenhouse gas. That makes up half of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million gallons of oil leaking each day. Of which an unknown portion is escaping into the atmosphere. Why is no one talking about this?

When I contacted Jeff Chanton, a professor in the Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science at Florida State University who has been closely following the BP spill, he was quick to point out that the immediate short-term threat to the ecosystem in the Gulf, is, of course, the oil itself. But, he says, “Methane is undeniably bubbling out with this oil and escaping to the atmosphere. This will exacerbate the greenhouse effect.”

How much so is not so clear. Based on Chanton’s recent research looking at natural oil seeps on the sea floor, he estimates that anywhere from 10 to 50 percent of the methane released might make its way into the air. This, he says, is because the oil actually forms a protective coating around the methane bubbles, allowing the gas to escape to the surface instead of being dissolved in seawater and consumed by natural methanotrophic bacteria.

“We looked at several sites this past summer, and at one of the sites, the natural seep was very oily,” he says. “At the site that was very oily, we did find elevated methane concentrations in the atmosphere over the site. But another site that was more shallow, where the bubbles were not oily, we didn’t see that. So the oil helps the methane get to the surface by kind of armoring the bubbles and then they don’t dissolve as much.”

So now, for the holy cow analysis: For calculation’s sake, let’s use the natural gas leakage figure given last week by BP: 15 million cubic feet a day (although based on BP’s oil spill estimate at that time of 5,000 barrels a day, that figure is probably a lot higher).

According to the EPA Interactive Units Converter:

1 cubic foot (CF) methane (CH4) = .04246 pounds of CH4
15 million CF CH4 x .04246 = 636,900 pounds CH4 = 318.5 metric tons CH4
318.5 metric tons CH4 = 6,066.9 metric tons CO2 equivalent a day

For comparison, that’s more than a third of daily CO2 emissions for the entire New York metro area.

Any other number crunchers want to take a crack at it?

–Jennifer Grayson

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

GE unveils lamp-style LED bulb that lasts 17 years

Jennifer Grayson — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:05:24 +0000

The federal phase-out of the traditional incandescent bulb won’t go into effect until 2012, but already the market is starting to shift. Yesterday, I went to my local Walgreens to pick up a replacement appliance bulb for my refrigerator, and was shocked to see that the top three shelves of the light bulb section were stocked with compact fluorescents (CFLs); only a few incandescent stragglers lingered on the bottom shelf.

This is great news for the environment (CFLs offer a 75 percent reduction in energy consumption), but not for my vanity. I replaced all the bulbs in my apartment with fluorescents years ago, of course, but I still cringe every time I catch a glimpse of my yellow-tinged skin in the hallway mirror. There are those who claim that decent CFLs do exist, but I have yet to find one.

But at long last, a truly flattering energy-efficient bulb may be making its way to a drugstore near you. GE announced yesterday that its 40-watt replacement Energy Smart LED bulb will be available late this year or in early 2011. The staggering sustainability stats: The lamp-style bulb will consume a mere 9 watts, provide a 77 percent energy savings over incandescents, and last 17 years. And, unlike a CFL, the GE bulb will contain no mercury.

The expected price tag of $40 to $50 may make some customers balk, but considering that one bulb could “light your kid’s bedroom desk lamp from birth through high school graduation” (or so the press release boasts), consumers are just going to have to start thinking a little more long-term when it comes to their finances. And the planet.

–Jennifer Grayson

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Giant iceberg collision not linked to climate change

Jennifer Grayson — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:24:40 +0000

The Mertz Glacier, from which a giant iceberg broke free after collision with the B9B iceberg on Feb. 12 or 13. Photo via Wikimedia Commons: Jacques Verron

Hold your hats, climate change activists: A colossal iceberg about the size of Luxembourg (read: Rhode Island) broke off an Antarctic glacier earlier this month after being clobbered by another giant iceberg. It’s a monumental event — the new iceberg is one of the largest recorded in several years — but as of now, the calving isn’t being blamed on global warming.

From Reuters:

“The calving itself hasn’t been directly linked to climate change but it is related to the natural processes occurring on the ice sheet,” said Rob Massom, a senior scientist at the Australian Antarctic Division and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Center in Hobart, Tasmania.

But despite the collision’s apparently natural cause, the two icebergs now floating side-by-side could have serious impact on the world’s oceans, since the area they’re located is of crucial importance to global ocean circulation.

From AP:

This area of water had been kept clear because of the glacier, said Steve Rintoul, a leading climate expert. With part of the glacier gone, the area could fill with sea ice, which would disrupt the sinking ability of the dense and cold water.

This sinking water is what spills into ocean basins and feeds the global ocean currents with oxygen, Rintoul explained.

As there are only a few areas in the world where this occurs, a slowing of the process would mean less oxygen supplied into the deep currents that feed the oceans.

“There may be regions of the world’s oceans that lose oxygen, and then of course most of the life there will die,” said Mario Hoppema, chemical oceanographer at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in Germany.

Undoubtedly, climate researchers will be studying these icebergs closely to help us understand what may happen if and when more icebergs break off as global temperatures rise over the next several decades.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Fascinated by icebergs? Still deciding what you want to do with your life? Here’s how you can become a climate scientist (hint: hope you like physics!).

Guilt-free snacking? SunChips unveils compostable chip bag

Jennifer Grayson — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:05:16 +0000

It seems like compostable packaging is all the rage right now, even though I would wager that the majority of Americans don’t even know what composting is. (To wit: Los Angeles’ largely ignored green bins.) Now, Frito-Lay is the latest company to jump on the biodegradable bandwagon, with the unveiling of SunChips‘ completely compostable snack food bag. It’ll be on Canadian grocery store shelves next month, and here in the US just in time for Earth Day 2010.

WATCH:

[Watch video on YouTube]

Of course, as with the biodegradable hotel key cards I profiled in January, you can’t just polish off a bag of Harvest Cheddar chips, toss it in the trash, and think you’ve done your part for the planet — these bags have to be placed in a hot compost pile or bin to break down in the estimated 12-16 weeks.

And also like the hotel key cards, these SunChips bags are made from Ingeo, a plant-based plastic manufactured by NatureWorks. While there’s been some controversy as to whether or not plant-based plastics do more harm than good (once you factor in the possibly genetically modified corn used to make these biopolymers — not to mention the pesticides and fertilizers used to grow the corn), NatureWorks has said it remains committed to sustainability, which you can read more about here.

We could debate for days as to whether these biodegradable bags will have a measurable impact on carbon emissions, but I think the greatest boon to the environment won’t be the bag itself; it’ll be the awareness this campaign brings to the general public about composting and why it’s so important. And that, in my opinion, is pretty cool.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Learn how to compost.

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

California redwoods threatened by climate change

Jennifer Grayson — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:05:49 +0000

Old-growth redwoods in Redwood National Park. That insect-sized creature at the bottom of the frame is me; the height of the photo was cropped by over two-thirds and I couldn't even get the tops of the trees in the original shot.

With all the focus on buffoons like Donald Trump (lauded climatologist that he is) pointing to this winter’s nonstop snow storms as evidence that global warming isn’t real, I’d like to reiterate that what we’re really talking about here is climate change. In this sound bite–driven world, semantics matter; the term global warming, while it describes what is likely happening to our planet, doesn’t paint a clear enough picture of the more visible changes in weather patterns that may be occurring as a result.

Case in point: California’s ancient coastal redwoods may be threatened due to declining summer fog levels, according to a new report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In the study, fog levels were found to have diminished by nearly three hours a day over the last century, increasing the likelihood of drought stress and eventual loss of trees.

From Reuters:

“Fog prevents water loss from redwoods in summer, and is really important for both the tree and the forest,” biologist Todd Dawson of the University of California Berkeley said in a statement.

…Dawson and colleagues estimated the frequency of fog by looking at weather records, especially airport records dating back to 1951.

“Since 1901, the average number of hours of fog along the coast in summer has dropped from 56 percent to 42 percent, which is a loss of about three hours per day,” said Berkeley’s James Johnstone, who led the study.

The researchers aren’t certain if the cause is natural climate variations or human activity (they’ll be looking at that in a future study), but I think we can all agree that the loss of these trees would be absolutely devastating, not just to the organisms that are part of this unique ecosystem, but to humanity as a whole.

I had a chance to visit Redwood National Park in October, and at the risk of sounding hokey, it was one of the great experiences of my life. To walk for hours among the very trees that had been there since before Christ was born — had stood in this same place at the time the Incas built Machu Picchu, and when Mozart wrote his first symphony, and while John Adams signed the Declaration of Independence…well, there are no words to describe it. I get choked up even trying to write about it.

The bright side is that these trees are incredible survivors: Coastal redwoods (or their very close relatives) existed as far back as the time of the dinosaurs, and goodness knows the climate has undergone myriad changes since then. But with just 5 percent of the world’s ancient redwoods left standing, it remains to be seen whether there will be enough to withstand the climate change we may be facing in the years ahead. We can only hope.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Send a donation to the Save the Redwoods League, which has been working since 1918 to protect and restore our redwood forests.

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Green Genius: Biodegradable trash bags that REALLY biodegrade

Jennifer Grayson — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:05:36 +0000

[Watch video on YouTube]

Not too long ago, a family member was excitedly telling me about her latest green purchase: an adorable little dog bone–shaped leash clip that dispenses biodegradable doggie doo bags. She had come across it at the checkout counter of The Container Store, and couldn’t resist — after all, who doesn’t want to feel guilt-free about tossing doody-filled plastic bags in the dumpster three times a day?

I hated to burst her bubble, but here’s the secret about those bags, and a lot of those other “biodegradable” bags: They don’t actually biodegrade. Well, at least not in normal landfill conditions. You see, those bags are designed to break down in composting environments only — that is, when exposed to air, sunlight, and natural microorganisms in the soil. That’s great if you want to use one of those bags to line your compost bin (but don’t throw dog waste in there; that requires a special kind of composting), but useless if you want to use it for your trash. In the anaerobic environment of the typical sealed landfill, those “biodegradable” bags essentially become mummified — as does any other kind of organic matter, for that matter.

That’s why I’m intrigued by a new brand of plastic bags by a company called Green Genius: They’re designed to actually break down in a sealed landfill. Watch the video, above, to see how it all works.

For lack of a better word, this sounds like a truly genius invention. My only question is this: If the methane that would have been released over 1,000 years as a traditional plastic bag breaks down in a landfill is released in a much shorter period with these new biodegradable bags, what happens if there’s no methane capture project attached to that landfill? Methane is 23 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2 — will we suddenly have a lot more methane being released into the atmosphere?

Of course, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t embrace a product that could potentially put an end to the plastic pollution smothering our planet; I, for one, am really excited to go pick up my first box of Green Genius bags. And maybe this will be the impetus to hustle up and promote methane capture on a wider scale.

The bags, which are also made from 40 percent recycled plastic, are currently available in tall kitchen and large outdoor sizes. Click here to find out where to buy them.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: Want to test out a Green Genius bag before you buy? Click here to order a free sample and receive a coupon for $2 off your next purchase.

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed

Study reveals BPA may damage human placental cells

Jennifer Grayson — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:45:50 +0000

Photo via Flickr: Stevendepolo

Today on HuffPost, I highlight just how ubiquitous the toxic packaging additive bisphenol A (BPA) has become. The good news is that there’s been a lot of press about banning the suspected endocrine disruptor from baby products like bottles and sippy cups, and a number of cities and states have managed to do just that — even the FDA has reversed its stance on the chemical, saying it is now “taking reasonable steps to reduce human exposure to BPA in the food supply.”

But what about the thousands of other products with BPA (canned goods, credit card receipts, plastic food containers, even dental appliances like night guards) that we adults come in contact with every day? This is scary stuff, and the chance for cumulative exposure is high. Moreover, the diseases linked to BPA exposure are equally as scary: heart disease, cancer, and diabetes, to name a few.

Now, a study published yesterday by Canadian researchers reveals that those most at risk may not even be able to limit their own exposure: I’m talking about babies who have yet to be born. It turns out that human placental cells die or are severely damaged after being exposed to even very low doses of BPA.

From Enviromental Health News:

The researchers obtained placentas from five women who had normal pregnancies and deliveries. Human cytotrophoblast cells were collected from the placentas and cultured. This type of placental cell is important for the exchange of oxygen, nutrients and waste products between mother and fetus.

The cells were exposed to BPA for 24 hours at one of seven different concentrations, ranging from 0.002 to 200 micrograms per milliliter (µg/ml). These doses were selected because they approximate levels of BPA measured in fetal and maternal blood. The researchers then looked to see if BPA exposure damaged the cells.

…Damage to the cell membrane was 1.3 to 1.7 times higher in placental cells exposed to BPA for 24 hours compared to cells that were not exposed to BPA. Apoptosis [cell death] was 2 to 3 times higher in the BPA treated cells. These results indicate that cellular development was adversely affected by BPA.

In layman’s terms, this means that for a pregnant woman, exposure to BPA — even at low levels — could potentially damage placental cells and impact fetal development.

–Jennifer Grayson

Do this now: If you’re pregnant, it’s prudent to take extra steps to minimize BPA exposure. Avoid canned foods, soups, and beverages (except those from Eden Organic); don’t use a plastic food storage container without first contacting the company to see if it contains BPA; and use a stainless steel reusable bottle to stay hydrated when you’re on the go.

Like this post? Subscribe to The Red, White, and Green RSS feed