Archive for the ‘Biodiversity Loss’ Category

Rush To Produce Corn-based Ethanol Will Worsen ‘Dead Zone’ In Gulf Of Mexico, Study Says

Thursday, March 13th, 2008

The U.S. government’s rush to produce corn-based ethanol as a fuel alternative will worsen pollution in the Gulf of Mexico, increasing a “Dead Zone” that kills fish and aquatic life, according to University of British Columbia researcher Simon Donner.

In the first study of its kind, Donner and Chris Kucharik of the University of Wisconsin quantify the effect of biofuel production on the problem of nutrient pollution in a waterway.

The researchers looked at the estimated land and fertilizer required to meet proposed corn-based ethanol production goals. Recently, the U.S. Senate announced its energy policy aims of generating 36 billion gallons annually of ethanol by the year 2022, of which 15 billion gallons can be produced from corn starch. The corn-ethanol goal represents more than three times than triple the production in 2006.

“This rush to expand corn production is a disaster for the Gulf of Mexico,” says Donner, an assistant professor in the Dept. of Geography. “The U.S. energy policy will make it virtually impossible to solve the problem of the Dead Zone.”

More…

Australians worst nation on Earth at preserving wildlife

Sunday, March 9th, 2008

SYDNEY – Australians love their wildlife – after all, who could fail to warm to a koala, or a wombat, or a kangaroo? But few Australians know that they have the worst record on the planet for conserving their beautiful and unusual animals.

Of all the mammal species that have become extinct in the past 200 years, nearly half are Australian.

Since the British arrived, 27 mammals – about 10 per cent of the total – have disappeared.

These are statistics that “embarrass many conservationists, myself included”, says Tammie Matson, head of the species programme at WWF Australia.

More…

React to Warming Now While Costs Still Low, OECD Urges

Thursday, March 6th, 2008

The world must respond to climate change and other environmental challenges now while the cost is low or else pay a stiffer price later for its indecision, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said Wednesday.

A new report by the 30-nation organization looks at “red light issues” in the environment, including global warming, water shortages, energy, biodiversity loss, transportation, agriculture, and fisheries.

More…

Destruction Of Sumatra Forests Driving Global Climate Change And Species Extinction

Monday, March 3rd, 2008

– A quote for the piece below:

At last December’s Bali Climate Change Conference, the Indonesian minister of Forestry pledged to provide incentives to stop unsustainable forestry practices and protect Indonesia’s forests.

– Oh, Pleeeeze. Haven’t we heard this before from just about every country that’s cutting down their forests for profit? , , and

= = = = = = =

ScienceDaily (Feb. 29, 2008) — Turning just one Sumatran province’s forests and peat swamps into pulpwood and palm oil plantations is generating more annual greenhouse gas emissions than the Netherlands and rapidly driving the province’s elephants into extinction, a new study by WWF and partners has found.

The study found that in central Sumatra’s Riau Province nearly 10.5 million acres of tropical forests and peat swamp have been cleared in the last 25 years. Forest loss and degradation and peat decomposition and fires are behind average annual carbon emissions equivalent to 122 percent of the Netherlands total annual emissions, 58 percent of Australia’s annual emissions, 39 percent of annual UK emissions and 26 percent of annual German emissions.*

Riau was chosen for the study because it is home to vast peatlands estimated to hold Southeast Asia’s largest store of carbon, and contains some of the most critical habitat for Sumatran elephants and tigers. It also has Indonesia’s highest deforestation rate, substantially driven by the operations of global paper giants Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) and Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Limited (APRIL).

At last December’s Bali Climate Change Conference, the Indonesian minister of Forestry pledged to provide incentives to stop unsustainable forestry practices and protect Indonesia’s forests. The governor of Riau province has also made a public commitment to protect the province’s remaining forest.

More…

Rat Invasions Causing Seabird Decline Worldwide

Saturday, February 23rd, 2008

– I wrote about this recently with regard to new Zealand’s natural history but the problems associated with rats being distributed world-wide into new environments is a major global ecological disaster.

= = = = =

Invasive rats on ocean islands are threatening the survival of many of the world’s seabirds, according to a new report.

The global analysis found that non-native rats have been observed preying on roughly a quarter of all seabird species, often with disastrous consequences. (See photos of rat-seabird conflict.)

The voracious rodents attack bird nesting colonies, eating eggs, chicks, and sometimes even adult birds.

Now 102 of 328 recognized seabird species are considered threatened or endangered by the World Conservation Union, with predation by invasive species ranking among the top dangers.

“Seabirds are important ecological actors in the oceans and on islands, but 30 percent of all seabirds are at risk of extinction,” said study co-author Bernie Tershy of the University of California, Santa Cruz.

“Invasive rats are likely the single largest threat to seabirds,” said Tershy, also a former grantee of the National Geographic Conservation Trust. (The National Geographic Society owns National Geographic News.)

Smaller seabird species and those that nest in burrows or rock crevices are particularly at risk, the study said.

That group includes storm-petrels, auklets, murrelets, and shearwaters, according to lead author Holly Jones of Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut.

“Rats can have a larger impact on entire seabird populations in species with adults that are small enough to prey on,” Jones said.

“Burrow- and crevice-nesting seabirds share the same underground habitat [as rats], which makes a predation encounter more likely.”

More…

Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler

Wednesday, January 30th, 2008

– This article gives a great overview of how human consumption of meat is affecting the world. It is one of the many stories, woven of interconnections and interdependencies that form the world around us, that so many of us are ignorant of.

– I think the article is over optimistic, however, about people getting smarter about meat consumption.

– The world’s richer people will continue to consume meat much as they have. And the world’s nouveau rich, in India and China, among other places, will also step up to the table and attempt to match the meat consumption patterns of the US and Europe. This will, inevitably, drive up grain prices to feed all of these feed-lot animals and that, along with the current fad of growing crops for ethanol fuels, will further raise the prices poor folks have to pay for their food.

– So long as the rich can pay for higher priced food comfortably and so long as they hope that growing crops for ethanol will allow them to avoid the consumption down-sizing that Peak Oil implies, these trends will continue. And long before the rich say, “enough”, the poor will have been priced out of the food market and the resulting social unrest will be well underway.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

A SEA change in the consumption of a resource that Americans take for granted may be in store — something cheap, plentiful, widely enjoyed and a part of daily life. And it isn’t oil.

It’s meat.

The two commodities share a great deal: Like oil, meat is subsidized by the federal government. Like oil, meat is subject to accelerating demand as nations become wealthier, and this, in turn, sends prices higher. Finally — like oil — meat is something people are encouraged to consume less of, as the toll exacted by industrial production increases, and becomes increasingly visible.

Global demand for meat has multiplied in recent years, encouraged by growing affluence and nourished by the proliferation of huge, confined animal feeding operations. These assembly-line meat factories consume enormous amounts of energy, pollute water supplies, generate significant greenhouse gases and require ever-increasing amounts of corn, soy and other grains, a dependency that has led to the destruction of vast swaths of the world’s tropical rain forests.

Just this week, the president of Brazil announced emergency measures to halt the burning and cutting of the country’s rain forests for crop and grazing land. In the last five months alone, the government says, 1,250 square miles were lost.

The world’s total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons. Per capita consumption has more than doubled over that period. (In the developing world, it rose twice as fast, doubling in the last 20 years.) World meat consumption is expected to double again by 2050, which one expert, Henning Steinfeld of the United Nations, says is resulting in a “relentless growth in livestock production.”

Americans eat about the same amount of meat as we have for some time, about eight ounces a day, roughly twice the global average. At about 5 percent of the world’s population, we “process” (that is, grow and kill) nearly 10 billion animals a year, more than 15 percent of the world’s total.

Growing meat (it’s hard to use the word “raising” when applied to animals in factory farms) uses so many resources that it’s a challenge to enumerate them all. But consider: an estimated 30 percent of the earth’s ice-free land is directly or indirectly involved in livestock production, according to the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization, which also estimates that livestock production generates nearly a fifth of the world’s greenhouse gases — more than transportation.

To put the energy-using demand of meat production into easy-to-understand terms, Gidon Eshel, a geophysicist at the Bard Center, and Pamela A. Martin, an assistant professor of geophysics at the University of Chicago, calculated that if Americans were to reduce meat consumption by just 20 percent it would be as if we all switched from a standard sedan — a Camry, say — to the ultra-efficient Prius. Similarly, a study last year by the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Japan estimated that 2.2 pounds of beef is responsible for the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the average European car every 155 miles, and burns enough energy to light a 100-watt bulb for nearly 20 days.

Grain, meat and even energy are roped together in a way that could have dire results. More meat means a corresponding increase in demand for feed, especially corn and soy, which some experts say will contribute to higher prices.

This will be inconvenient for citizens of wealthier nations, but it could have tragic consequences for those of poorer ones, especially if higher prices for feed divert production away from food crops. The demand for ethanol is already pushing up prices, and explains, in part, the 40 percent rise last year in the food price index calculated by the United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization.

More…

– thx to Mike M. for pointing this story out to me.

– This article is from the NY Times and they insist that folks have an ID and a PW in order to read their stuff. You can get these for free just by signing up. However, a friend of mine suggests the website bugmenot.com :arrow: as an alternative to having to do these annoying sign ups. Check it out. Thx Bruce S. for the tip.

Brazil Amazon deforestation soars

Saturday, January 26th, 2008

– I don’t know why folks have a hard time getting the point of The Perfect Storm Hypothesis. This story is a perfect example of the interdependencies the hypothesis talks about.

– Over population and poverty drives people to settle in forested land – clearing it as they go. World food shortages drive growers to grow food where previous trees stood. Less trees mean less water retention which dries the remaining forest making it less resilient. Less forest means less CO2 uptake. More CO2 in the atmosphere leads to warmer weather. Warmer weather means less winter snow pack. Less winter snow pack means less summer water. Less summer water means less ability to grow food using ‘wet agricultural methods’. Less food grown means more pressure to cut the forests to grow the food where they stood. Societies deeply dependent on diminishing oil resources and now trying to avoid the fact by promoting biofuel growing and use. Biofuels, the growth of which, takes the same fields we used to grow human food on. And as a result, we have less food and need more room to grow it and we all turn again to the land the forest stand upon.

– And around and around it goes in branching causal relationships and positive feedback cycles. And behind it all, human greed, ignorance, rapaciousness and leaders who talk but do not act. Leaders who see the truth but do not believe.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

The Brazilian government has announced a huge rise in the rate of Amazon deforestation, months after celebrating its success in achieving a reduction.

In the last five months of 2007, 3,235 sq km (1,250 sq miles) were lost.

Gilberto Camara, of INPE, an institute that provides satellite imaging of the area, said the rate of loss was unprecedented for the time of year.

Officials say rising commodity prices are encouraging farmers to clear more land to plant crops such as soya.

The monthly rate of deforestation saw a big rise from 243 sq km (94 sq miles) in August to 948 sq km (366 sq miles) in December.

“We’ve never before detected such a high deforestation rate at this time of year,” Mr Camara said.

His concern, outlined during a news conference in Brasilia on Wednesday, was echoed by Environment Minister Marina Silva.

Expensive soya

Ms Silva said rising prices of raw materials and commodities could be spurring the rate of forest clearing, as more and more farmers saw the Amazon as a source of cheap land.

“The economic reality of these states indicate that these activities impact, without a shadow of a doubt, on the forest,” she said.

The state of Mato Grosso was the worst affected, contributing more than half the total area of forest stripped, or 1,786 sq km (700 sq miles).

The states of Para and Rondonia were also badly affected, accounting for 17.8% and 16% of the total cleared respectively.

The situation may also be worse than reported, with the environment ministry saying the preliminary assessment of the amount of forest cleared could double as more detailed satellite images are analysed.

President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is due to attend an emergency meeting on Thursday to discuss new measures to tackle deforestation in the Amazon.

More…

Brazil vows to stem Amazon loss

Saturday, January 26th, 2008

– This stuff really gets me. I think if we went back and looked at the last twenty years, we could find an article like this every year or so. “Scientists report Brazilian Rain forest being decimated” And then a short while later, “Brazilian authorities vow to step up protection of the forests”.

– Over and over again, the problem is brought up and action decided on and then … apparently nothing of substance happens and the next year, another report on how the forests (which we all depend upon) are still disappearing.

-Human intelligence is much overrated.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Brazil has agreed emergency measures to stem deforestation as government figures revealed a sharp increase in the rate of clearances in the Amazon.

The steps were announced after an emergency cabinet meeting chaired by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

The measures include sending extra federal police and environmental agents to stop farmers and cattle ranchers illegally felling any more rain forest.

In the last five months of 2007, 3,235 sq km (1,250 sq miles) were lost.

Environment Minister Marina Silva said environmental agents and police would be deployed around 36 cities and towns where illegal clearing jumped dramatically last year. People or businesses who buy anything produced on the deforested land could face fines, she said.

The plan involves a 25% rise in the police force assigned to the region.

More…

Biofuels ‘are not a magic bullet’

Friday, January 18th, 2008

Biofuels may play a role in curbing climate change, says Britain’s Royal Society, but may create environmental problems unless implemented with care.

In a new report, the Society suggests current EU and UK policies are not guaranteed to reduce emissions.

It advocates more research into all aspects of biofuel production and use.

The report says the British government should use financial incentives to ensure companies adopt cutting-edge and carbon-efficient technologies.

“Biofuels could play an important role in cutting greenhouse gas emissions from transport, both in Britain and globally,” said Professor John Pickett from Rothamsted Research, who chaired the Royal Society’s study.

“But it would be disastrous if biofuel production made further inroads into biological diversity and natural ecosystems.

“We must not create new environmental or social problems in our efforts to deal with climate change.”

Variable savings

Biofuels – principally ethanol and diesel made from plants – are one of the few viable options for replacing the liquid fuels derived from petroleum that are used in transport, the source of about one quarter of the human race’s greenhouse gas emissions.

Vehicles, and the infrastructure for delivering fuel through filling stations, can be modified at marginal cost – certainly compared with the price of a large-scale switch to hydrogen or electric vehicles, even if they were to prove technologically and economically worthwhile.

Hence the adoption by Europe and the US of policies to stimulate biofuel production and use.

But a number of recent scientific studies have shown that the carbon savings from using biofuels compared with petrol and diesel vary hugely, depending on what crop is grown and where, how it is harvested and processed, and other factors.

More…

EU Rethinks Biofuels Targets As Criticism Mounts

Friday, January 18th, 2008

The EU has admitted that it failed to foresee problems raised by its policy to encourage motorists in Europe to drive vehicles which run on fuels derived from plants as part of efforts to cut carbon emissions.

The European Union’s environment chief said the bloc would rethink new draft rules on boosting the production of biofuels amid growing criticism by green campaign groups that the move could lead to rainforest destruction and social dislocation.

 

“We have seen that the environmental problems caused by biofuels and also the social problems are bigger than we thought they were. So we have to move very carefully,” Stavros Dimas told the BBC on Monday, Jan. 14.

 

It would be better to miss the target than achieve it by harming the poor or damaging the environment, Dimas said.

 

In March last year, EU leaders agreed that 10 percent of the bloc’s road fuels should come from biofuels by 2020 as part of wider efforts to combat climate change and slash CO2 emissions. That goal was to be anchored in concrete legislation.

 

Too many negative consequences?

 

But criticism has grown steadily in past months about the negative impact of large-scale production of biofuels.

 

Critics have warned that expanding the growth of agricultural products such as corn, soybeans and rapeseed to make biofuels can lead to environmental damage, drive up food prices and lead companies to drive poor people off their land to convert it to fuel crops.

 

More…