EXERCISE, THE TRUE FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH!
Posted on 25. Jul, 2010 by Howard Salus in Education, Healthy Foods, Opinions
By Rodi Alexander Friedman
“ We are under exercised as a nation. We look instead of play. We ride instead of walk. Our existence deprives us of the minimum of physical activity essential for healthy living”. John F. Kennedy
To live a vital, healthy life, diet alone will not do the job. You MUST get exercise! Many people
claim that they don’t have the time to exercise. The truth is, you don’t have the time NOT to exercise.
Or, many think because they are in their 50’s, 60’s, or 70’s, it’s too late for them. According to an
article published in Circulation in September 2001 where a 6 month program of moderate exercise
that included walking, jogging or riding a stationary bike for 1 hour, 4 – 5 times per week, turned back
the clock 30 years for middle aged men. These men were able to regain the cardiovascular fitness
levels they had enjoyed as 20 year olds. The study began in 1966 when 5 healthy 20 years olds went
through a series of tests that measured how their aerobic capacity was affected by 3 weeks of total bed
rest. 30 years later the same men underwent similar testing before and after a 6 month exercise regime.
The researchers reported that as the men aged, their weight had climbed an average of 25%, their body
fat had doubled, and their aerobic capacity had declined 11% during the previous 30 years. However,
30 years of aging had done less damage to their aerobic capacity than 3 weeks of bed rest. And,
through 6 months of exercise the men were able to reverse the affects of aging and increase aerobic
capacity by 15%. This documents the fact that it is never too late to start, and positive progress will be
made regardless of how long you have been inactive.
Proper exercise can help you change or maintain a good muscle to fat ratio and have numerous
other benefits including;
* increase your metabolic rate * increase in energy * reduce depression
* better digestion * better sleep * lower blood pressure
* better cholesterol levels * more positive attitude * improve mental alertness
* better self esteem * improve muscle strength * better endurance
* increase your flexibility * stronger bones * improve your stamina
Exercise can also have a major effect on your immune system. During exercise, your breathe
more deeply. This cleans toxins out of the lungs and acts as a pump for the lymph system.
Sweating is another by-product of exercise. When blood vessels of the skin dilate, the sweat
glands act as tiny filters to remove waste products and toxins from the blood. The waste is then
pumped to the surface as sweat.
When you are sedentary, white blood cells (an important part of your immune system) stick to the
walls of your blood vessels and become dormant. Exercise causes these cells to awaken and get back
into circulation, where they can operate at peak performance. This process is called demargination
and begins 30 minutes into an aerobic workout.
I had the opportunity to sit down with Advanced Personal Trainer, Sabrina Gatt, from Toronto
Canada, a working professional for over 10 years. Sabrina is a superior athlete and has completed 8
Boston marathons. She has stated, “Exercise plays a monumental role in our assurance to good
health…Nitric Oxide production in the body personates vitality and circulation in achieving optimum
health through mobility and quality nutrition. Cellular reproduction is on going through out our lives.
The more circulatory the body is at flushing out and regeneration the new, the more youthful, functional
and efficient our lives will become……., it’s just that simple.” Sabrina also states, “ one of the great
bi-products of exercise is the elevated production of endorphins, dopamine, and seratonin…… Our
natural “elated hormones” that keep us in a healthy state of mind, body and soul. A combination of
cardiovascular, strength training, and flexibility equally need to be a part of your fitness routine.
Functional and compound movements provide a balanced and symmetrical and functional physique…..
all the recommendations can be achieved in any current fitness environment you are currently in.
Enjoying good health each and every day should be your mantra, optimally achieving freedom from
dependence and fragility.”
In my opinion and experience, it is simply a mind set. You MUST make the time to incorporate
a regimented schedule into your daily lives. Then you will be sure to reap the benefits of exercise.
Andas we’ve mentioned in this article, there are many benefits. Make exercise as important as
brushing your teeth. In order to improve fitness, you must work out 4 or more times a week. Three
times a week will maintain your current level of fitness, while fewer than 3 episodes of working out
causes your fitness level to decrease. Your goal should be to build workouts between 45 minutes to 1
hour in order to burn fat, improve immune function and get the full benefits of an exercise program.
Depending on your current health or physical status, you may need to check with your physician or
health care provider before any kind of physical activity. Especially if you are:
* excessively overweight
* over 30 and don’t exercise regularly (3x per week)
* have a family history of Heart Disease or Stroke
* have high blood pressure
* are a current smoker
Remember, it is never too late to start physical activity. If you want to live longer and feel better,
EXERCISE, your life depends on it!!
P.S. In regards to my last article, Be Vigilant – Read Labels Part II,
http://envmagazine.org/?p=1638 , many readers asked for additional information, giving a list of
recommended products that would be safe to use. I will be comprising a list which will be posted
in a future article.
Why do we need numerical nutrient standards to clean up Florida waters?
Posted on 05. Apr, 2010 by Howard Salus in Environment, Florida News, Opinions
Compiled for ENV
by Grant Campbell
Toxic Algae on the Caloosahatchee River.
Some people say that the EPA mandated Numerical Nutrient Standard is a one-size-fits-all solution to the cleanup needed for the Nation’s waters. Although not specifically addressed in the February 2005 report as a recommendation, classification of water body designation in Florida underwent intense scrutiny from FDEP and a wide range of stakeholders and third-party observers.
The standard used today in Florida is cumbersome in that the waterbodies are assessed individually based upon their designated use. A key concept in determining water body impairment and establishing a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is determination of water body’s “designated use.” Thus a canal that feeds a storage area could have a different designated use than the lake and a different TMDL would apply to the canal, and in some instances, allow the canal to contaminate the storage area.
What is a TMDL?
A TMDL, or Total Maximum Daily Load, is a scientific determination of the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a surface waterbody can absorb and still meet the water quality standards that protect human health and aquatic life. Waterbodies that do not meet water quality standards are identified as “impaired” for the particular pollutants of concern–nutrients, bacteria, mercury, etc.–and TMDLs must be developed, adopted and implemented for those pollutants to reduce pollutants and clean up the water body.
What are the basic steps in the TMDL program? How does it work?
- Assess the quality of surface waters–are they meeting water quality standards?
- Determine which waters are impaired–that is, which ones are not meeting water quality standards for a particular pollutant or pollutants.
- Establish and adopt, by rule, a TMDL for each impaired waterbody for the pollutants of concern–the ones causing the water quality problems.
- Develop, with extensive local stakeholder input, a Basin Management Action Plan ( BMAP) that….
- Implement the strategies and actions in the BMAP.
- Measure the effectiveness of the BMAP, both continuously at the local level and through a formal re-evaluation every five years.
- Adapt–change the plan and change the actions if things aren’t working.
- Reassess the quality of surface waters continuously.
Subsection 305(b) of the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that states, territories, and authorized tribes develop lists of pollutant-impaired waters. As described in subsection 303(d) of the CWA, impaired waters are those that do not meet water quality standards that states, territories, and authorized tribes have set based on designated use. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), following the CWA, requires that states, territories, and authorized tribes establish priority rankings for impaired waters and develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) of pollutants for these waters.
A TMDL represents the capacity of a surface water body or water body segment to assimilate a specific pollutant while still meeting water quality standards. Specifically, it is the maximum quantity of a pollutant for example, iron, nitrogen, bacteria, etc.– that can be discharged to the water body without impairing its designated uses, which may include fishing, swimming, shellfish harvesting, or drinking water supply. TMDLs developed for each impaired water segment in Florida must be adopted through the state’s public rulemaking process, and subsequently implemented according to management and allocation plans developed with input from local stakeholders.
How is the Program Implemented?
The TMDL program is implemented in Florida by the Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), as mandated by the state’s Watershed Restoration Act of 1999 (s. 403.067, F. S.). The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) and the state’s five water management districts work extensively with FDEP to develop and implement TMDLs. FDEP is required to report to the governor and legislature after 5 years of TMDL program implementation, to evaluate the success of the program and make recommendations for improving it. Accordingly, FDEP submitted in February 2005 a report entitled “Florida’s Total Maximum Daily Load Program: The First Five Years” (DEP Division of Water Resource Management).
Contaminants Causing Impairment and Triggering the TMDL Process
By the end of 2004, FDEP had developed and adopted, by rule, 52 TMDLs, with another 61 proposed or in draft form, but as yet not adopted by rule. In 2006, FDEP submitted its Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida and with 80% of the state’s waters surveyed, FDEP indicates 1066 TMDLs on 223 water bodies will be required due to verified impaired water bodies. Water quality monitoring in support of the TMDL program has revealed that the major types of pollutants causing impairment of Florida’s surface waters are:
- Nutrients / dissolved oxygen, primarily nitrogen and phosphorus, which promote the growth of algae and other aquatic plants that cause wide swings in oxygen levels and lead to fish kills and damaged habitat.
- Bacteria, which may threaten public health and close waters to swimming or shellfish harvesting.
- Metals, such as iron, silver, copper, cadmium, and zinc that adversely affect the health and reproduction of aquatic organisms.
- Mercury based largely on the existence of Department of Health fish consumption advisories. (The relative contributions of local, regional, and global sources, including atmospheric sources, have been widely debated and still remain uncertain.)
Over the last nine years, EPA has taken a number of steps to provide leadership and articulate its goal of working in partnership with states, territories and authorized tribes to establish quantitative endpoints to minimize excess nutrient loadings in our Nation’s waters. EPA issued a National Strategy for Development of Regional Nutrient Criteria in June 1998, and followed with a November 2001 national action plan for the development and establishment of numeric nutrient criteria. EPA published technical guidance for developing criteria for lakes and reservoirs in May 2000, rivers and streams in June 2000, and estuaries and coastal waters in October 2001. EPA also published recommended nutrient criteria for most streams and lakes in 2001. This combined strategy of EPA, state, territorial, and tribal partnership supported by technical assistance was intended to jump-start progress on a difficult and challenging problem.
Significant progress has been made, but we need to move more quickly and more comprehensively in order to meet the growing challenges from increasing population, expanding and more intensive agricultural activities, and spreading urbanization. A number of states and territories have already moved ahead to establish numeric standards for priority waterbodies. Others are in the process of collecting data and preparing to develop them.
The State of Florida has initiated rulemaking to adopt quantitative nutrient water quality standards to facilitate the assessment of designated use attainment for its waters and to provide a better means to protect state waters from the adverse effects of nutrient over-enrichment. The addition of excess nutrients, often associated with human alterations to watersheds, can negatively impact waterbody health and interfere with designated uses of waters – by causing noxious tastes and odors in drinking water, producing algal blooms and excessive aquatic weeds in swimming and boating waters, and altering the natural community of flora and fauna.
What is the Problem?
Like the human body, waterbodies require nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, to be healthy, but too many nutrients can be harmful. Many of our nation’s waters, including streams, rivers, wetlands, estuaries, and coastal waters, are affected by nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. The effect of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution for a given water body depends on its ecoregion and its sources of nitrogen and phosphorus.
High levels of nitrogen and phosphorus in waters can produce harmful algal blooms. In turn, these blooms can produce “dead zones” in water bodies where dissolved oxygen levels are so low that most aquatic life cannot survive. This condition in water bodies is referred to as hypoxia.
Florida is blessed by the waters of the Atlantic Ocean to the east, the Everglades and the Gulf of Mexico to the west, and a rich network of rivers, streams, lakes and marshlands in between. All across Florida, the effects of pollution can be felt and these effects jeopardize public health, our ability to swim and boat in lakes and rivers, and they undermine our tourist economy.
In 2008, testing by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection revealed that 1,000 miles of the state’s rivers and streams, 350,000 acres of Florida’s lakes and 900 square miles of its estuaries were contaminated by sewage, fertilizer or manure pollution.
The actual number of miles and acres of these waterbodies impaired by pollutants may be higher than State estimates as many waterbodies that have yet to be assessed may also be impaired. Because not all Florida waterbodies are contaminated to the same extent, the present system is much too laborious and complicated, making a strong case for the adoption of a one-size-fits-all policy.
Algae outbreaks plague many of our lakes, rivers and springs. The outbreaks can make boating and swimming dangerous or impossible, result in massive fish kills, and cause permanent reductions in waterfront property values. From coast to coast, Floridians are horrified to see their beloved lakes and rivers turn to green slime.
For example, almost the whole Caloosahatchee River in Southwest Florida recently suffered a massive blue‐green algae outbreak. The St. Lucie River and estuary also suffered a massive toxic algae outbreak which caused a permanent loss of a half billion dollars in waterfront property values.
Some of these algae outbreaks can be toxic. Exposure to toxic algae can cause rashes, skin and eye irritation, allergic reactions and gastrointestinal upset. Swimming can cause serious illness or even death if water is ingested. Some algae are known tumor promoters, producing “neurotoxins” which interfere with nerve cell function and “hepatotoxins” which attack the liver.
During the St. Lucie River outbreak, the County Health Department posted signs warning against contact with the water. Visitors to Wakulla Springs – for a century hailed as one of Florida’s Crown Jewels – reported getting skin rashes after swimming in the spring. The rashes were attributed to toxic algae triggered by sewage pollution. Farther south, over twenty similar incidents were reported at Ichetucknee Springs.
There, the outbreak was from unregulated manure from industrial dairy operations. For the past several years, major portions of the St. Johns River suffered from a massive toxic blue‐green algae outbreak which was dubbed “The Green Monster” for the fluorescent green slime created on the surface of the water. Toxin levels were recorded at 50 – 140 times above the World Health Organization’s recommended limits and many people reported respiratory problems, raw throats, and irritated eyes. Boat traffic on stretches of the St. Johns River has had to be shut down due to algae outbreaks.
The effects are by no means limited to freshwaters. Red tide and red drift algae have been linked to nutrient pollution on Florida beaches
The stench produced by red drift algae smells like raw sewage and drives away beachgoers. Red tide causes respiratory problems and often results in closed beaches during the tourist season. These closures have a devastating effect on the tourist economy because most beachgoers come from out-of‐ state or from Europe and return home with horror stories about Florida beaches.
Fertilizer, sewage and animal manure pollution can also endanger drinking water. Algae outbreaks are drawn into water intake pipes and attempts to disinfect the algae‐laden water often cause the algae to suddenly release dangerous toxins. In June 2008, a water treatment plant serving 30,000 people was forced to shut down after a toxic blue‐green algae outbreak on the Caloosahatchee River made the drinking water plant unusable.
Its Causes
Sewage. Even after sterilization and removal of solids, sewage effluent still contains very high levels of phosphorus and nitrogen – the essential components of fertilizer. Insufficiently treated sewage effluent is often allowed to be discharged directly into rivers or piped into near‐shore coastal areas.
The result is a ready food source for nuisance species such as algae. Even the solid residue of water treatment, known as sludge or “biosolids,” contains very high levels of phosphorus and nitrogen. Often this sludge residue is disposed of on land or marketed as fertilizer. When it rains, sludge gets washed into rivers and lakes, where it acts as a potent fertilizer.
Fertilizer. Floridians use huge amounts of fertilizer to keep their yards green. Florida’s agricultural sector also applies vast amounts of fertilizer on everything from tomatoes to pine trees. And then there’s the golf courses! Most fertilizer is applied at the wrong time and in excessive amounts. As a result, most of it is washed off into rivers, lakes and estuaries.
Fertilizing in the summer rainy season is almost the same as dumping fertilizer directly into the nearest stream. The result is like Miracle‐Gro for algae.
Manure. Florida agricultural operations include large numbers of industrial‐scale dairy operations and huge beef cattle calving operations. These operations produce massive amounts of manure.
When manure is not correctly handled on site, it washes into groundwater and streams when it rains. This problem is compounded by the fact that cattle like to congregate around streams and lakes and seek shade under trees that grow near the edges of water. This means large amounts of manure are deposited at the water’s edge or even directly in the water. The manure water then triggers algae outbreaks downstream.
The Proposed EPA Rule
EPA’s proposed numeric nutrient rule provides standards for lakes, streams, springs and clear streams, and canals. It also contains nitrogen standards for estuaries consistent with the freshwater standards.
Despite the claims made by the rule’s detractors, EPA is not taking a one‐size‐fits‐all approach. Lakes are categorized into three groups (colored, clear & alkaline, clear & acidic) and specific standards are proposed for each group. For streams, EPA is proposing four different watershed‐based regions within Florida with different nitrogen and phosphorous criteria for each region. EPA also took into account the need to protect downstream water bodies by proposing equations that would be used to further limit nutrient levels when necessary to protect downstream lakes and estuaries.
For springs and clear streams, EPA is proposing a nitrate‐nitrite criterion that would prevent nuisance algae. The rule also proposes nitrogen and phosphorus limits for South Florida canals.
In order to allow time for affected polluters to implement the necessary measures to comply with the new rules, EPA is proposing a new water quality regulatory approach called a “restoration standard.” This approach would allow Florida to set incremental water quality stair steps for nutrients that will be stepped down over time to achieve the required ultimate nutrient limit. If a water body does not meet the stair step level for nitrogen or phosphorus at the end of each stair step, the restoration standard would be terminated and the ultimate nitrogen and phosphorus limits would apply immediately. This method would allow polluters the time needed to adjust to the new rule while ensuring that each stair step is complied with.
EPA has also proposed a site‐specific criterion which is an alternative water quality standard that protects the lake or stream and is based on sound science but is tailored to a specific site where special natural conditions may exist. These criteria may be more or less stringent than the applicable general nutrient standard and allow for scientific considerations to bring added precision to the necessary nutrient standard at that specific location. This approach would add even more flexibility and make certain that good science is being considered in on‐the‐ground decision‐making.
The Consent Decree
EPA has proposed the new nutrient standards as a result of a lawsuit by conservationists. Currently, Florida has an unenforceable narrative nutrient standard that says that nutrients can’t cause a biological “imbalance.” This is like posting a speed limit sign on I‐75 that reads “Drive at a Reasonable Speed Considering Weather, Traffic and Lighting Conditions As well as Other Relevant Factors.” Numeric standards are like speed limit signs with numbers on them—like “SPEED LIMIT 55 MPH.”
After watching algae outbreaks threaten water bodies across Florida and uncovering EPA documents which stated explicitly that numeric nutrient standards were necessary under the Clean Water Act, Earthjustice sued EPA on behalf of Florida Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, and St. Johns Riverkeeper.
The suit sought to require EPA to promptly set numeric standards. The Florida
Department of Agriculture, the South Florida Water Management District, the Phosphate Mining and Sewage Utilities Councils, and many associations of farming and industrial polluters intervened in opposition to the establishment of numeric limits.
After extensive negotiations, EPA entered into a settlement agreement with the conservationists. Finding that sewage, fertilizer, and animal waste pollution have worsened or not been reduced from unacceptably high levels, the federal court found that Florida’s narrative standards had not solved the problem.
Thus the federal court entered a Consent Decree, meaning that it approved the settlement as fair, reasonable and in the public interest. The Consent Decree requires
EPA to finalize numeric standards for lakes and streams by October 2010 and to finalize standards for estuaries a within a year . The court’s order forecloses the argument that EPA can abandon or postpone setting enforceable numeric standards for Florida
Practical Solutions
Smart Lawns. Floridians love to keep beautiful yards, but applying too much fertilizer means that huge amounts of fertilizer are washed into streams, lakes and estuaries every time it rains. Runoff from fertilizer in residential areas causes a third of the problem.
In most of Florida, no fertilizer at all is needed to have a beautiful lawn. What’s worse, three‐fourths of it washes off when it rains, meaning that most of it is wasted. That’s why many counties and cities in Florida have adopted Smart Fertilizer ordinances that ban lawn fertilizer during the summer rainy season.
These ordinances also encourage planting of native trees and shrubs that need no fertilizer. Home owners save money and don’t have to pay local government taxes for new expensive water treatment systems for stormwater polluted by fertilizer.
While a pound of nitrogen fertilizer costs only about $5, the cost of a water cleanup project for nitrogen pollution is $225 per pound of nitrogen. Smart Fertilizer rules save everybody money.
Smart Farms. Cleaning up polluted waterways can be expensive, so the best way to treat nutrient pollution is to eliminate it at its source. This means being smarter about how we use fertilizer on our farms. The only fertilizer that runs into lakes and rivers is fertilizer that’s wasted. Properly applied, it is supposed to be used by the plants. All that fertilizer runoff wastes money too. Instead of this waste, farms need to implement smart fertilizer practices.
These include:
1) Controlling runoff on farms;
2) Performing scientific soil testing – down to where the roots actually reach ‐ to determine the actual needs of crops;
3) Applying fertilizer only to the root zone of the plants; and
4) Applying fertilizer only in the amount needed by the plant.
If we required fertilizer to be used more carefully on our farms, we could go a long way toward protecting our waters without wasting money on unnecessary fertilizer or costly restoration projects.
Better Sewage Treatment. The claim that it will take over $50 billion to upgrade our sewage treatment plants to comply with the new rule is claptrap. Upgrading all the sewage treatment plants in the entire United States (including federal grants, state contributions, and leveraged bonds) from 1988 to 2007 only cost $58 billion.
The $50 billion claim is based on treatment by reverse osmosis – the method Saudi Arabia uses to convert sea water to fresh water. Some wastewater treatment plants will have to spend serious money to clean up their act. That’s because these plants are now allowed to dump effluent that hasn’t been filtered and treated very well.
Some have no permit limits on their phosphorus and nitrogen discharges at all. Others with spray fields in North and Central Florida will need much better treatment for nutrients because of underground connections to springs and rivers.
But most plants in Florida would only need add‐ons that use chemical treatment or biological uptake systems. Extremely low levels can be attained with these processes.
For most of these, capital costs would be about $1.50 to $2.00 per gallon capacity with a few cents per gallon per month in operating and maintenance costs.
The new standards will also be phased in as permits come up for renewal. So instead of the scary numbers opponents to the rule throw around, it is more likely to cost a few dollars extra per person per month phased in over several years, and it is likely that there would be state and federal money to help out with these costs.
The alternative of not establishing protective numeric standards for our streams, lakes and estuaries will only make the problems worse and the cleanup more expensive.
Better Manure Management. Some dairy operations have thousands of cows that each generate 140 pounds of manure per day. These massive amounts of manure should be disposed of responsibly.
Manure ‐ including wash water from barn floors ‐ should be dried and recycled as fertilizer or disposed of in land fills. Otherwise, manure moves through ground and surface water to contaminate springs and downstream waters.
A major source of cow manure is from cow calf operations where manure washes into rivers and streams. The water management districts and the state Department of
Environmental Protection should require cow calf operations to fence cows out of streams and rivers and require the construction of shade structures such as pole barns.
Cows eat in the open pastures and then congregate in the shady areas near water as they digest grass. Large amounts of manure accumulate in these areas. The construction of shade roofs provides the cows with shade away from the water and concentrates manure in a place where it can be removed with a tractor.
Controlling manure at the source saves taxpayers money in the long term by avoiding clean‐up costs and the cost of multibillion dollar pollution treatment projects.
Nutrient pollution, especially from nitrogen and phosphorus, has consistently ranked as one of the top causes of degradation in some U.S. waters for more than a decade. Excess nitrogen and phosphorus lead to significant water quality problems including harmful algal blooms, hypoxia and declines in wildlife and wildlife habitat. Excesses have also been linked to higher amounts of chemicals that make people sick.
Conclusion
We can take steps now that will make a difference in addressing the challenges of growing nutrient pollution. The first step is to have numeric nutrient criteria in place to enable action. EPA is committing itself to support development of numeric nutrient criteria, and to use EPA’s tools and metrics to help states, territories, and authorized tribes adopt numeric nutrient standards more quickly. EPA will also continue to do research, develop new tools, and collaborate to strengthen partnerships for consensus solutions.
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/policy.html
The Big Picture of Going Green
Posted on 28. Feb, 2009 by post master in Opinions
by: Bonnie Nicholls
Going “Green” is a popular term today. Many people have begun to take
some steps to recycle and use vehicles that are more fuel efficient to
try to be more environmentally responsible. However, some of you may be still wondering, what is this really all about? Is it a fad? Can we
really change what is going on with doing these things?
While we may not still have all the answers, it is important to take a
look at the big picture of what climate change is all about and why many people feel it is important that we do the things that are suggested to become more “green” and environmentally responsible.
What in the World is Going On?
The world has gone through several ages and eras, both physically and
socially. It has only been recently that we have been able to accumulate so much data, process it, and store it due to the computer and modern day technology. It was actually only a little over 50 years ago that specific data began to be analyzed concerning the carbon in our atmosphere.
Roger Revelle is the scientist that first started making continuous
measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide in 1950. Other scientists
have also analyzed tree rings and other geological indicators frozen in
the ice of past levels of carbon dioxide and changes in our climate. The
results they have discovered is that our atmosphere has increased in
temperature by 1.4 degrees in the last 50 years (most of which is in the
last 30 years), which is at a faster rate than any other time era that
has been researched. It is thought too that it is not coincidental that
the 30 years coincides with the use of fossil fuel for electric in our
homes and fuel for our cars. The projections are that if things keep
going the way they are, we could increase by 2 to 11 degrees in the next 100 years.
What does that mean to us? Our world is becoming a very different place. As the world turns warmer, our ice melts. With more water on the planet, much of our livable land and fresh drinking water will disappear. South Florida is predicted to be under water. Climates in other parts of the world will change because the different mix of fresh water and salt water. Plants and animals will die because they will no longer have their natural habitats. An increase in certain illnesses have already occurred, such as asthma and cancer, and there are possible other worldwide epidemics that are predicted.
What Are We Doing?
Why is what we are doing affecting this change in temperature?
Scientists have identified what is called the “Greenhouse Effect.” Many
of the gases that we produce create that effect, that is, they trap the
heat around the world so it does not go off in space. It acts much like
a big blanket.
There are 3 specific things we are doing to create a problem for our
atmosphere and to contribute to this greenhouse effect. First is burning
fossil fuels. Second is destroying our tree canopy. Third is polluting
the water that kills the plankton.
Usually carbon dioxide emitted into the air can be absorbed by the
trees, plants, and the plankton in the ocean, but we cut down of our
tree canopy and an excess of carbon dioxide in the waters have killed
much of the plankton. Again, this affects our wildlife and our food
chain. And with the tremendous growth of population, there is an
increase in the need for energy, housing, and clean water. It becomes a
vicious cycle.
There are two goals to focus on and which needs the contribution of
everyone.
1. Take steps to slow the climate change
2. Prepare for a “new” way of living
Why set these goals and make the changes?
We need to take a fresh approach to create a healthier life and planet
for the Present and as a Heritage to our Children:
#1 Preserve our environment.
We need to have healthy natural resources – our air, water, and land.
#2 Personal – Health and Community Benefits
We need to protect our health and to develop healthier relationships
with others.
#3 Economic – There is the “Green Advantage.” The state of the economy is another serious issue today. This is also the negative result of our current methods of consumption and not being environmentally
responsible. The Green Advantage means that it is financially better for
each individual. There are many ways that going green is cost effective.
We can also create new “green” jobs and rebuild our economy to be more sustainable.
To make changes, we need to evaluate our current habits and then to
learn about different things we can do to. ENV Magazine is dedicated to
helping to pass on information about some practical, simple, cost
effective things we all need to do.
Here are some topics that will be covered in upcoming issues of ENV
Magazine:
Reducing Our Carbon Footprint to “350”
Reducing Direct and Indirect Energy Consumption
Tips to Reduce Consumption of Goods
Recycling Tips
Water Conservation
Reducing Toxins in our Water, Air, and Homes
Greenwashing
ENV Magazine is a proud partner & a voice for:
