global warming

This Plastic-Eating Caterpillar Could Help Save The World

April 25, 2017 By Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

When you think of organisms that would save the world a caterpillar doesn’t usually come to mind. However, the wax worm has proven that even the smallest contribution can make a whole lot of change.

Many people have been annoyed by the presence of the wax worm for decades. In fact, it is most well-known for the pest problem it creates in Europe. What we citizens of the world didn’t know though is that the wax worm is helping the environment by eating plastic bags.

Yes, a plastic-eating caterpillar may help save the world and here’s how…

What You Need to Know About the ‘Plastic-Eating Caterpillar’

The fact that the wax worm eats plastic was discovered by an amateur beekeeper in Spain. She found the wax worms in one of her beehives and removed them, placing them in a plastic bag. She was surprised to find that the worms ate through the plastic bag at an alarming rate.

So, that has gotten scientists wondering what else the stomach of this plastic-eating caterpillar can handle. What if the wax worm could break down polyethylene (aka plastic bags, which currently filling up landfills around the world) on a regular basis?

How a ‘Plastic-Eating Caterpillar’ May Change the World

The answer to that question is yes. The plastic-eating caterpillar can also digest polyethylene, as shown in the video above. Wax worms are actually more efficient at eating through plastic bags than any other method tried by scientists previously.

The Spanish beekeeper that discovered this about the wax worm collaborated with scientists to discover just how well these plastic-eating caterpillars are able to, well, eat plastic. They discovered that they ate through plastic bags at an alarming rate and there’s a science to it.

A wax worm’s enzymes are what aids the breakdown of plastic, according to the study published in the scientific journal “Biology.” The scientists were able to confirm that it is the enzymes in the caterpillar’s body causing the breakdown by mashing the bodies of a few worms on bags (with similar results to them eating the bag). If scientists are able to replicate this enzyme it could help alleviate the effects of pollution around the world.

Think about the number of plastic items and plastic bags you through out just on a weekly basis. Plastic bags fill up landfills around the world. If scientists are able to focus the efforts of these plastic-eating caterpillars they could slow down some of the affects of the pollution caused by plastic bags and other plastic items being thrown away. This tiny organism has the ability to change the world one plastic bag at a time.

Want more information about the plastic-eating caterpillar, check out the video below.

Like this article? You may also enjoy reading about Odd Ways to Make Money and Alternative Uses for Plastic Bags.

Photo: Gecko Forums

New Study Shows Hydropower May Fuel Global Warming

October 2, 2016 By Amanda Blankenship 2 Comments

Greenhouse gas emissions have been a concern of millions of people around the world for years. Countries around the world have been trying to get these emissions under control for years. If everyone was able to get on board with dialing down greenhouse gas emissions it is possible that we, as a human race, would be able to dial down global warming by more than 2 degrees Celsius from where it was before the Industrial Revolution. A new study, however, shows that there may be more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than scientists initially thought.

The fact that there may be more greenhouse gas emissions than scientists originally thought is important. This is because the efforts being made to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions would need to be cut even more to make a dent in the damage that has been done.

New Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The new study will be published in a paper form next week in “BioScience.” It shows that hydropower may in fact be a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions.

This is an unexpected source of something that is doing harm to the environment. Oftentimes people think of hydropower as a way to provide power to the world without harming the atmosphere. Man-made reservoirs, like the Hoover Dam, may be behind the rise in greenhouse gas emissions.

There are approximately 1 million dams throughout the world that have been created for the purpose of providing electricity, irrigation and other human needs. While these forms of energy seem to be “green,” scientists have proven that they are emitting practically a billion tons of carbon dioxide each year (1.3 percent of the global total).

How Greenhouse Gases Affect the Environment

These gases are generally in the form of methane, which has a strong short-term warming effect. Some emissions of carbon dioxide can be used by humans for energy, like oil and gas. However, a great deal of these emissions are harming the atmosphere.

The latest research, as previously stated, shows that reservoirs that we are using for energy may actually be emitting more of these gases into the air (not usable for energy like gas and oil). According to the Washington Post, 79 percent of the gases being emitted from reservoirs are methane-based gases. Carbon dioxide accounted for 17 percent and nitrous oxide accounted for 4 percent.

“There’s been kind of an explosion in research into efforts to estimate emissions from reservoirs,” said Bridget Deemer, one author involved with the study. “So we synthesized all known estimates from reservoirs globally, for hydropower and other functions, like flood control and irrigation.”

Researchers also found that the estimates of methane emissions per area of reservoir are about 25 percent higher than scientists originally thought. According to Deemer this is especially important because there is a global boom in dam construction worldwide right now.

How to Fix the Problem

Deemer points out that the study didn’t only single out dams that are being used for energy purposes. Dams being used for other purposes are also causing issues with the environment. The information gathered by the team took a look at 267 reservoirs around the world which cover 30,000 square miles.

John Harrison, another author of the study, said that based on the information shown dams have been emitting about the same amount of gases as rice paddies. Rice paddy emissions, however, have been taken into account for years. Reservoirs have not.

In fact, Harrison said that based on the new study, it appears that reservoir emissions and rice paddy emissions are of about the same magnitude on a global scale — but rice paddy emissions have been taken into account for some time. Reservoir emissions often have not.

Still More to Be Discovered

Authors of the study acknowledge that there is still more information to be found out about greenhouse gas emissions, especially where dams are concerned. The current study findings do not represent a “life cycle analysis” of all the reservoirs in the world. The study also does not weigh in the fact that the majority of the reservoirs are used to generate hydropower. Using hydropower presumably creates fewer greenhouse gas emissions than burning coal or natural gas.

Either way, the scientists know one thing for sure. These emissions, whether caused by hydropower or other sources, need attention. They are slowly eating away at the atmosphere and destroying the environment.

What do you think about the scientists’ findings?

Photo: carol bean

Pope Francis Calls Catholics to Act Against Climate Change

December 31, 2015 By Lilian Nwa Leave a Comment

Pope Francis encourages Catholics and world leaders to fight climate change

Pope Francis has not been one to mince words or refrain from sharing his thoughts. In December, he accused the Curia (the senior governing group of the Vatican consisting of cardinals, bishops and priests) of suffering from “spiritual Alzheimer’s” and of “existential schizophrenia” though he did say that such problems pose a danger to all Christians including himself.

Now, Francis has turned his attention to climate change in a move that will again anger staunch conservatives who were already infuriated by Francis’ prior call to ease global policy via state intervention in the market economy.

According to the website thinkprogress.org, Francis made a biblical case for addressing climate change when he told a large crowd in Rome that, “Creation is not a property, which we can rule over at will…[It] is a gift…that God has given us, so that we care for it and we use it for the benefit of all, always with great respect and gratitude.” Francis continued by calling destruction of the planet a “sinful act” akin to telling God that his creation is faulty or inadequate.

Now, the Pope is encouraging world leaders and approximately 1.2 billion Catholics to take an active role in protecting the planet and thus preventing climate change that too often disrupts ecologies and peoples’ livelihoods. According to Seattle Pi, Francis will soon visit the Philippines’ city Tacloban, which was devastated in 2012 by Super-Typhoon Haiyan. Many believe he will subsequently release an encyclical (a papal letter sent to bishops and intended for wide circulation) concerning the threat of global warming.

As mentioned, American conservatives have not received this news kindly. In fact, Fox News correspondent Doug McKelway reported that the Pope had aligned himself with “a few environmental extremists who favor widespread population control and wealth redistribution.”

Still, the Pope’s call for action seems to have widespread support among most Catholics and Christians generally. In 2006, the Evangelical Climate Initiative warned its members that poor nations and individuals are most susceptible to the challenge and threat of global warming. Christians, the organizers said, who are naturally called to care for their neighbors must then care about climate change.

Altogether, it seems then that Catholics, along with other Christians, individuals of other faiths and those with no faith, should join efforts to protect the planet from climate change. In our collective efforts, we can decrease the burden borne by the poorest nations and individuals with the most to lose.

(Photo courtesy of Aleteia Image Department)

10 Ways Global Warming May Affect Your Finances

July 31, 2015 By Will Lipovsky 3 Comments

While some people who believe global warming isn’t a legitimate issue to be concerned about, most economic and geologic signs point towards global warming. Many people believe that global warming only impacts the weather, but it actually will impact the economy as well. In one way or another, much of this impact may end up having a negative effect on your personal finances. Here are a few things to watch out for:

1. Cost of Food

Global warming means a significant change in the weather patterns across the world which, in turn, will also have an affect on agriculture. As such, this means it will be harder and more expensive to produce food. This will cause the price of food to drastically rise and may have a fairly large impact on your weekly grocery bill.

2. Extreme Weather Disasters

We’ve seen a startling amount of natural disasters around the world in the last decade or two, and a lot of them have been attributed to global warming. If a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, or other natural disaster has happened where you live, you already know how devastating it can be emotionally, physically, and financially. If more natural disasters continue to occur, it can seriously hinder the economy of those areas. In some cases this means a stoppage of goods productions which could drive up prices and accessibility.

3. Disease

Global warming can also cause a rise in the spread of diseases. Many of these infectious diseases are affected by climate change or the contamination of food, water, and air. An increased risk of disease means more medical bills and vaccinations.

4. Healthcare Costs

In addition to an increased risk of diseases caused by climate change, there are other associated healthcare costs which may hurt your finances as well. For instance, you may need to start paying more money for access to vaccinations and medications. Sudden climate changes can also cause issues with your immune system and make you more susceptible to getting sick.

5. Cost of Utilities

Just as global warming may impact agriculture and the cost of food, it may also have an impact on the coal, oil, and natural gas. Many of the areas where these resources are found are prone to natural disasters, which may end up making coal, oil, or natural gas scarce, thus increasing the price. If you’ve noticed your utility bills slowly increasing in price over the years, this may be one of the reasons why.

6. Insurance Costs

One of the biggest risks associated with global warming is how it will impact insurance costs for businesses, real estate, and home ownership. With the increased occurrence of natural disasters, home and real estate insurance has risen. Many areas that currently have flood or earthquake insurance may see an increase in insurance costs. In fact, some areas of the country have already seen insurance plans increase in cost.

7. Real Estate

With the possibility of coastal cities eroding or other areas being destroyed by natural disasters, the cost of real estate will most likely rise. Global warming is predicted to increase migration to more stable areas, and this will most likely cause a severe increase in price for houses or rental units as well as real estate tax and insurance.

8. Increased Cost of Transportation

Anyone who has experienced a natural disaster or onslaught of bad weather knows that transportation infrastructure is often one of the first things impacted. With so much climate change and potential for natural disasters or disturbances, there’s a chance that many cities’ infrastructure will crumble or be badly in need of repairs. On a broader level, this may mean an increase of taxes in order to fix roads or transit systems, but on a smaller, more personal level, this may mean having to buy new tires for your car that much more often or having your vehicle undergo significant repairs.

9. Home Repair and Upkeep

Global warming may also cause you to spend more repairing your home. If your city or town experiences significant weather changes, you may have to update your house accordingly. This may mean ensuring that your house is weatherproof or making sure that you have the right type equipment to deal with severe summer or winter weather.

10. Economic Issues

The impact global warming has on the overall economy is a big issue many people are worried about. Global warming may mean a decrease in production of certain goods or industries, which could mean job loss and even more economic hardship. This results in shifting market prices for goods and services, and those prices will more than likely be increased instead of decreased. On a local economic level, any natural disaster or huge shift in the economy will probably affect your personal spending.

Limiting Global Warming to 2 Degrees Celsius Is “Utterly Inadequate”

March 29, 2015 By Lilian Nwa 6 Comments

Limiting global warming to 2 degrees is utterly inadequate

In October of last year, scientists David G. Victor and Charles F. Kennel wrote in an article for the journal Nature that for nearly a decade, international diplomacy has set a goal of “stopping global warming at 2 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels.” However, the authors strongly criticized this goal, stating that, “..it has allowed some governments to pretend that they are taking serious action to mitigate global warming, when in reality they have achieved almost nothing.” As well, the authors proclaimed that scientifically there are much better ways to measure how human activities have impacted the average global surface temperature beyond the 2 degree celsius standard.

Now, a recent article by Petra Tschakert of Penn State University in University Park has also denounced the target as being “utterly inadequate” and wants to revise the target to 1.5° C. In an article published in the journal Climate Change Responses, she warns that the lower limit is necessary to protect coral reefs, prevent sea level rises and maintain the presence of ice during Arctic summers.

Tschakert is not the only expert who has warned that a decreased temperature increase target is necessary. In fact, during a recent meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report, most of the panel’s members seemed to agree. However, whether or not this new goal is achievable remains to be seen. Indeed, some researchers already believe this goal is impossible as emissions have gone from bad to worse and will likely result in a 3° C temperature increase by 2100.

However, in a new book titled “Climate Shock: The Economic Consequences of a Hotter Planet” by Gernot Wagner of the Environmental Defense Fund and Martin L. Weitzman at Harvard, the authors seem to suggest that there might be an alternative. In a proposal they call the Copenhagen Theory of Climate change, The New York Times reports the authors suggest “we should be asking people to volunteer to save our climate by taking small, individual actions.”

The motivation behind the name of their proposal (Copenhagen) refers to the ability of the Danish government to convince half of its residents to commute to work by bicycle each day. As The New York Times reports, “A half-century ago, the city’s inhabitants were becoming almost as reliant on cars as people anywhere else. But after the oil crisis of the 1970’s…many Copenhagen residents made a personal commitment to ride bicycles…out of moral principle, even if that was inconvenient for them.”

If people in other parts of the developed and developing world could be convinced to make such a commitment, this “polycentric approach for coping with climate change” could yield real results. But, as the Times warns, the world is “diverse and complicated” and in order to combat climate change and global warming, we will need to establish a global, “concrete framework” with consequences for those who choose not to play by the rules.

(Photo courtesy of Andreas Kambanis)

Climate Change Denier Wei-Hock Soon Took Over $1 Million from the Oil Industry

February 22, 2015 By Lilian Nwa 2 Comments

Leading climate change denier Wei-Hock Soon has taken over 1 million dollars from the oil industry

There is an ongoing debate about how humans are affecting the global climate and subsequently, what governments and policy makers should do to stem the effects of climate change. According to Wikipedia, no scientific body disagrees with the view that global surface temperatures have increased primarily due to human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, and as such, there should be political pressure to prevent continued changes.

However, there is a small group of scientists who disagree with this view, and altogether, the issue has become one of political debate, with many Republican deniers. To prevent the undue (and unscientific) influence of outside organizations and groups, supporters and deniers of global warming have been questioned about their sources of funding and recently, one of the leading climate change deniers was revealed to have received more than $1.2 million from the fossil fuel industry over the last decade.

The denier, scientist Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has argued, “Variations in the sun’s energy rather than greenhouse gas emissions are behind global warming.” With his clearly anti-global warming stance, Dr. Soon has appeared on a number of conservative news programs and conferences, and has also testified before Congress.

Though this discovery does not necessarily mean he falsified scientific reports or that his corporate funders influenced his scientific beliefs, it does cast a significant shadow on his integrity and reliability as a researcher. According to the Times, Dr. Soon published 11 pages since 2008 concerning his theory and omitted the required disclosure in each one. In at least eight, the Times reports that “he appears to have violated ethical guidelines of the journals that published his work.”

As if this were not enough, documents obtained from Dr. Soon show correspondence between the researcher and his corporate funders in which he described his papers as “‘deliverables’ that he completed in exchange for money.” Previously, Dr. Soon has also reacted angrily when questioned about his funding sources, and though he has acknowledged some corporate ties, he has not been upfront or clear about his sources.

Historian of science Naomi Oreskes, also at Harvard University, has weighed in on this case and its broader implications for scientific debate. She told the Times, “The whole doubt-mongering strategy relies on creating the impression of scientific debate…Willie Soon is playing a role in a certain kind of political theater.”

Perhaps then those who deny climate change are less interested in science than the “political theater” of the relentless back-and-forth between themselves and those they disagree with. Like parents who refuse to vaccinate their children, the views of these people say less about their scientific knowledge and more about their inability to trust the government or any ‘outside’ source of knowledge.

(Photo courtesy of Mark van Laere)