Essay 1 Revision – Nuclear Power: Is It Really All That Bad?

On March 11^th 2011, a massive earthquake and tsunami struck Japan. The first reports focused on the waves’ damage to city after city and town after town. Then all reports focused on one place, Fukushima. What was special about this town? Did many people live there? No, it was a coastal town with the same damage as every other fishing community. The only difference was that a couple of water pumps were damaged. The problem was that these pumps cooled a nuclear power plant. The lack of cooling started a chain of events resulting in explosions and spreading radiation. These events caused considerable discussion and questioning of the safety of nuclear power. This questioning is not going to help the environment. The problems facing the world today are numerous: humans are running out of oil sources, greenhouse gases are changing our climate and there are few ready alternative sources of power available. Humankind, for the most part, has done nothing to curb the effects of global warming. We are waiting for an easy way out while burning coal and oil to power our homes. Of course we can’t just stop making electricity and wait for a perfect energy source. We don’t have the time. However, there is a technology that is developed and ready to be used, that can produce massive amounts of power and no uncontrolled pollution. The human race cannot stand around waiting for a new energy solution to appear, we must use the nuclear technology available now to create clean energy today. Although nuclear power is often viewed as dangerous, it causes more good than harm because of its efficiency, cleanliness and safety.

Efficiency is the key to any good power source and nuclear energy has considerable advantages over other power sources. Every year the United States burns 1 billion tons of coal to make electricity.  Sixty-thousand tons of Uranium would create the same amount of energy; a small fifty gram Uranium pellet puts off the same amount of energy as 1780 pounds of coal (Klimas, Anderson & Azadian, 2006). Instead of using a solid chunk of coal the size of a refrigerator, two pieces of uranium the size of a pair of dice can be used. The ease at which this can be dug up and transported can make a huge difference in efficiency of the fuel. Only one truck is needed to drive the fuel to the power plant instead of a mile-long train. The less fuel used lowers the amount of work and energy going into getting the fuel. Although Uranium is more expensive than coal, the plant needs much less; each kilowatt-hour created by nuclear power (1.76 cents/per kilowatt-hour) is cheaper than coal (2.21 cents/per kilowatt-hour) (Klimas, Anderson & Azadian, 2006). The fuel supply is a huge factor to consider when selecting a power plant. Oil and coal are running out. Uranium is still easily mined and will continue to be for years after oil and coal mines have dried up. Also, some reactors are set up to recycle used nuclear fuel and create more fuel (Yangco, 1996). Let’s see a coal plant do that: burn 50 tons of coal and end up with 60 tons. This process is not science fiction and can stretch the use of the fuel many times. This efficiency is a solid advantage nuclear power has over other forms of alternative energy. Unlike solar or wind, a nuclear plant can provide vast amounts of constant, reliable energy. They are also exempt from many kinds of fuel shortages. Uranium is evenly distributed around the globe so a conflict in the Middle East will not affect energy prices here (Yangco, 1996).

The biggest advantage for the environment over conventional energy plants is that a nuclear power plant puts out no pollution during operation (Clyde, Schleier-Smith & Tseng, 1996). No air pollution equals no gases released into atmosphere equals no contributing to global warming. This is much different from the smoke belching coal plants that produce 40% of the CO² released by the US, and that cause endless health problems (Godin, 2011). The massive amounts of dangerous gases released are uncontrollable and deadly. Air pollutants can never be controlled while radioactive waste can be put in containers and stored. Coal plant air pollution kills 1,000,000 people every year. The nuclear plant radiation from Chernobyl is expected to cause early death in about 4,000 people, (Godin, 2011) but that was an accident, not routine operation. The accident in Japan was a small release that had nowhere near the potential for killing compared to Chernobyl. The only time people are hurt by nuclear power is when something goes wrong. Coal pollution kills when everything goes right.

Nuclear power has a different kind of pollution: radiation. The disaster in Japan and the past disasters of 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl created massive amounts of fear in the general public. Anything that can silently penetrate walls and produce cancer, radiation sickness, and death is scary. Nuclear waste will continue to give off radiation for thousands of years. However, radiation is not understood well by the general public. Radiation is normal. Two of the three disasters mentioned really didn’t cause much human damage. At 3 Mile Island some people received 0.3% more radiation than normal (Yangco, 1996). The Japanese incident is still too recent to see health trends and Chernobyl was not actually a meltdown, it was an explosion and fire caused by the mishandling of chemicals and steam, not run away nuclear reactions. Even after releasing huge amounts of radiation Chernobyl did not kill many people when compared to the ongoing deaths from coal. Something that is not widely known is that radiation is everywhere, from bricks to fire. Everyday objects give off small amounts of reaction, while fires release natural radiation from those same materials. Taking a plane trip gives your body a dose of radiation from outer space. These are all normal and non-dangerous exposures to radiation. More radiation is released burning coal then from a nuclear power plant, even one with a leak (Klimas, Anderson & Azadian, 2006)!

I can only hope that nuclear power production does not get stifled by the fears. This form of clean energy has to be utilized if we as humans want to keep our way of life. The path humanity is on — one of dwindling of fossil fuels and a planet that is inhospitable — is unacceptable and dramatic action needs to be taken soon. Nuclear power may not be the final answer to our problems, but it can fill in and power the world until better technology is discovered. A look at the efficiency, cleanliness, and safety of nuclear power reveals a power source that has too much positive potential for the environment and our future for us to ignore.

References

Clyde, J., Schleier-Smith, J., & Tseng, G. (1996, October 28). Nuclear energy. Retrieved from http://library.thinkquest.org/3471/nuclear_energy_body.html

Godin, S. (2011, March 13). Deaths per twh by energy source. Retrieved from http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

Klimas, R., Anderson, D., & Azadian, N. (2006, December 13). Nuclear power pros and cons. Retrieved from http://www.eng.fsu.edu/~azadini/group/website/

Yangco, R. (1996, June 06). The pros and cons of nuclear energy. Retrieved from http://members.tripod.com/funk_phenomenon/nuclear/procon.htm

Essay 1 Revision

The third longest river in the world is also the longest river in Asia. The ancient Yangtze River begins its life high upon the Tibetan Plateau in Western China. The spark of its life is derived from glacial runoff. This runoff is joined by small streams and creeks as it descends from its lofty Tibetan perch. The river gains volume and ferocity as it tumbles and roils towards China’s east coast. As the river nears the coast, it splinters apart to form the capillaries of the Yangtze River Delta. For centuries, this unrelenting river etched its pathway unmolested across China, splitting the country in two. However, in 2006 the completion of the Three Gorges Dam forever changed the ecology, environment, and destiny of the river. The Yangtze is not alone. According to an article by David Biello (2009) called “Dam Building Boom: Path to Clean Energy,” the world has as many as 48,000 hydroelectric dams. These dams provide electricity to millions of people. According to Mara Hvistendahl’s article (2008) called “China’s Three Gorges Dam: An Environmental Catastrophe,” the Three Gorges Dam alone will generate 18,000 megawatts of electricity. That is eight times the amount of electricity generated by the America’s Hoover Dam. However, this green source of energy has a dark side. Although hydroelectric dams are believed to provide a relatively clean source of electricity, they cause an increase in greenhouse gases because flooding destroys carbon dioxide filtering vegetation and forests, decomposing organic material releases methane and stored carbon dioxide into the water, and the dam’s turbines release these gasses into the atmosphere.

Dams have a very simple yet extremely functional design. Simply build a wall across a river and effectively stop it in its tracks. Provide a pathway for the water to escape to the other side of the dam. This pathway is called a penstock. The penstock is filled from near the base of the dam thereby pulling water from near the bottom of the reservoir. At the end of the penstock the water enters a large chamber that houses the blades of the turbines. The water spins the blades of the turbines which generates the electricity. Once the water has passed the turbine blades it is spat out the back side of the dam where it is free to continue its journey downstream. When fish enter the turbine system the outcome is nearly always fatal for the fish (Carr 2012, Ferguson 2011, Keefer 2010). The amount of electricity generated depends on how much water is let through the penstock. On days where there is little electricity needed then only a little water is let through. On days where much more electricity is needed then more water can be let through. Dams will also open the penstocks fully to drain large amounts of water to accommodate floodwater during rainy seasons and during spring snow thawing.

However, by placing a dam in the river water begins to build up on the upriver side. Often a large lake will be formed. These lakes are called reservoirs. The reservoir can be massive. This flooding alone often has serious consequences for people. The flooding from the Three Gorges Dam created a lake that was so large it displaced nearly 1.3 million people. Deep beneath this lake rests the skeletal remains of a forest. This forest was once thriving, absorbing carbon dioxide to grow and releasing precious oxygen as a result. The lake that developed behind the Three Gorges Dam covers 468 square miles of land that once grew vegetation and forests. Imagine how much forested land has been destroyed by the flooding behind the world’s 48,000 hydroelectric dams. There are also thousands of acres of forested land that must be cleared to resettle the 1.3 million displaced residents. A dam in the Nile River drainage displaced nearly 50,000 residents (Bosshard 2009). Also, land must be cleared for the electrical transmission lines and other necessary dam projects.

Once the land behind a hydroelectric dam has been flooded, and the forests and vegetation are all dead, the biological material begins to decompose deep below the surface of the lake. The dead biological material such as the trees, plant and animal matter is attacked by microscopic bacteria. Some bacteria called aerobic bacteria need oxygen to live as they begin to break down the plant and animal matter (Demarty 2011). As these bacteria live, they release carbon dioxide. Other bacteria, called anaerobic bacteria, do not need oxygen to live. As these bacteria break down the animal and plant matter, they release a toxic combination of carbon dioxide and methane gas. This gas is released into the surrounding water by the bacteria where it then resides until it can be released into the atmosphere. The flooding caused by the dam is not the only source of this organic material. The dam also works like a net and water filter. Any plant or animal matter that is carried by the river from further upstream is stopped by the dam. Trees, branches, driftwood, and animal matter are all trapped behind the dam. This material sinks to the bottom of the lake where it will also decompose. Therefore, dams create a continual source of decomposing material which will release greenhouse gases. The production of greenhouse gases has been found to increase in dam reservoirs that are located in tropical climates.

Some of the gas is oxidized in the water to form carbon dioxide which is released at the surface of the lake by the gentle agitating motion of the waves and wind (Roland 2010). However, most of the methane gas remains suspended in the deep water. As the dam releases water through the penstock the water becomes highly agitated by the movement. The spinning of the turbines, and eventually the turmoil caused by spilling from the down river side of the dam will cause most of the greenhouse gases to be released. The rest of the greenhouse gases will be released from the water as it continues its journey downstream. According to a report by International Rivers Network (2012) called “Frequently Asked Questions: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Dams,” as much as 104 million metric tons of methane gas will annually be released by the large dams of the world. This release of methane gas is responsible for as much as 4% of humankind’s warming impact on the planet. Methane gas in the atmosphere traps more heat than carbon dioxide. The International Rivers Network (2012) report states that dams are responsible for 23% of the world’s methane gas production. According to International Rivers Network (2012), hydroelectric dams actually are less environmentally-friendly than fossil fuel burning facilities when generating the same amount of electricity:

“Large hydropower reservoirs in the tropics can have a higher global warming impact per kilowatt hour generated than fossil fuels, including coal.” (International River Network 2012)

There are some methods to curb the production of greenhouse gases in dam reservoirs. Prior to the flooding of a proposed dam reservoir area it is possible to log off forested areas to cut down on the volume of organic material that will be covered with water. This is by no means a cure all. It would be impossible to fully remove all material from a proposed flood zone. The sheer volume would be incomprehensible. However, the removal of large timber would cut down on a large proportion of organic material. When the Three Gorges Dam reservoir flooded it covered numerous villages, cities and towns. This flooding added inorganic trash and material to the reservoir’s collection of decomposing sediment. Additional problems arise when dam building is proposed in tropical climates such as Brazil where a large scale dam on the Amazon River is proposed. The dam, named The Bella Monte, would be the third largest hydroelectric dam in the world. The flooding that would ensue from the construction of this dam could flood large portions of pristine Amazon rainforest. This flooding would release a catastrophic volume of methane gas into the atmosphere.

In addition to releasing vast amounts of toxic greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, dams have other effects on the environment (Grahm-Rowe 2005, Marriot 2010, Mourad 2011) around them. Up river flooding can cause serious seasonal flooding of agricultural and natural wetlands. The flooding of agricultural lands not only affects those that depend on agriculture but this flooding also releases toxic pesticides and poisons into the river water. Flooding natural wetland ecosystems with many times the normal amount of water can destroy these delicate ecosystems. Many natural wetlands are destroyed and cannot ever recover from the flooding. Continuious flooding of a seasonally flooded region upsets breeding, spawning, and migratory schedules of numerous species of aquatic wetland indigenous creatures. An unknown number of delicate and endangered species can be wiped out by this flooding (Lopez-Pujol and Ming-Xun 2009). Dams also inhibit migrations of keystone fish species such as salmon. The loss of salmon and salmon habitat can impact hundreds of species of birds, fish and mammals that rely on salmon as a food source (Welch 2008). The Three Gorges Dam also threatens endangered species such as the Yangtze Alligator and the Yangtze Freshwater Dolphin. These species are found nowhere else in the world. Hydroelectric dams also increase the chances of landslides upstream of the dam where the reservoir erodes riverbanks. Large scale land slides into reservoirs have often caused large waves that flood river side villages leaving death and destruction in their wake. Cities that were destroyed by the Three Gorges Dam reservoir, released and unknown amount of human sewage, toxic waste, petroleum products and trash into the water system. These underwater ghost cities will undoubtedly pollute the Yangtze for generations to come.

Although hydroelectric dams were once thought to be the best source of electricity, new studies have proven that hydroelectric dams are no better, and in some cases a worse method of generating electricity. Hydroelectric dams can produce stunning amounts electricity. However, the release of methane and other greenhouse gases from hydroelectric dam reservoirs, especially those in tropical climates can in fact make hydroelectric dams less efficient than fossil fuel electric facilities that produce similar amounts of electricity. Methane production in reservoirs can be cut down by the removal of plant and animal matter from proposed dam reservoir areas prior to flooding however it cannot be eliminated completely. Dam reservoirs will always continue to produce greenhouse gases. As the human race continues to grow and expand into previously untouched wilderness the need for more and more electricity generating facilities will also grow. The damming and building of hydroelectric dams will continue and the subsequent production of greenhouse gases will also increase. Not only do humans increase greenhouse gases by building hydroelectric dams, but humans also inadvertently decrease the planet’s ability to filter carbon dioxide form the atmosphere by killing the vegetation in a proposed reservoir flood area. With today’s technology it is no obvious better or worse method for producing electricity. Each need must be analyzed and examined to determine the best method of electrical production whether it be a fossil fuel burning facility or a hydroelectric dam or a nuclear power plant. It is up to humankind to determine the appropriate method of generating electricity for a certain area. There may never be a single environmentally sound method of electricity generation. Every method of electrical generation has downsides. The safest choice is for every single person to attempt to cut down on unnecessary use of electricity. Every person can lead by example and cut down on unnecessary use of electricity. Turning off lights after leaving a room, unplugging unused electrical appliances when not in use because many appliances contain clocks which are continuously drawing current. It is cutting down on the small uses of electricity that can add up to save large volumes of power. By cutting down on the need for electricity, the need for large scale hydroelectric dams can be cut down. This cutback on electricity is the best method currently available to humans to keep planet Earth green.

References

Biello, David. “The Dam Building Boom: Right Path to Clean Energy” Yale Environment 360. Feb 23, 2009 http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_dam_building_boom_right_path_to_clean_energy/2119/>.

Bosshard, Peter, “China Dams the World” World Policy Institute 26, no 4 (2009) http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-ba49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=46730738

 

Carr, J.W. and F.G. Whorisky “Migration of Silver American Eels past a Hydroelectric Dam and Through A Coastal Zone” Fisheries Management and Ecology 15, no 5/6 (2008) 393-400. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=34883128

 

Demarty, M and J. Bastien, “GHG Emissions from Hydroelectric Reservoirs in Tropical and Equatorial Regions: Review of 20 Years of CH4 Emission Measurements,” Energy Policy 34, no. 7 (2011): 4197-4206. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.03.031

 

Ferguson, John W et al, “Potential Effects of Dams on Migratory Fish in the Mekong River: Lessons from Salmon in the Fraser and Columbia Rivers” Environmental Management 47 (2011) 141-159. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

 

Grahm-Rowe, Duncan. “Hydroelectric Power’s Dirty Secret.” New Scientist. Feb 24, 2005 <httrp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7046-hydroelectric-powers-dirty-secret-revealed.html>.

 

Hvistendahl, Mara. “China’s Three Gorges Dam : An Environmental Catastrophe.” Scientific American. 3 Feb. 2012. 25 Mar. 2008 International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. < http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=chinas-three-gorges-dam-disaster&gt;

 

International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. International Rivers Network. <http://www.internationalrivers.org/files/GlobalResGHGsFAQ.pdf&gt;.

 

Keefer, M. L. et al. “Prespawn Mortality in Adult Spring Chinook Salmon Out Planted above Barrier Dams” The Ecology of Freshwater Fish 19 (2010) 361-372. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Lopez-Pujol, Jordi and Ming-Xun Ren, “Biodiversity and the Three Gorges Reservoir: A Troubled Marriage” Journal of Natural History 43, no 43-44 (2009) 2765-2786. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=20&hid=110

 

Marriot, Joe et al, “Impact of Power Generation Mix on Life Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprint Greenhouse Gas Results,” Journal of Industrial Ecology 14, no 6 (2010) 917-928. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=18&hid=110

 

Mourad, Ben Amor, et al, “Electricity Trade and GHG Emissions: Assessment of Quebec’s Hydropower in the Northeastern American Market (2006-2008),” Energy Policy 39, no 3 (2011) 1711-1721. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.001

 

Roland, Fabio et al, “Variability of Carbon Dioxide Flux from Tropical (Cerrado)

Hydroelectric Reservoirs,” Aquatic Sciences 72 (2010) 283-293. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=19&hid=110

 

Welch, David W. et al, “Survival of Migrating Salmon Smolts in Large Rivers With and Without Dams” PloS Biology 6, no 10 (2008) 2101-2108. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Research Part 5 Final Draft: The Dark Side of Hydroelectric Dams

The Dark Side of Hydroelectric Dams

The third longest river in the world is also the longest river in Asia. The ancient Yangtze River begins its life high upon the Tibetan Plateau in Western China. The spark of its life is derived from glacial runoff. This runoff is joined by small streams and creeks as it descends from its lofty Tibetan perch. The river gains volume and ferocity as it tumbles and roils towards China’s east coast. As the river nears the coast, it splinters apart to form the capillaries of the Yangtze River Delta. For centuries, this unrelenting river etched its pathway unmolested across China, splitting the country in two. However, in 2006 the completion of the Three Gorges Dam forever changed the ecology, environment, and destiny of the river. The Yangtze is not alone. According to an article by David Biello (2009) called “Dam Building Boom: Path to Clean Energy,” the world has as many as 48,000 hydroelectric dams. These dams provide electricity to millions of people. According to Mara Hvistendahl’s article (2008) called “China’s Three Gorges Dam: An Environmental Catastrophe,” the Three Gorges Dam alone will generate 18,000 megawatts of electricity. That is eight times the amount of electricity generated by the America’s Hoover Dam. However, this green source of energy has a dark side. Although hydroelectric dams are believed to provide a relatively clean source of electricity, they cause an increase in greenhouse gases because flooding destroys carbon dioxide filtering vegetation and forests, decomposing organic material releases methane and stored carbon dioxide into the water, and the dam’s turbines release these gasses into the atmosphere.

Dams have a very simple yet extremely functional design. Simply build a wall across a river and effectively stop it in its tracks. Provide a pathway for the water to escape to the other side of the dam. This pathway is called a penstock. The penstock is filled from near the base of the dam thereby pulling water from near the bottom of the reservoir. At the end of the penstock the water enters a large chamber that houses the blades of the turbines. The water spins the blades of the turbines which generates the electricity. Once the water has passed the turbine blades it is spat out the back side of the dam where it is free to continue its journey downstream. When fish enter the turbine system the outcome is nearly always fatal for the fish (Carr 2012, Ferguson 2011, Keefer 2010). The amount of electricity generated depends on how much water is let through the penstock. On days where there is little electricity needed then only a little water is let through. On days where much more electricity is needed then more water can be let through. Dams will also open the penstocks fully to drain large amounts of water to accommodate floodwater during rainy seasons and during spring snow thawing.

However, by placing a dam in the river water begins to build up on the upriver side. Often a large lake will be formed. These lakes are called reservoirs. The reservoir can be massive. This flooding alone often has serious consequences for people. The flooding from the Three Gorges Dam created a lake that was so large it displaced nearly 1.3 million people. Deep beneath this lake rests the skeletal remains of a forest. This forest was once thriving, absorbing carbon dioxide to grow and releasing precious oxygen as a result. The lake that developed behind the Three Gorges Dam covers 468 square miles of land that once grew vegetation and forests. Imagine how much forested land has been destroyed by the flooding behind the world’s 48,000 hydroelectric dams. There are also thousands of acres of forested land that must be cleared to resettle the 1.3 million displaced residents. A dam in the Nile River drainage displaced nearly 50,000 residents (Bosshard 2009). Also, land must be cleared for the electrical transmission lines and other necessary dam projects.

Once the land behind a hydroelectric dam has been flooded, and the forests and vegetation are all dead, the biological material begins to decompose deep below the surface of the lake. The dead biological material such as the trees, plant and animal matter is attacked by microscopic bacteria. Some bacteria called aerobic bacteria need oxygen to live as they begin to break down the plant and animal matter (Demarty 2011). As these bacteria live, they release carbon dioxide. Other bacteria, called anaerobic bacteria, do not need oxygen to live. As these bacteria break down the animal and plant matter, they release a toxic combination of carbon dioxide and methane gas. This gas is released into the surrounding water by the bacteria where it then resides until it can be released into the atmosphere. The flooding caused by the dam is not the only source of this organic material. The dam also works like a net and water filter. Any plant or animal matter that is carried by the river from further upstream is stopped by the dam. Trees, branches, driftwood, and animal matter are all trapped behind the dam. This material sinks to the bottom of the lake where it will also decompose. Therefore, dams create a continual source of decomposing material which will release greenhouse gases. The production of greenhouse gases has been found to increase in dam reservoirs that are located in tropical climates.

Some of the gas is oxidized in the water to form carbon dioxide which is released at the surface of the lake by the gentle agitating motion of the waves and wind (Roland 2010). However, most of the methane gas remains suspended in the deep water. As the dam releases water through the penstock the water becomes highly agitated by the movement. The spinning of the turbines, and eventually the turmoil caused by spilling from the down river side of the dam will cause most of the greenhouse gases to be released. The rest of the greenhouse gases will be released from the water as it continues its journey downstream. According to a report by International Rivers Network (2012) called “Frequently Asked Questions: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Dams,” as much as 104 million metric tons of methane gas will annually be released by the large dams of the world. This release of methane gas is responsible for as much as 4% of humankind’s warming impact on the planet. Methane gas in the atmosphere traps more heat than carbon dioxide. The International Rivers Network (2012) report states that dams are responsible for 23% of the world’s methane gas production. According to International Rivers Network (2012), hydroelectric dams actually are less environmentally-friendly than fossil fuel burning facilities when generating the same amount of electricity:

“Large hydropower reservoirs in the tropics can have a higher global warming impact per kilowatt hour generated than fossil fuels, including coal.” (International River Network 2012)

There are some methods to curb the production of greenhouse gases in dam reservoirs. Prior to the flooding of a proposed dam reservoir area it is possible to log off forested areas to cut down on the volume of organic material that will be covered with water. This is by no means a cure all. It would be impossible to fully remove all material from a proposed flood zone. The sheer volume would be incomprehensible. However, the removal of large timber would cut down on a large proportion of organic material. When the Three Gorges Dam reservoir flooded it covered numerous villages, cities and towns. This flooding added inorganic trash and material to the reservoir’s collection of decomposing sediment. Additional problems arise when dam building is proposed in tropical climates such as Brazil where a large scale dam on the Amazon River is proposed. The dam, named The Bella Monte, would be the third largest hydroelectric dam in the world. The flooding that would ensue from the construction of this dam could flood large portions of pristine Amazon rainforest. This flooding would release a catastrophic volume of methane gas into the atmosphere.

In addition to releasing vast amounts of toxic greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, dams have other effects on the environment (Grahm-Rowe 2005, Marriot 2010, Mourad 2011) around them. Up river flooding can cause serious seasonal flooding of agricultural and natural wetlands. The flooding of agricultural lands not only affects those that depend on agriculture but this flooding also releases toxic pesticides and poisons into the river water. Flooding natural wetland ecosystems with many times the normal amount of water can destroy these delicate ecosystems. Many natural wetlands are destroyed and cannot ever recover from the flooding. Continuious flooding of a seasonally flooded region upsets breeding, spawning, and migratory schedules of numerous species of aquatic wetland indigenous creatures. An unknown number of delicate and endangered species can be wiped out by this flooding (Lopez-Pujol and Ming-Xun 2009). Dams also inhibit migrations of keystone fish species such as salmon. The loss of salmon and salmon habitat can impact hundreds of species of birds, fish and mammals that rely on salmon as a food source (Welch 2008). The Three Gorges Dam also threatens endangered species such as the Yangtze Alligator and the Yangtze Freshwater Dolphin. These species are found nowhere else in the world. Hydroelectric dams also increase the chances of landslides upstream of the dam where the reservoir erodes riverbanks. Large scale land slides into reservoirs have often caused large waves that flood river side villages leaving death and destruction in their wake. Cities that were destroyed by the Three Gorges Dam reservoir, released and unknown amount of human sewage, toxic waste, petroleum products and trash into the water system. These underwater ghost cities will undoubtedly pollute the Yangtze for generations to come.

Although hydroelectric dams were once thought to be the best source of electricity, new studies have proven that hydroelectric dams are no better, and in some cases a worse method of generating electricity. Hydroelectric dams can produce stunning amounts electricity. However, the release of methane and other greenhouse gases from hydroelectric dam reservoirs, especially those in tropical climates can in fact make hydroelectric dams less efficient than fossil fuel electric facilities that produce similar amounts of electricity. Methane production in reservoirs can be cut down by the removal of plant and animal matter from proposed dam reservoir areas prior to flooding however it cannot be eliminated completely. Dam reservoirs will always continue to produce greenhouse gases. As the human race continues to grow and expand into previously untouched wilderness the need for more and more electricity generating facilities will also grow. The damming and building of hydroelectric dams will continue and the subsequent production of greenhouse gases will also increase. Not only do humans increase greenhouse gases by building hydroelectric dams, but humans also inadvertently decrease the planet’s ability to filter carbon dioxide form the atmosphere by killing the vegetation in a proposed reservoir flood area. With today’s technology it is no obvious better or worse method for producing electricity. Each need must be analyzed and examined to determine the best method of electrical production whether it be a fossil fuel burning facility or a hydroelectric dam or a nuclear power plant. It is up to humankind to determine the appropriate method of generating electricity for a certain area. There may never be a single environmentally sound method of electricity generation. Every method of electrical generation has downsides. The safest choice is for every single person to attempt to cut down on unnecessary use of electricity. Every person can lead by example and cut down on unnecessary use of electricity. Turning off lights after leaving a room, unplugging unused electrical appliances when not in use because many appliances contain clocks which are continuously drawing current. It is cutting down on the small uses of electricity that can add up to save large volumes of power. By cutting down on the need for electricity, the need for large scale hydroelectric dams can be cut down. This cutback on electricity is the best method currently available to humans to keep planet Earth green.

References

Biello, David. “The Dam Building Boom: Right Path to Clean Energy” Yale Environment 360. Feb 23, 2009 http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_dam_building_boom_right_path_to_clean_energy/2119/&gt;.

Bosshard, Peter, “China Dams the World” World Policy Institute 26, no 4 (2009) http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-ba49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=46730738

 

Carr, J.W. and F.G. Whorisky “Migration of Silver American Eels past a Hydroelectric Dam and Through A Coastal Zone” Fisheries Management and Ecology 15, no 5/6 (2008) 393-400. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=34883128

 

Demarty, M and J. Bastien, “GHG Emissions from Hydroelectric Reservoirs in Tropical and Equatorial Regions: Review of 20 Years of CH4 Emission Measurements,” Energy Policy 34, no. 7 (2011): 4197-4206. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.03.031

 

Ferguson, John W et al, “Potential Effects of Dams on Migratory Fish in the Mekong River: Lessons from Salmon in the Fraser and Columbia Rivers” Environmental Management 47 (2011) 141-159. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

 

Grahm-Rowe, Duncan. “Hydroelectric Power’s Dirty Secret.” New Scientist. Feb 24, 2005 <httrp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7046-hydroelectric-powers-dirty-secret-revealed.html>.

 

Hvistendahl, Mara. “China’s Three Gorges Dam : An Environmental Catastrophe.” Scientific American. 3 Feb. 2012. 25 Mar. 2008 International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. < http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=chinas-three-gorges-dam-disaster&gt;

 

International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. International Rivers Network. <http://www.internationalrivers.org/files/GlobalResGHGsFAQ.pdf&gt;.

 

Keefer, M. L. et al. “Prespawn Mortality in Adult Spring Chinook Salmon Out Planted above Barrier Dams” The Ecology of Freshwater Fish 19 (2010) 361-372. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Lopez-Pujol, Jordi and Ming-Xun Ren, “Biodiversity and the Three Gorges Reservoir: A Troubled Marriage” Journal of Natural History 43, no 43-44 (2009) 2765-2786. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=20&hid=110

 

Marriot, Joe et al, “Impact of Power Generation Mix on Life Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprint Greenhouse Gas Results,” Journal of Industrial Ecology 14, no 6 (2010) 917-928. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=18&hid=110

 

Mourad, Ben Amor, et al, “Electricity Trade and GHG Emissions: Assessment of Quebec’s Hydropower in the Northeastern American Market (2006-2008),” Energy Policy 39, no 3 (2011) 1711-1721. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.001

 

Roland, Fabio et al, “Variability of Carbon Dioxide Flux from Tropical (Cerrado)

Hydroelectric Reservoirs,” Aquatic Sciences 72 (2010) 283-293. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=19&hid=110

 

Welch, David W. et al, “Survival of Migrating Salmon Smolts in Large Rivers With and Without Dams” PloS Biology 6, no 10 (2008) 2101-2108. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Zach Horner Research Draft 2 Workshop

1. A large amount of material is made easy to understand and is very organized.

2. Any concerns?

3. Thesis is great, explains focus well.

4. Thesis correct and bold.

5. Essay has 1,911 words not including references.

6. This is an easy nine. Very interesting topic with many different facets considered in depth.

7. More discussion of ghost cities and the effect on the local people would strengthen your argument and be interesting to the reader.

8. There are no clear solutions presented in the conclusion and no clear call to action.

9. Add some solutions or call to action in the conclusion. Should all dams be returned to original state? No new dams? What is a good alternative?

10. Each paragraph relates well to the thesis.

11. Mostly good, the 5^th paragraph to 6^th needs some work. A quote ends and the new paragraph does not start smoothly at all.

12. Opening is much improved and captures my attention nicely. Maybe move first sentence down into the paragraph more.

13. Conclusion is logical and complete but needs a call to action.

14. Draft contains 13 sources with over 5 being scholarly.

15. Sources are pretty equally used.

16. Citations are done correctly and vary in format (not just (blah, 2012)).

17. No unused sources.

18. Good balance of opinion to quotes.

19. No long quotes.

20. No.

21. The only quote needs commentary after it. This would also help the transition to the next paragraph.

Looks great! A good paper got even better.

 

Research Part 5 Final Draft: A Changing Arctic

A Changing Arctic
The Arctic Sea is an undiscovered beauty with its crystal blue-green waters and sculptures of ice that look as if Picasso himself created the massive bergs. With such natural beauty, it is hard to believe what lies beneath this surreal waterscape are the greatest killer this world has ever seen. Usually the grand flows of sea ice that freeze in the winter keep these black and white mammals at bay longer. Over the years the shift in the weather has provided for them an earlier season to explore the Arctic waters. Although the melting sea ice is allowing for an increase of killer whale presence in the Arctic, the whales are damaging the ecosystem of the Arctic Sea because they are dominating the top of the food chain, they are competing with the Inuit (Inupiat) for their marine food supply, and they are causing marine mammals to become endangered and possibly extinct.

The killer whale or orca is one animal that can be found in almost any of the oceans or seas around the world, from Antarctica to the Arctic (Pitman, Perryman, LeRoi, & Eilers, 2007; Zerbini, 2007). Their presence in the Arctic Sea has increased over the years due to the warming of the Arctic region.  In just the Hudson Bay area alone, from 1990 to 2000 there have been reports of an increase of 79 killer whale sightings (Hidgon & Ferguson, 2009).  The killer whales usually make an appearance in July and begin their move back into warmer waters around the end of August. Since the waters have become warmer they are staying a lot longer, even into December.  Killer whales are not the only factor in reshaping this ecological environment, but they are becoming a very devastating one.  Due to the fact these rather large marine mammals live in such an expansive territory, they do not have a stable food source but eat whatever is available to them. There have been studies done on large whale pods that have suggested that they will stick to one diet, but that particular diet is not the same for each pod (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012; Laden, 2012). Most studies have been done on whale pods not living in the Arctic, but with the help of the Inuit (Inupiat) people of the Arctic, researchers have been able to get a little better picture of what these whale pods are devouring.  One might think these giants would have an appetite for fish, but marine mammals are what they prefer. Many of the Inuit that have been interviewed as to the eating habits of the killer whale have stated they have not seen them eat fish but have gone after seals, sea lions, otters, walrus, and other more docile whales, such as the bowhead, beluga, and the narwhal (Morell, 2012). The killer whales have been observed as not being very humane in their killings.  They tend to play with their food, tossing it between them as if the animal were a rag doll (O’Harra, 2012).  They have also been seen taking an unsuspecting polar bear for a meal, too.  These adaptable mammals pick and choose their prey depending on the area they are in and tend to go after the more vulnerable marine mammals.  An example of an unsuspecting marine mammal would be a seal sunning itself on a piece of floating ice.  The whale pod will then works together to create a massive wave knocking the seal from its safe location, giving the whale pod a chance at their prey (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012).  The Inuit have seen many killer whale pods slaughter other members of a different whale species family, such as the very rare narwhal and the bowhead whale along with the beluga (Morell, 2012). The Inuit or the Inupiat are known as the “People of the Whales”, and since they are not the only ones who use the whale as a food source this increase of killer whale presence gives them a reason to be concerned (Sakakibara, 2010).

The killer whales are now coming into the Arctic much earlier and staying much later than they have in the past. The local native people now have to compete with these pack hunting killers for one of their native ancestral food sources, the whale. Orcas or killer whales have been called wolves of the sea because of their pack like hunting skills (O’Harra, 2012). As a researcher for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Freshwater Institute, Steven Ferguson has made a very scary observation.  Because of the climate change, the killer whales could be the cause of an irreversible change that is being seen in the Arctic ecosystem.  Steven Ferguson also states that, “This change of what animals live in the Arctic is likely going to happen with the warming but we didn’t anticipate that killer whales might be removing certain susceptible prey and maybe temperate species will move up to take their place” (Puxley, 2012). This is a very real outcome that could start to take place. The native whales of the Arctic are not the only marine mammals the killer whales are affecting.   The killer whales are causing the Inuit to become worried about the seals and walrus populations as well (Mead, Gittelsohn, Kratzmann, Roache, & Sharma, 2010). With the killer whales trespassing into the Inuit way of life, these giants cannot be met with open arms who are trying to take over the Inuit hunting grounds.  The Inuit live in an area of the world where they have to rely on the animals of the sea for nutrition.  They live in a tundra area where wild plants just don’t want to grow.  “In our society, it is always the whale that brings us together,” said Mae Ahgeak, whaling captain’s wife, in her personal interview with Sakakibara in Barrow, Alaska, June 18, 2005. Whales are a very important part of the Inuit subsistence. As Sakakibara stated in her article, “Cetaceousness and Climate Change Among the Inupiat of Arctic Alaska,” “The cultural survival and social ethics are all based on intimate relationships with the whale, and the whale symbolically and physically lies in the heart of human subsistence” (Sakakibara, 2010). This leaves the only option for the Inuit culture to survive is to hunt the hunters who are depleting their way of life (Lougheed, 2010).  With the invasion of the killer whales, a shift in the Inuit cultural pattern is again taking place.  This time it is not because of the introduction of other peoples and ideas but from an animal that cannot be controlled (Mead, Gittelsohn, Kratzmann, Roache, & Sharma, 2010). A way in which the Inuit people have survived for thousands of years may become harder and harder to pass on to the next generation. Some might suggest that with the introduction of Euroamerican ideals, the significance of the ancestral ways is not as important.  But it should not be due to the ancestral food sources being over hunted by the killer whale (Lougheed, 2009). Concerns of the Inuit way of hunting are also being called in to question with the increase of the killer whale presence.  Some feel it may not be safe for both the Inuit and the killer whale to be hunting the same areas and hunting the same animals, sometimes at the same time (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012). It is not just the Inuit that the killer whale is having a great impact on but all life up in the Arctic north.  It seems that all marine mammals that depend on the ice for protection, are trying to find other places to hide, not just from the Inuit but from the killer whales, too. The bigger problem however, is how to keep the killer whales from over killing. Since these marine wolves do not have any natural predators, it is hard keep their numbers under control. This is where the Inuit really come in to help keep the balance. In Canada and Alaska, aboriginal whaling is still legal, and because these great giants can become overwhelming killers, the Inuit are doing their part in the circle of life (Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, 2007). Some may argue that that is exactly what the killer whale is doing also, just doing their part of the circle of life.  It has been suggested that when the food source of an animal runs low, that species will be affected and their numbers will start to drop.  In this way giving their prey a chance to reproduce, and get their populations back up to allow the circle to continue as it always has. But what about the animals who are being hunted to their extinction?

Before the longer seasonal appearances of the orca in the Arctic region, researchers tried to get an accurate count of marine populations but were not very successful. They were unable to get an assessment of the climate change that has affected their population numbers.  The killer whales’ extended appearance in the Arctic has been a great shock to this very fragile ecosystem. With the melting sea ice, many changes have occurred. One change can be seen with the migration of the beluga whales.  The beluga whales prefer to spend their winters in an area where there is a light and moveable sea ice flow.  Researchers are now finding where some of these whales have now moved into areas that have deep ice coverage to try to escape becoming the prey of the killer whale (Laidre, Stirling, Lowry, Wiig, Heide-Jorgensen, & Ferguson, 2008). This global change is something everyone needs to be more aware of. The narwhal whale is another one of the animals that are being affected by the killer whale. The area of the Arctic where the narwhal can be found most frequently is around the shores of Greenland.  This area, too, has seen an increase in killer whale activity over the years (Heide-Jorgensen, Laidre, Burt, Borchers, Marques, Hansen, & Fossette, 2010; Kwok & Untersteiner, 2011). The narwhal whales rely on the densely packed sea ice flow during the winter months. They have adapted to this type of habitat and with the melting of the sea ice it is disappearing fast (Laidre, Stirling, Lowry, Wiig, Heide-Jorgensen, & Ferguson, 2008).  If future generations are to have the experience of seeing one of these unique creatures, more needs to be done to insure the sea ice does not completely disappear (Campbell, Yurik, & Snow, 1988). The narwhals are not the only animals at risk of their populations decreasing. The bowhead whales, which are the most important source for the Inuit subsistence, have had eye witnesses to their killings by killer whales.  In 1999, there were a greater number of killer whales in the Arctic since sea ice flows were minimal. A group of Inuit reported discovering at least eight dead whales, one in which was a recent kill which they could still use (Ferguson, Higdon, & Chemelnitsky, 2010).  Many other mammals are affected, too, such as the sea otter, stellar sea lions, along with the ringed and bearded seals (Ferguson, Higdon, and Wetsdal, 2012; Kuker & Barrett-Lennard, 2010; Durban, Ellifrit, Dahlheim, Waite, Matkin, Barrett-Lennard, & Wade, 2009). During the spring and summer months, the Arctic waters come alive with marine mammals. The Arctic areas are their breeding grounds and where in the next year their young will be born.  When this very delicate balance is interrupted, “with earlier spring break-up of sea ice and reduced snow cover for birth lairs” this has a direct result in reducing the amount of offspring born each year (Higdon & Ferguson, 2010). What happens if these animals are over hunted by other animals, how will they procreate and continue generation after generation? With native Inuit hunting these same animals as part of their subsistence and cultural practices, their culture like the many marine mammals do not stand a chance at being around for much longer.

Researchers are discovering everyday new information regarding the impact of the killer whales on the Arctic.  With these new findings, they may be able to find ways to decrease the killer whales effects on this fragile ecosystem, while helping to preserve the culture of the native people and help to bring back the dwindling marine mammal populations that they have affected. With the help of conservationists, along with the people of the world, maybe one day it might be possible for each creature on earth to find that middle ground and coexist.

References

Campbell, R., Yurick, D., & Snow, N. (1988). Predation on Narwhals, Monodon monoceros , by killer whales, Orcinus orca , in the Eastern Canada. Canadian field-naturalist. Ottawa ON [CAN. FIELD-NAT.]. Vol. 102, no. 4, pp. 689-696.

Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. (2007). Archives. Status of Knowledge on Killer Whales (Orcinus) in the Canadian Arctic. Retrieved from http://www.biblio.uqar.qc.ca/archives/30137701.pdf

Durban, J. J., Ellifrit, D. D., Dahlheim, M. M., Waite, J. J., Matkin, C. C., Barrett-Lennard, L. L., & … Wade, P. P. (2010). Photographic mark-recapture analysis of clustered mammal-eating killer whales around the Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska. Marine Biology, 157(7), 1591-1604. doi:10.1007/s00227-010-1432-6

Ferguson, S., Higdon, J., and Wetsdal, K. (2012). Prey items and predation behavior of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in Nunavut, Canada based on Inuit hunter interviews. Aquatic Biosystems, 8:3 doi:10.1186/2046-9063-8-3

Heide-Jorgensen, M, Laidre, K., Burt, M., Borchers, D., Marques, T., Hansen, R., & Fossette, S. (2010). Abundance of narwhals on the hunting grounds in Greenland.  Journal of Mammalogy, 91(5), 1135-1151. Doi: 10.1644/09-MAMM-A-198.1.

Hidgon, J., & Ferguson, S. (2009). Loss of Arctic Sea Ice Causing Punctuated Change in Sightings of Killer Whales (Orcinus orca) Over the Past Century. Ecological Applications, 19(5), 1365-1375.

Kuker, K., & Barrett-Lennard, L. (2010). A re-evaluation of the role of killer whales Orcinus orca in a population decline of sea otters Enhydra lutris in the Aleutian Islands and a review of alternative hypotheses. Mammal Review, 40(2), 103-124. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2009.00156.x

Laidre, K., Stirling, I., Lowry, L., Wiig, O., Heide-Jorgensen, M., & Ferguson, S. (2008). Quantifying the Sensitive of Arctic Marine Mammals to Climate-Induced Habitat Change. Ecological Application, 18(2) Supplement, S97-S125.

Laden, G. (2012). What the Inuit Taught Scientists about Killer Whales. Surprising Science. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.Smithsonian.org.

Lougheed, T. (2010). THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ARCTIC TRADITIONAL FOOD. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(9), A386-A393.

Mead, E. E., Gittelsohn, J. J., Kratzmann, M. M., Roache, C. C., & Sharma, S. S. (2010). Impact of the changing food environment on dietary practices of an Inuit population in Arctic Canada. Journal Of Human Nutrition & Dietetics, 2318-26. doi:10.1111/j.1365-277X.2010.01102.x

Morell, V. (2012). Killer Whale Menu Finally Revealed. Science Now. Retrieved from

http://www.news.sciencemag.org

O’Harra, D. (2012). Killer Whales are the Sea Wolves of Arctic. Alaska Dispatch. Retrieved from http://www.alaskadispatch.com

Pitman, R.L., Perryman, W.L., LeRoi, D., & Eilers, E. (2007). A Dwarf Form of Killer Whale in Antarctica. Journal of Mammalogy, 88(1), 43-48.

Puxley, C. (2012).Disappearing Sea Ice Enticing More Killer Whales to Arctic.
[Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www. Winnipegfreepress.com

Sakakibara, C. (2010). Kiavallakkikput Agviq (Into the Whaling Cycle): Cetaceousness and Climate Change Among the Inupiat of Arctic Alaska. Annals Of The Association Of American Geographers, 100(4), 1003-1012. doi:10.1080/00045608.2010.500561

Zerbini, A. N., Waite, J. M., Durban, J. W., LeDuc, R., Dahlheim, M. E., & Wade, P. R. (2007). Estimating abundance of killer whales in the nearshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands using line-transect sampling. Marine Biology, 150(5), 1033-1045. doi:10.1007/s00227-006-0347-8

 

Response #11-15

Response #11-15

Article #1

The very name of the article, How Factory Farms Are Killing Seals, is thought provoking. How can farms be harming sea creatures? Author Tom Philpott reveals an ugly side to farming that the industry wants covered up. This piece is written for anyone who doesn’t want the sea life of our planet to suffer for our need for cheap food. The focus of the article if the fact those bacterial strains that are easily killed by antibiotics get passed around in factory farms. The livestock are then treated with antibiotics but the bacteria are not all killed, it just moves from one animal to another, gaining immunity to the antibiotics. Eventually a super bug is created that makes its way into the ocean by way of animals feces in the watershed. Now a super strong, highly contagious bacterium is in the ocean food chain and spreads into animals. The animals’ immune systems where never designed to handle human enhanced germs and they suffer greatly. The truly scary part is these diseased animals are found in areas humans swim too. So now the problem has come full circle, and humans have to clean up their own mess. The writing itself is short and to the point, this makes the information effective and easily understood and obsorbed by the reader. The environment is already taking a hit for human messiness. Not only did farmers let the super bugs get into the natural environment, they failed to think of the results of craming millions of animals together and trying to kill every germ. There are no real arguments; the path of these bacteria can be traced from farm to seal. What I want to know is what can be done to stop this cycle before the super germs get into humans and we have no way to stop them. This need to be researched as it is a huge problem that we are creating diseases we can’t treat.

Article #2

While the title Navigating a Critical Juncture for Sustainable Weed Management is not the catchiest phrase ever, this article confronts a growing problem that will affect all members of society. Author David Mortensen highlights a growing problem that could destroy our food supply which would bring all of society crashing to a halt. Currently the common way to control weeds in a field of crops is to make those crops resistant to the herbicide that kills all the weeds. If the crop is genetically engineered to not die while a poison kills everything else growing in the field everything works out right? Wrong! The problem is that weeds are growing immune to the herbicide as well. Stronger and stronger chemicals are created to keep up with the weeds evolution. These chemicals pose a greater danger to the surrounding environment by seeping through the ground and casing pollution and other effects that are not completely understood. The article is pretty effective but uses too much wordy language. Simpler language would make the article more accessible to everybody. Again there is not much that can be argued the weeds are getting stronger and farmers have no permanent solutions. A deeper look at the effects of these stronger chemicals in the wild and a look at possible solutions would be greatly beneficial to the case Mortensen is making. If farmers keep going in the direction they are going now the weeds will outgrow the herbicides and humans will not be able to control them.

Article #3

At first I didn’t know what to make of the title of this article; German blue chip firms throw weight behind North African solar project. What does that even mean? Turns out some big companies in Europe are getting to getter to build giant solar plants in Africa and transmit all that power across the sea to Europe. It is a simple sounding plan but one with huge implications for all parties. Author Kate Connolly explores the many pluses and minuses to such a complex plan. The goal is to help all parties and get clean power to Europe. If this plan works it could be replicated around the world and its progress should be watched by all people who want clean energy. The article is effective in that it covers all sides and considers many views. It makes sure the African nations will profit from this new plan as well as the large European companies fronting the bill. The argument were made and countered that the long transmission of power may not be feasible. New technologies allow power to be sent longer distances for cheap and with little loss. The environment will benefit greatly because if the plan works, Europe will suddenly create no pollution to provide power to the many countries and peoples of the continent. I would like more information on how the power will get from one side of the Mediterranean to the other. There are many technical hurdles that must be met that the article does not fully cover.

Video

The movie Collapse hits the viewer like a slap in the face. Director Chris Smith holds back no punches in this movie built around a riveting interview of a prominent investigative journalist, Michael Ruppert. This film is aimed at all Americans who need to wake up and come to terms with the impending collapse of our civilization. Ruppert says that he is trying to reach out and educate people until he reaches “the hundredth monkey.” This saying is referring to a study conducted of monkeys where once a hundred monkeys learned a skill or new way of doing things the rest of the monkeys followed suit. Ruppert’s main point is to reveal the deep rooted problems America faces and to convince the viewer it is time to at and prepare for what is come; the end of the world as we know it. The movie is very effective in portraying the dark implications of what he is saying. The simple basement or bunker the interview takes place in sets a dark forbidding mood right from the beginning. Throughout Ruppert’s testimony videos and news clips show the evidence backing up what he is saying. The filmmakers also put in long blackouts that allowed the words to sink in to the viewer and emphasized important points. Environmentally this film didn’t talk about pollution or global warming specifically; it mainly was about how the environmental restraints, such as a limited amount of oil, are what will end the global economy. There are many counter arguments that are not addressed specifically. Ruppert at one point says he doesn’t do debates because he is right and the facts are with him. This also brings up the argument that this man is a crazy conspiracy theorist. The next thing to research would be to check if his predictions have come true in the past and where he gets his information. A fact check conducted independently by the viewer would add great weight to the words of this man. This movie does bring up a lot of questions and Mr. Ruppert seems to have all the answers, which is hard to believe.

Website

Trash Trip is a website dedicated to exploring waste that has been spread from coast to coast. There are many posts revealing the many deposits and uses of the trash everywhere. It also serves to highlight the massive quantities of valuable resources that go toward handling our trash. The website is very effective, using a blot style of postings and pictures to not just tell of the mess humans have made but also show it. The amount of pollution humans have put into the natural environment is unacceptable and all humans should be concerned. Our society cannot continue this way, we need to reduce our waste and find new ways to deal with the massive piles of trash that are destroying the world we live in. A counter argument is that this trash is not that big compared to the vastness of nature. This may be true if you just consider a bucket of waste just as a piece of trash. What this site points out is the potential for that waste to get in the water supply and contaminate and harm many forms of life. The website has found its focus and fills the role to show that damage our trash has on the world around us. I see no cons to its existence; all of humanity should see that we need to reduce our waste and clean up our planet. I only wish that more websites could show the damage humans have caused and that more people would pay attention.

Spring 2012 Response #11-15 Environment Duckworth

Spring 2012
Response 11-15
Environment

Article 1

Kathy Freston’s article, “Vegetarian is the New Prius”, was an eye-opener for young adults to the elderly. She shed light on how people can be more protective of the environment by switching to driving cars such as the Toyota Prius, which would help cut vehicle emissions in half, and thus reduce the greenhouse emissions which negatively impact global warming. She then explains how livestock (such as chickens, pigs, and cows) stand out as one of the top three sources of significant problems in the environment. Raising livestock for food causes a number of problems for the environment, which includes water pollution, air pollution, and global warming just to name a few. With the sizable amount of meat that people consume every day, the need to raise large amounts of livestock in order to be slaughtered has dramatically increased as well. When examining the negative impact of the raising livestock to meet what people want in their diets, it turns out that becoming a vegetarian would be significantly more beneficial regarding helping the environment. This article was quite effective because the author provided compelling information that was quite convincing.

Some counterarguments become obvious. People have problems with change, so asking them to give up their daily meals, such as steaks, pork chops, or chicken, may create some significant frustrations. Asking them to turn to cheese, beans, and vegetables as their primary source of daily nutrients may create a great deal of turmoil for people who count on their meat, not to mention the expense of making this lifestyle change. Eating healthy comes with a cost as well. If people truly want to protect their surrounding environment as well as the world in a more global way, they should take the time to research the information to make decisions they can live with and help to support improving the world in which we live.

References

Freston, K. (2011, November 17). Vegetarian is the New Prius. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathy-freston/vegetarian-is-the-new-pri_b_39014.html

Article 2

The authors of this article (Mortensen, D.A., et a., 2012l) aimed this information from “Navigating a Critical Juncture for Sustainable Weed Management” at the large number of adults; especially those whose lives and jobs revolve around agriculture. The main purpose lies within the authors’ ability to convey how the need for effective weed management is significant for maintenance of agricultural productivity. Weeds appear to be unavoidable barriers that farmers as well as many other people must learn to work around and overcome. When weeds interfere with crop production, they can cause billions of dollars of crop losses every year. The use of herbicides creates the problem of herbicide-resistant weeds.
This article is somewhat effective; however, people who are not as knowledgeable about the scientific terminology used in this site may find the information more challenging to follow. The information needs to be presented in a more simplistic way to enable the readers to follow it more easily. Potential solutions include: the use of integrated weed management in order to decrease the use of herbicides in the short-term as well as the use of new herbicide-resistant crops to increase the use of herbicides and intensify the selection pressure (Mortensen, D.A., et al., 2012). The use of these alternative solutions may have a negative impact on the environment also. While the use of integrated weed management through new herbicide-resistant crops, which results in no-till crop production and thus yields some conservation benefits as well as soil quality, the dependency of the ongoing use of herbicide-resistant weeds challenges its sustainability. The authors present both the pros and cons for the proposals to sustainable weed management.

References

Mortensen, D. A., Egan, J. F., Maxwell, B. D., Ryan, M. R., & Smith, R. G. (2012). Navigating a Critical
Juncture for Sustainable Weed Management. BioScience, 62(1).

Article 3

Naomi Klein cleverly links climate with capitalism in her article entitled, Capitalism vs. the Climate. The article is aimed at people covering a broad age range from young adults to elderly people. The debate continues between whether or not to shred the free-market ideology that has taken over the global economy for more than thirty years or was it truly about the climate change. The posed question is still in limbo—is the climate change really a plan to steal American freedom?
It is quite surprising to discover how Americans’ perceptions change so readily at times merely because they are not made aware of the falsehoods or truths of these perceptions, such as regarding the burning of fossil fuels causing the climate to change. Almost 75% of pollsters believed this to be true just 4 years ago; however, less than half of the pollsters believe that to be true now. Klein reports on the climate agenda and what that means in terms of the specific six areas: public infrastructure (reviving and reviewing the public sphere); economic planning (in other words, remembering how to plan); corporate regulation (or reigning in corporations); international trade (or re-localizing production); consumption (or ending the cult of shopping); and taxation (or taxing the rich and filthy) (Klein, 2011).
The climate movement must make a significant comeback in order to claim its necessary place where it should belong, which is at or at least near the top. Climate change does not mean an end to free trade; however, it does require an end to the reckless free trade that seems to oversee entities, such as the World Trade Organization. Other careless choices which negatively impact the environment would need to be adjusted. Rationing the use of more energy-intensive transports involving a long-haul and only doing this in cases where particular goods cannot be produced nearby and where local production is more carbon-intensive. Further considerations should be examined to see how to prevent the climate change.

References

Klein, N. (2007). Capitalism vs. Climate. The Nation.

Video

Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis’ video entitled King Corn entails the move of two college buddies from Boston to Green, Iowa, and their mission to grow and farm a single acre of corn. Not only do they encounter the difficulties American society faces as the need for more corn increases, but also the two buddies witness the role different government entities play with the push to significantly increase the amount of corn grown. Larger industrial farms seem to have buried the picture of the family farm.
The government played a significant part in important decisions regarding what crops were grown as well as how they were grown. The government’s decisions resulted from its distorted considerations based on the economy rather than from the true places they should have come from, which were the social, economic, and environmental ramifications.
The video was effective, especially regarding the way the director followed the journey these two young men took together, unaware of the all-encompassing part the government actually played in the decision-making processes for farmers as well as for the farming industries. One key implication for the environment is the negative impact the need for the increase of corn production would have on the condition of the soil. Counterarguments include how the move towards the large industrial farms affects the family farm concept as well as the negative impact the increased crop production of corn impacts the condition of the soil on that farm. Pursuit of ways to prevent negative consequences increased corn production has would be an area to examine in more detail.

References

Woolf, Aaron. (Director). (2007). King Corn [Motion Picture].

Website

Rainforest Action Network reveals a broad array of knowledge regarding the environment. Each issue or post from this network contains information about the organization itself as well as pertinent information about forests and energy. The updates provide many pictures to capture the readers’ attention, which especially appeal to people of all ages, young and old, especially those who are interested in being proactive with engaging in activities to save the rainforest environment.
The website is quite effective with the way it captures the views attention through the variety of pictures as well as descriptions of positive ways people can proactively engage in activities to support this worthy network. The network shares its avid environmental supporters, such as Bank of America, Lowe’s, Home Depot, and Goldman Sachs, who provide ongoing commitment for this worthwhile cause. The supporters are trying to help others to understand that we can establish a sustainable world within our lifetimes if people will join in and actively support this cause. It also provides information about how our precious rainforests are dwindling, and the best way to prevent the extinction of these forests is through the use of defensive strategic campaigns. The members of the network strive to achieve a green market economy which will improve energy efficiency. The implementation of the green market economy will help to decrease poisonous pollutants like mercury, create new jobs to assist with carrying out the movement for becoming more energy efficient, and hopefully help to solve the energy crisis. The website’s pictures convey the message that a picture is worth a thousand words.

References

Rainforest Action Network | Environmentalism with teeth. (n.d.). Rainforest Action Network. Retrieved
April 20, 2012, from http://ran.org/

Andra Woodard RESEARCH DRAFT 2 WORKSHOP

Overall

1. What does the author do particularly well? Be specific. I really like that there is a lot of information but it doesn’t read like a report, it’s more like a story.

2. Ask the author for one particular concern that s/he had about the draft. Examine that area and see if you can offer the author helpful suggestions. Did you have trouble find info on the amount of animals left in the wild? I don’t know where to look for that, but it seemed like you were a little vague on how many of a species remained in the wild.

Thesis

3. Does the author clearly express his/her opinion of the topic in the thesis? Yes

4. Does the thesis follow the format we’ve been using (ALTHOUGH clause, argumentative claim, BECAUSE clause with 3 reasons of support). Is thesis bolded or underlined and in last sentence of intro paragraph? Yes and Yes

Content

5. How many words is the draft, not including References? 2093

6. On a scale of 1 to 10, how interesting did you find this paper to read? Be brutally honest! 8

7. Where can the author more fully develop ideas, either by providing examples or explaining/clarifying concepts for the reader? I really liked it. Still some comma placement issues (sorry, I’m a comma Nazi).

8. What kinds of objections might someone who disagrees with the author’s point of view raise? Someone might say that the Orca’s are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

9. Has the author dealt with these objections? If not, suggest some good places to deal with them. Yes

10. Is the relationship between each paragraph and the thesis clear? If not, what suggestions do you have for the author to improve the connection? Yes

Style

11. Are there easy transitions from one paragraph to the next, or does the author jump from topic to topic? Easy transitions.

12. Does the opening of the essay capture the reader’s attention? How so? If not, what suggestions can you make that might strengthen the opening? Does the essay have an informative yet interesting title? It captured my interest because I didn’t know this was happening.  I’m new to AK and I didn’t even know that there were Orca’s here!

13. Does the concluding paragraph serve to bring the discussion to an end that logically follows from the thesis and its direction? If your buddy’s conclusion just restates the thesis, call him/her on that, and help them come up with a better conclusion. Maybe give them tips from the Hacker handbook (section C). She used her final paragraph to wrap things up nicely.

Research

14. Does the draft contain at least 10 sources (5 peer-reviewed/scholarly sources from EbscoHost or another database).  Yes

15. Does the author rely heavily on just 1 or 2 sources, or does the author equally use all of the sources to support the paper’s thesis? There are a couple that are used frequently, but I think she used all of them wisely.

16. Does the author use in-text citations after every quotation, statistic, paraphrase, idea and opinion borrowed from research? Are the in-text citations done in correct APA formatting? I think so.

17. Does the author have anything on the Reference list that is not used in the essay (she/he should not). No way! I checked them all!!!! Good Job!

18. Does the author have more quotations/statistics/paraphrases/etc in his/her paper than personal opinion? Essay should read as an argument, not as a report. Didn’t read as a report. It flowed nicely.

19. Are they any quotations that are longer than 2 lines?  No

20. Are there any quotations that you think should instead be paraphrased? Remember that too many quotations lead to clunky and chunky essays. No

21. Any quotations should be commented upon. They are there to support the author’s argument, not to make it. Does the author comment after every one? If not, help the author decide what the underlying reason behind putting the quote in the paper was.  Very Nice.

Other?  

Is there any other feedback you’d like to give your buddy? I really liked it this time. It flowed nicely and had good information.

Reseach Project Part 4: Rough Draft #2

The Dark Side of Hydroelectric Dams

The third longest river in the world is also the longest river in Asia. The ancient Yangtze River begins its life high upon the Tibetan Plateau in Western China. The spark of its life is derived from glacial runoff. This runoff is joined by small streams and creeks as it descends from its lofty Tibetan perch. The river gains volume and ferocity as it tumbles and roils towards China’s east coast. As the river nears the coast, it splinters apart to form the capillaries of the Yangtze River Delta. For centuries, this unrelenting river etched its pathway unmolested across China, splitting the country in two. However, in 2006 the completion of the Three Gorges Dam forever changed the ecology, environment, and destiny of the river. The Yangtze is not alone. According to an article by David Biello (2009) called “Dam Building Boom: Path to Clean Energy,” the world has as many as 48,000 hydroelectric dams. These dams provide electricity to millions of people. According to Mara Hvistendahl’s article (2008) called “China’s Three Gorges Dam: An Environmental Catastrophe,” the Three Gorges Dam alone will generate 18,000 megawatts of electricity. That is eight times the amount of electricity generated by the America’s Hoover Dam. However, this green source of energy has a dark side. Although hydroelectric dams are believed to provide a relatively clean source of electricity, they cause an increase in greenhouse gases because flooding destroys carbon dioxide filtering vegetation and forests, decomposing organic material releases methane and stored carbon dioxide into the water, and the dam’s turbines release these gasses into the atmosphere.

Dams have a very simple yet extremely functional design. Simply build a wall across a river and effectively stop it in its tracks. Provide a pathway for the water to escape to the other side of the dam. This pathway is called a penstock. The penstock is filled from near the base of the dam thereby pulling water from near the bottom of the reservoir. At the end of the penstock the water enters a large chamber that houses the blades of the turbines. The water spins the blades of the turbines which generates the electricity. Once the water has passed the turbine blades it is spat out the back side of the dam where it is free to continue its journey downstream. When fish enter the turbine system the outcome is nearly always fatal for the fish (Carr 2012, Ferguson 2011, Keefer 2010). The amount of electricity generated depends on how much water is let through the penstock. On days where there is little electricity needed then only a little water is let through. On days where much more electricity is needed then more water can be let through. Dams will also open the penstocks fully to drain large amounts of water to accommodate floodwater during rainy seasons and during spring snow thawing.

However, by placing a dam in the river water begins to build up on the upriver side. Often a large lake will be formed. These lakes are called reservoirs. The reservoir can be massive. This flooding alone often has serious consequences for people. The flooding from the Three Gorges Dam created a lake that was so large it displaced nearly 1.3 million people. Deep beneath this lake rests the skeletal remains of a forest. This forest was once thriving, absorbing carbon dioxide to grow and releasing precious oxygen as a result. The lake that developed behind the Three Gorges Dam covers 468 square miles of land that once grew vegetation and forests. Imagine how much forested land has been destroyed by the flooding behind the world’s 48,000 hydroelectric dams. There are also thousands of acres of forested land that must be cleared to resettle the 1.3 million displaced residents. A dam in the Nile River drainage displaced nearly 50,000 residents (Bosshard 2009). Also, land must be cleared for the electrical transmission lines and other necessary dam projects.

Once the land behind a hydroelectric dam has been flooded, and the forests and vegetation are all dead, the biological material begins to decompose deep below the surface of the lake. The dead biological material such as the trees, plant and animal matter is attacked by microscopic bacteria. Some bacteria called aerobic bacteria need oxygen to live as they begin to break down the plant and animal matter (Demarty 2011). As these bacteria live, they release carbon dioxide. Other bacteria, called anaerobic bacteria, do not need oxygen to live. As these bacteria break down the animal and plant matter, they release a toxic combination of carbon dioxide and methane gas. This gas is released into the surrounding water by the bacteria where it then resides until it can be released into the atmosphere. The flooding caused by the dam is not the only source of this organic material. The dam also works like a net. Any plant or animal matter that is carried by the river from further upstream is stopped by the dam. Trees, branches, driftwood, and animal matter are all trapped behind the dam. This material sinks to the bottom of the lake where it will also decompose. Therefore, dams create a continual source of decomposing material which will release greenhouse gases. The production of greenhouse gases has been found to increase in dam reservoirs that are located in tropical climates.

Some of the gas is oxidized in the water to form carbon dioxide which is released at the surface of the lake by the gentle agitating motion of the waves and wind (Roland 2010). However, most of the methane gas remains suspended in the deep water. As the dam releases water through the penstock the water becomes highly agitated by the movement. The spinning of the turbines, and eventually the turmoil caused by spilling from the down river side of the dam will cause most of the greenhouse gases to be released. The rest of the greenhouse gases will be released from the water as it continues its journey downstream. According to a report by International Rivers Network (2012) called “Frequently Asked Questions: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Dams,” as much as 104 million metric tons of methane gas will annually be released by the large dams of the world. This release of methane gas is responsible for as much as 4% of humankind’s warming impact on the planet. Methane gas in the atmosphere traps more heat than carbon dioxide. The International Rivers Network (2012) report states that dams are responsible for 23% of the world’s methane gas production. According to International Rivers Network (2012), hydroelectric dams actually are less environmentally-friendly than fossil fuel burning facilities when generating the same amount of electricity:

“Large hydropower reservoirs in the tropics can have a higher global warming impact per kilowatt hour generated than fossil fuels, including coal.” (International River Network 2012)

There are some methods to curb the production of greenhouse gases in dam reservoirs. Prior to the flooding of a proposed dam reservoir area it is possible to log off forested areas to cut down on the volume of organic material that will be covered with water. This is by no means a cure all. It would be impossible to fully remove all material from a proposed flood zone. The sheer volume would be incomprehensible. However, the removal of large timber would cut down on a large proportion of organic material. When the Three Gorges Dam reservoir flooded it covered numerous villages, cities and towns. This flooding added inorganic trash and material to the reservoir’s collection of decomposing sediment. Additional problems arise when dam building is proposed in tropical climates such as Brazil where a large scale dam on the Amazon River is proposed. The dam, named The Bella Monte, would be the third largest hydroelectric dam in the world. The flooding that would ensue from the construction of this dam could flood large portions of pristine Amazon rainforest. This flooding would release a catastrophic volume of methane gas into the atmosphere.

In addition to releasing vast amounts of toxic greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, dams have other effects on the environment (Grahm-Rowe 2005, Marriot 2010, Mourad 2011) around them. Up river flooding can cause serious seasonal flooding of agricultural and natural wetlands. The flooding of agricultural lands not only affects those that depend on agriculture but this flooding also releases toxic pesticides and poisons into the river water. Flooding natural wetland ecosystems with many times the normal amount of water can destroy these delicate ecosystems. Many natural wetlands are destroyed and cannot ever recover from the flooding. An unknown number of delicate and endangered species can be wiped out by this flooding (Lopez-Pujol and Ming-Xun 2009). Dams also inhibit migrations of keystone fish species such as salmon. The loss of salmon and salmon habitat can impact hundreds of species of birds, fish and mammals that rely on salmon as a food source (Welch 2008). The Three Gorges Dam also threatens endangered species such as the Yangtze Alligator and the Yangtze Freshwater Dolphin. These species are found nowhere else in the world. Hydroelectric dams also increase the chances of landslides upstream of the dam where the reservoir erodes riverbanks. Large scale land slides into reservoirs have often caused large waves that flood river side villages leaving death and destruction in their wake. Cities that were destroyed by the Three Gorges Dam reservoir, released and unknown amount of human sewage, toxic waste, petroleum products and trash into the water system. These underwater ghost cities will undoubtedly pollute the Yangtze for generations to come.

Although hydroelectric dams were once thought to be the best source of electricity, new studies have proven that hydroelectric dams are no better, and in some cases a worse method of generating electricity. Hydroelectric dams can produce stunning amounts electricity. However, the release of methane and other greenhouse gases from hydroelectric dam reservoirs, especially those in tropical climates can in fact make hydroelectric dams less efficient than fossil fuel electric facilities that produce similar amounts of electricity. Methane production in reservoirs can be cut down by the removal of plant and animal matter from proposed dam reservoir areas prior to flooding however it cannot be eliminated completely. Dam reservoirs will always continue to produce greenhouse gases. As the human race continues to grow and expand into previously untouched wilderness the need for more and more electricity generating facilities will also grow. The damming and building of hydroelectric dams will continue and the subsequent production of greenhouse gases will also increase. Not only do humans increase greenhouse gases by building hydroelectric dams, but humans also inadvertently decrease the planet’s ability to filter carbon dioxide form the atmosphere by killing the vegetation in a proposed reservoir flood area. With today’s technology it is no obvious better or worse method for producing electricity. Each need must be analyzed and examined to determine the best method of electrical production whether it be a fossil fuel burning facility or a hydroelectric dam or a nuclear power plant. It is up to humankind to determine the appropriate method of generating electricity for a certain area. There may never be a single environmentally sound method of electricity generation. The safest choice is for every single person to attempt to cut down on unnecessary use of electricity. By cutting down on the need for electricity, the need for large scale hydroelectric dams can be cut down. This cutback on electricity is the best method currently available to humans to keep planet Earth green.

References

Biello, David. “The Dam Building Boom: Right Path to Clean Energy” Yale Environment 360. Feb 23, 2009 http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_dam_building_boom_right_path_to_clean_energy/2119/&gt;.

Bosshard, Peter, “China Dams the World” World Policy Institute 26, no 4 (2009) http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-ba49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=46730738

 

Carr, J.W. and F.G. Whorisky “Migration of Silver American Eels past a Hydroelectric Dam and Through A Coastal Zone” Fisheries Management and Ecology 15, no 5/6 (2008) 393-400. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?vid=25&hid=14&sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=34883128

 

Demarty, M and J. Bastien, “GHG Emissions from Hydroelectric Reservoirs in Tropical and Equatorial Regions: Review of 20 Years of CH4 Emission Measurements,” Energy Policy 34, no. 7 (2011): 4197-4206. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.bbr.2011.03.031

 

Ferguson, John W et al, “Potential Effects of Dams on Migratory Fish in the Mekong River: Lessons from Salmon in the Fraser and Columbia Rivers” Environmental Management 47 (2011) 141-159. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

 

Grahm-Rowe, Duncan. “Hydroelectric Power’s Dirty Secret.” New Scientist. Feb 24, 2005 <httrp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7046-hydroelectric-powers-dirty-secret-revealed.html>.

 

Hvistendahl, Mara. “China’s Three Gorges Dam : An Environmental Catastrophe.” Scientific American. 3 Feb. 2012. 25 Mar. 2008 International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. < http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=chinas-three-gorges-dam-disaster&gt;

 

International Rivers Network. 3 Feb. 2012. International Rivers Network. <http://www.internationalrivers.org/files/GlobalResGHGsFAQ.pdf&gt;.

 

Keefer, M. L. et al. “Prespawn Mortality in Adult Spring Chinook Salmon Out Planted above Barrier Dams” The Ecology of Freshwater Fish 19 (2010) 361-372. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Lopez-Pujol, Jordi and Ming-Xun Ren, “Biodiversity and the Three Gorges Reservoir: A Troubled Marriage” Journal of Natural History 43, no 43-44 (2009) 2765-2786. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=20&hid=110

 

Marriot, Joe et al, “Impact of Power Generation Mix on Life Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprint Greenhouse Gas Results,” Journal of Industrial Ecology 14, no 6 (2010) 917-928. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=18&hid=110

 

Mourad, Ben Amor, et al, “Electricity Trade and GHG Emissions: Assessment of Quebec’s Hydropower in the Northeastern American Market (2006-2008),” Energy Policy 39, no 3 (2011) 1711-1721. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.uaf.edu/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.001

 

Roland, Fabio et al, “Variability of Carbon Dioxide Flux from Tropical (Cerrado)

Hydroelectric Reservoirs,” Aquatic Sciences 72 (2010) 283-293. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/detail?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=19&hid=110

 

Welch, David W. et al, “Survival of Migrating Salmon Smolts in Large Rivers With and Without Dams” PloS Biology 6, no 10 (2008) 2101-2108. http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy.library.uaf.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c23df883-04cf-428f-be65-8a49a40e683b%40sessionmgr15&vid=22&hid=14

Research Draft 2: A Changing Arctic

A Changing Arctic
The Arctic Sea is an undiscovered beauty with its crystal blue-green waters and sculptures of ice that look as if Picasso himself created the massive bergs. With such natural beauty it is hard to believe what lies beneath this surreal waterscape is the greatest killer this world has ever seen. Usually the grand flows of sea ice that freeze in the winter keep these black and white mammals at bay longer. But over the years the shift in the weather has provided for them an earlier season to explore the Arctic waters. Although the melting sea ice is allowing for an increase of killer whale presence in the Arctic, the whales are damaging the ecosystem of the Arctic Sea because they are dominating the top of the food chain, they are competing with the Inuit (Inupiat) for their marine food supply, and they are causing marine mammals to become endangered and possibly extinct.

The killer whale or orca is one animal that can be found in almost any of the oceans or seas around the world, from Antarctica to the Arctic (Pitman, Perryman, LeRoi, & Eilers, 2007; Zerbini, 2007). Their presence in the Arctic Sea has increased over the years due to the warming of the Arctic region.  In just the Hudson Bay area alone from 1990 to 2000 there have been reports of an increase of 79 killer whale sightings (Hidgon & Ferguson, 2009).  The killer whales usually make an appearance in July and begin their move back into warmer waters around the end of August. But because of the waters becoming warmer they are staying a lot longer, even into December.  Killer whales are not the only factor in reshaping this ecological environment but they are becoming a very devastating one.  Due to the fact these rather large marine mammals live in such an expansive territory they do not have a stable food source but eat whatever is available to them. There have been studies done on large whale pods that have suggested that they will stick to one diet but that particular diet is not the same for each pod (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012; Laden, 2012). Most studies have been done on whale pods not living in the Arctic but with the help of the Inuit (Inupiat) people of the Arctic, researchers have been able to get a little better picture of what these whale pods are devouring.  One might think these giants would have an appetite for fish but marine mammals are what they prefer. Many of the Inuit that have been interviewed as to the eating habits of the killer whale have stated they have not seen them eat fish but have gone after seals, sea lions, otters, walrus, and other more docile whales, such as the bowhead, beluga, and the narwhal (Morell, 2012). The killer whales have been observed as not being very humane in their killings.  They tend to play with their food, tossing it between them as if the animal were a rag doll (O’Harra, 2012).  They have also been seen taking an unsuspecting polar bear for a meal too.  These adaptable mammals pick and choose their prey depending on the area they are in and tend to go after the more vulnerable marine mammals.  An example of an unsuspecting marine mammal would be a seal sunning itself on a piece of floating ice.  The whale pod will then work together to create a massive wave to knock the seal from its safe location giving the whale pod a chance at their prey (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012).  The Inuit have seen many killer whale pods slaughter other members of a different whale species family, such as the very rare narwhal and the bowhead whale along with the beluga (Morell, 2012). The Inuit or the Inupiat are known as the “People of the Whales” and since they are not the only ones who use the whale as a food source this increase of killer whale presence gives them a reason to be concerned (Sakakibara, 2010).

The killer whales are now coming into the Arctic much earlier and staying much later then they have in the past. The local native people now have to compete with these pack hunting killers for one of their native ancestral food sources, the whale. Orcas or killer whales have been called wolves of the sea because of their pack like hunting skills (O’Harra, 2012). As a researcher for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Freshwater Institute, Steven Ferguson has made a very scary observation.  Because of the climate change the killer whales could be the cause of an irreversible change that is being seen in the Arctic ecosystem.  Steven Ferguson also states that, “This change of what animals live in the Arctic is likely going to happen with the warming but we didn’t anticipate that killer whales might be removing certain susceptible prey and maybe temperate species will move up to take their place” (Puxley, 2012). This is a very real outcome that could start to take place. The native whales of the Arctic are not the only marine mammals the killer whales are affecting.   The killer whales are causing the Inuit to become worried about the seals and walrus populations as well (Mead, Gittelsohn, Kratzmann, Roache, & Sharma, 2010). With the killer whales trespassing into the Inuit way of life these giants cannot be met with open arms who are trying to take over the Inuit hunting grounds.  The Inuit live in an area of the world where they have to rely on the animals of the sea for nutrition.  They live in a tundra area where wild plants just don’t want to grow.  “In our society, it is always the whale that brings us together,” said Mae Ahgeak, whaling captain’s wife, in her personal interview with Sakakibara in Barrow, Alaska June 18, 2005. Whales are a very important part of the Inuit subsistence. As Sakakibara stated in her article, “Cetaceousness and Climate Change Among the Inupiat of Arctic Alaska”, “The cultural survival and social ethics are all based on intimate relationships with the whale, and the whale symbolically and physically lies in the heart of human subsistence” (Sakakibara, 2010). This leaves the only option for the Inuit culture to survive is to hunt the hunters who are depleting their way of life (Lougheed, 2010).  With the invasion of the killer whales, a shift in the Inuit cultural pattern is again taking place.  This time it is not because of the introduction of other peoples and ideas but from an animal that cannot be controlled (Mead, Gittelsohn, Kratzmann, Roache, & Sharma, 2010). A way in which the Inuit people have survived for thousands of years may become harder and harder to pass on to the next generation. Some might suggest that with the introduction of Euroamerican ideals the significance of the ancestral ways is not as important.  But it should not be due to the ancestral food sources being over hunted by the killer whale (Lougheed, 2009). Concerns of the Inuit way of hunting are also being called in to question with the increase of the killer whale presence.  Some feel it may not be safe for both the Inuit and the killer whale to be hunting the same areas and hunting the same animals, sometimes at the same time (Ferguson, Higdon, & Wetsdal, 2012). It is not just the Inuit the killer whale is having a great impact on but all life up in the Arctic north.  It seems that all marine mammals that depend on the ice for protection are trying to find other places to hide not just from the Inuit but from the killer whales too. But the bigger problem is how to keep the killer whales from over killing. Since these marine wolves do not have any natural predators it is hard keep their numbers under control. This is where the Inuit really come in to help keep the balance. In Canada and Alaska, aboriginal whaling is still legal and because these great giants can become over whelming killers the Inuit are doing their part in the circle of life (Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, 2007). Some may argue that that is exactly what the killer whale is doing also, just doing their part of the circle of life.  It has been suggested that when the food source of an animal runs low that species will be affected and their numbers will start to drop.  In this way giving their prey a chance to reproduce and get their populations back up to allow the circle to continue as it always has. But what about the animals who are being hunted to their extinction?

Before the longer seasonal appearances of the orca in the Arctic region, researchers tried to get an accurate count of marine populations but were not very successful. They were unable to get an assessment of the climate change that has affected their population numbers.  The killer whales’ extended appearance in the Arctic has been a great shock to this very fragile ecosystem. With the melting sea ice many changes have occurred. One change can be seen with the migration of the beluga whales.  The beluga whales prefer to spend their winters in an area where there is a light and moveable sea ice flow. But researchers have found where some of these whales are now moving into areas that have deep ice coverage to try to escape becoming the prey of a killer whale (Laidre, Stirling, Lowry, Wiig, Heide-Jorgensen, & Ferguson, 2008). This global change is something everyone needs to be more aware of. The narwhal whale is another one of the animals that are being affected by the killer whale. The area of the Arctic where the narwhal can be found most frequently is around the shores of Greenland.  This area too has seen an increase in killer whale activity over the years (Heide-Jorgensen, Laidre, Burt, Borchers, Marques, Hansen, & Fossette, 2010; Kwok & Untersteiner, 2011). The narwhal whales rely on the densely packed sea ice flow during the winter months. They have adapted to this type of habitat and with the melting of the sea ice it is disappearing fast (Laidre, Stirling, Lowry, Wiig, Heide-Jorgensen, & Ferguson, 2008).  If future generations are to have the experience of seeing one of these unique creatures, more needs to be done to insure the sea ice does not completely disappear (Campbell, Yurik, & Snow, 1988). The narwhals are not the only animals at risk of their populations decreasing. The bowhead whales, which are the most important source for the Inuit subsistence, have had eye witnesses to their killings by killer whales.  In 1999 there were a greater number of killer whales in the Arctic since sea ice flows were minimal. A group of Inuit reported discovering at least eight dead whales, one in which was a recent kill which they could still use (Ferguson, Higdon, & Chemelnitsky, 2010).  Many other mammals are affected too, such as the sea otter, stellar sea lions, along with the ringed and bearded seals (Ferguson, Higdon, and Wetsdal, 2012; Kuker & Barrett-Lennard, 2010; Durban, Ellifrit, Dahlheim, Waite, Matkin, Barrett-Lennard, & Wade, 2009). During the spring and summer months the Arctic waters come alive with marine mammals. The Arctic areas are their breeding grounds and where in the next year their young will be born.  When this very delicate balance is interrupted “with earlier spring break-up of sea ice and reduced snow cover for birth lairs” this has a direct result in reducing the amount of offspring born each year (Higdon & Ferguson, 2010). What happens if these animals are over hunted by other animals, how will they procreate and continue generation after generation? With native Inuit hunting these same animals as part of their subsistence and cultural practices, their culture like the many marine mammals do not stand a chance at being around for much longer.

Researchers are discovering everyday new information regarding the impact of the killer whales on the Arctic.  With these new findings they may be able to find ways to decrease the killer whales effects on this fragile ecosystem, while helping to preserve the culture of the native people and help to bring back the dwindling marine mammal populations that they have affected. With the help of conservationists along with the people of the world maybe one day it might be possible for each creature on earth to find that middle ground and coexist.

References

Campbell, R., Yurick, D., & Snow, N. (1988). Predation on Narwhals, Monodon monoceros , by killer whales, Orcinus orca , in the Eastern Canada. Canadian field-naturalist. Ottawa ON [CAN. FIELD-NAT.]. Vol. 102, no. 4, pp. 689-696.

Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. (2007). Archives. Status of Knowledge on Killer Whales (Orcinus) in the Canadian Arctic. Retrieved from http://www.biblio.uqar.qc.ca/archives/30137701.pdf

Durban, J. J., Ellifrit, D. D., Dahlheim, M. M., Waite, J. J., Matkin, C. C., Barrett-Lennard, L. L., & … Wade, P. P. (2010). Photographic mark-recapture analysis of clustered mammal-eating killer whales around the Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska. Marine Biology, 157(7), 1591-1604. doi:10.1007/s00227-010-1432-6

Ferguson, S., Higdon, J., and Wetsdal, K. (2012). Prey items and predation behavior of killer whales (Orcinus orca) in Nunavut, Canada based on Inuit hunter interviews. Aquatic Biosystems, 8:3 doi:10.1186/2046-9063-8-3

Heide-Jorgensen, M, Laidre, K., Burt, M., Borchers, D., Marques, T., Hansen, R., & Fossette, S. (2010). Abundance of narwhals on the hunting grounds in Greenland.  Journal of Mammalogy, 91(5), 1135-1151. Doi: 10.1644/09-MAMM-A-198.1.

Hidgon, J., & Ferguson, S. (2009). Loss of Arctic Sea Ice Causing Punctuated Change in Sightings of Killer Whales (Orcinus orca) Over the Past Century. Ecological Applications, 19(5), 1365-1375.

Kuker, K., & Barrett-Lennard, L. (2010). A re-evaluation of the role of killer whales Orcinus orca in a population decline of sea otters Enhydra lutris in the Aleutian Islands and a review of alternative hypotheses. Mammal Review, 40(2), 103-124. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2009.00156.x

Laidre, K., Stirling, I., Lowry, L., Wiig, O., Heide-Jorgensen, M., & Ferguson, S. (2008). Quantifying the Sensitive of Arctic Marine Mammals to Climate-Induced Habitat Change. Ecological Application, 18(2) Supplement, S97-S125.

Laden, G. (2012). What the Inuit Taught Scientists about Killer Whales. Surprising Science. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.Smithsonian.org.

Lougheed, T. (2010). THE CHANGING LANDSCAPE OF ARCTIC TRADITIONAL FOOD. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(9), A386-A393.

Mead, E. E., Gittelsohn, J. J., Kratzmann, M. M., Roache, C. C., & Sharma, S. S. (2010). Impact of the changing food environment on dietary practices of an Inuit population in Arctic Canada. Journal Of Human Nutrition & Dietetics, 2318-26. doi:10.1111/j.1365-277X.2010.01102.x

Morell, V. (2012). Killer Whale Menu Finally Revealed. Science Now. Retrieved from

http://www.news.sciencemag.org

O’Harra, D. (2012). Killer Whales are the Sea Wolves of Arctic. Alaska Dispatch. Retrieved from http://www.alaskadispatch.com

Pitman, R.L., Perryman, W.L., LeRoi, D., & Eilers, E. (2007). A Dwarf Form of Killer Whale in Antarctica. Journal of Mammalogy, 88(1), 43-48.

Puxley, C. (2012).Disappearing Sea Ice Enticing More Killer Whales to Arctic.
[Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www. Winnipegfreepress.com

Sakakibara, C. (2010). Kiavallakkikput Agviq (Into the Whaling Cycle): Cetaceousness and Climate Change Among the Inupiat of Arctic Alaska. Annals Of The Association Of American Geographers, 100(4), 1003-1012. doi:10.1080/00045608.2010.500561

Zerbini, A. N., Waite, J. M., Durban, J. W., LeDuc, R., Dahlheim, M. E., & Wade, P. R. (2007). Estimating abundance of killer whales in the nearshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands using line-transect sampling. Marine Biology, 150(5), 1033-1045. doi:10.1007/s00227-006-0347-8