Myles Jellison: Research Draft 1 Workshop

1. What does the author do particularly well? Be specific.

The article is easy to read. Not filled with super complicated text.

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.

Was there a particular component of this essay that you had issues putting together?

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 on both.

Content

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

Essay is 587 words, not including the references.

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

I would give the paper a 6. But I would also give the topic a 9. I was really interested in the compressed air storage system, and would be interested in other forms of green storage systems. If additional information or descriptions about those systems and how that technology works was included it would make this paper more interesting.

7. Where can the author more fully develop ideas, either by providing examples or explaining/clarifying concepts for the reader?

Describing the current storage methods and comparing them a little more in depth to greener and more efficient methods in detail would be good.

8. What kinds of objections might someone who disagrees with the author’s point of view raise?

Obtaining money to reconstruct the national power grid; where does this money come from? Are small power providers going to go bankrupt attempting to convert? Is the technology available today to completely transition to the smart grid?

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

The topic of expenses is somewhat addressed. However, aside from large initial expenses where is this money coming from? Is it going to come from an already beleaguered national budget-government payout? Or is it going to be fronted by consumers? Or is the company going to foot the bill and extend the costs to the consumers later? The technology aspect could be addressed if the author decides to include current transmission and storage methods/ alternative methods and the in depth explanations of how they work.

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?

Its clear.

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

I found the transitions jumpy. Also I found the paper just ended without a real summary.

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?

Like I said above this topic is interesting. I like how the author noted that most energy topics delve into the realm of sources of energy rather than making efficient methods of storing and transferring what energy we already have. I liked how noting that in the first paragraph lets the reader know that this isn’t going to be another run of the mill green energy paper. Some facts about the amount of lost energy would be very interesting and grabbing. Example: 60% of energy sent through current transmission lines is lost. Something similar to that-I made that fact up, but you get the idea. Facts to tell the reader that our current methods are indeed inefficient would be helpful.

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).

I thought the paper just ended. I didn’t feel any real wrap up or summary-it just ended.

Research

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

18 Sources

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?

Author used several different sources.

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?

Sometimes.

17. Does the author have anything on the Reference list that is not used in the essay (she/he should not).

Direct quotes were quoted. However I do not believe every source was used.

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.

I thought it could have used more facts, and some more statistics.

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.

Quotations were fine, and in good locations to back up his paraphrasing.

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. 

There were comments afterwards however the paper didn’t have enough information. Needs more overall explanations about the topic, with more facts etc.

Other? 

Is there any other feedback you’d like to give your buddy?

I liked the topic and I am super interested in the storage and transmission methods. I think explaining the inefficiency of the old and efficiency of the new, and to some extent (basic ideas) how the technology works would be awesome.

Essay #1 Cause/Effect – “Genetically Modified Seeds: The Killing of the Honey Bee’s”

From the flowers to the trees, bees of all kinds are very important for the continuation of not just plant life but all life here on Earth. Without the help from these pollinating insects the produce section of the local grocery stores might look at a lot different. Although the general public has not been aware of a noticeable decline in the growth of commercial crops here in the United States, the use of genetically modified seeds has caused the decline of the honey bee population because it has introduced bacteria and viruses into their diet, it has contaminated their food source, and is responsible for the death of the next generation of bees.

With the introduction of genetically modified seeds (gmo) consumers are being reassured that the produce they are eating is safer than ever before and with the help of these gmo’s growing these crops does not require near the amount of pesticides as before. But what effects are these gmo’s having on the insects that are meant to help in pollination and the essential growth of these crops? When these seeds were engineered a strain of bacteria and virus that is used as a pesticide was genetically introduced into the seeds DNA. One of the gene segments that have been introduced is a bacterium called bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) which is intended to deter butterfly larva from devouring the plant. The resulting bio-toxin that is now found in every cell of the plant, instead of just sprayed on topically where the larva is, is a protein called Cry1Ab (Gitlin 2009). This bio-toxin is not a new substance that has been introduced to the bees. Beekeepers have been using it as a way to keep moths out of the hives. But in the last few years beekeepers have noticed on increase in Cry1Ab in the hives and they have not been spraying the hives as often (Donovan2009). How is this happening?

The bee’s main food source has been contaminated. Bees not only pollinate the crops but take that pollen back to the hive to become food not only for the adult bees but for the larva as well. Bees are a very fragile insect with an immune system that cannot handle a lot of new threats at one time. They are able to fight off diseases up to a certain point. Even the smallest amount of Bt from the gmo’s could potentially have a very adverse affect on the bees. Having to consume pollen that is genetically altered with strains of a bacteria and virus is weakening their already delicate little bodies. With no other food source and without the ability to know not to eat the poisoned crops the future for the bees does not look very good. They are killing themselves off with the help of ingested bacteria strains that should never be found in their food. What about the next generation of bees?

At the rate the bees are disappearing there may not be a next generation. According to research that was done in Mexico the affects of Cry1Ab on bees is very interesting. It affects their judgment and their senses just like alcohol affects humans. When observed the bees will continue to take the substance in that contains this bio-toxin and will fail to obtain enough pollen to take back to the hive (Donovan 2009). If every bee in the hive is sitting at a gmo plant and worried only of themselves at that moment of pure bio-toxin bliss than there is really no way their hive will survive. The hive is a very well planned out organism and the reason there are so many bees to one hive is so they can take care of and look out for the others. The increase of Cry1Ab in their diets is not only affecting their immune system but their lively hood as well. The way bees were created is fascinating and how through a short period of time a single bee is able to do a variety of different jobs in and out of the hive. The introduction of this mind altering poison has been devastating to the future of bees. “Although not directly lethal to non-target organisms, the toxins from the Bt gene potentially put non-target insects such as honeybees at risk” (Donovan2009).

Look into the role of people. How should they get involved? What will happen if they don’t? These are questions that should not be taken lightly. With hundreds of bees disappearing every day it is imperative that an action be taken to figure out whether or not gmo’s are the major contributing factor to the epidemic of colony collapse disorder, the disappearing of the honey bees. Also realizing that there are many factors in the bee’s disappearance that can help create an awareness that will bring change. Actively searching for answers and ways to organically increase crop production that will not harm the helpful insects is a must.

Gmo’s may sound like the next best thing for a better crop production, but all the side effects need to be weighed out. The only hope the bees have for a future is to look to a new source of how crops are grown. Maybe organic is the better way to go not only for the bees but for the people as well. Who knows what Bt and Cry1Ab are doing to the human race.

References:

Genersch, E. (2010). Honey bee pathology: current threats to honey bees and beekeeping.

Applied Microbiology & Biotechnology, 87(1), 87-97. doi:10.1007/s00253-010-2573-8

Kaplan, J. (2008). A Complex Buzz. Agricultural Research, 56(5), 8-11.

Donovan, P. (2009). Genetically Modified Crops Implicated in Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder.

Retrieved from   http://www.naturalnews.com/025287.html

Gitlin, B. (2009). Is Bee Colony Collapse Disorder linked to GMOs?

Retrieved from http://gmo-journal.com/index.php/2009/09/24/is-bee-colony-collapse-disorder-linked-to-gmos/

Essay #2 Book review-A Book Telling the Truth

Zhenzihao Zhang

 

Maureen

 

ENGL213X

 

10/16/2011

A Book Telling the Truth

                 I have read the book: “Food Inc”. Although industrial food is cheap and convenient, in Food Inc., Karl Weber reveals that industrial food is making us sicker, fatter, and poorer because food corporations’ deliberately keep information from consumers, biotechnology is applied without long-term justification, and antibiotics are abused.

The book presents us a whole new aspect of our food and our world that may be totally different from what we perceived before. Food incorporations are tells lies all the time. The packaging of the foods we see in markets like Walmart today conveys the idea that foods are grown naturally in old-time farms, while the truth of industrial food production is that the whole procedure for producing foods can’t be less wholesome.  Taking farms growing chickens for example, thousands of chickens are confined in a small field, with no space between chickens can be seen, and the stink spreads for several miles, greatly polluting air nearby, of which residents nearby suffer the most. How come consumers have no idea of their situation? The industry uses legislation, marketing and intimidation to keep Americans completely in the dark about the process to produce the foods and where their foods are from.

At the present, the food on shelves in supermarket is not real food, though they may look like real one. To be more specific, the food we see now is different food with a similar appearance as past food. However, we see them in the same notion of past food. If we compare food today with food parents cooked several decades ago, we’ll find significant difference. Today most of the food has been genetically engineered, altering the way they grew in the past. What is genetic e engineering? Generic engineering is also called genetic modification, which means scientists directly manipulate an organism’s genome taking advantage of modern DNA technology. Foreign DNA is introduced into the organism of interest.  The potential benefits of genetically engineered food are heart-stirring because it does bring us more production without losing the quality. However, concerns on biodiversity, the ecosystem and people’s safety exists because such food may not be tested properly and guaranteed to be safe. Unexpected dangerous substances may be present in GE (genetically engineered) food because the procedure for assessing the safety of GE foods is not designed to detect them. Even top researchers identity that the impacts of genetic engineering is unpredictable, and these scientists are being harassed and suppressed by food giants.

As far as we know, the cost of raising live stocks is about ten times as much as the same amount of plants. The fact makes it nearly impossible that the price of meat products get close to that of vegetables. However, it does happen in America through industrial production in large scale, which, in terms of quantity, is a miracle, but not in terms of quality. The documentary book shows us the dirtiness of factory farms where livestock are raised and slaughtered, which can’t be worse. In an industrial farm producing pigs, substantial amount of pigs are confined to a limited field. The field is never cleaned, and animals live on feces from birth to death. This action has a side effect that animals highly possibly can get infected with certain viruses because of the dirtiness and soon it will develop into a plague for animals, coming along with which is tremendous loss. To prevent the disaster from happening, farmers feed those pigs with all kinds of antibiotics. The high-tech movement isn’t safe as well, and it could lead to the emergence of super germs that are resistant to all kinds of antibiotics. Ironically, this action to compensate for the former action is also flawed, but it’s not compensated. Super germs are extremely hard to kill, which means they can kill anyone they want to kill. People infected with super germs died quickly, even with treatment. Several cases have happened around US.

The process of slaughtering animals is also dirty and unsafe. According to the book, animals are killed without their guts completely cleaned, which means feces may still be there. And the body surely was stained with feces in fields before the animal is brought to the slaughter room. To make things worse, complete sterilization can never be achieved for industrial production. At the end, consumers buy meat products they take for granted as safe and clean, while the products are actually not. Eating meat products stained by feces can lead to severe diseases, which has been proved.

The darkness of industrial production of foods gives rise to the rapid development of organic food industry. Organic foods are produced without involving any pesticide and any antibiotics, and chemical treatment can’t be made to food.  Some people question the production efficiency of organic foods. The worry is nonsensical. According to an interview in the book, a farmer producing chicken in a distinctive organic way produce nearly the same amount as in industrial way.

The book should be applauded with flowers and choruses because it throws light on the dark secrets and hidden facts of the food incorporations, makes American people aware of what exactly they are eating, and supports the revolution of food industry and people’s transferring to eating organic foods with solid evidence. With a book like this telling the truth, consumers will mediate over the contradiction between profiting and ethics, which is the innate contradiction lies in capitalism.

Cause/Effect Draft: Stomp Out Erosion

Shishmaref, Alaska, which has been inhabited over four hundred years, is facing the possible relocation of their village due to drastic erosion. Shishmaref is not the only place suffering. The people of Alaskan villages cannot let erosion change our lives. The natural process of erosion eats away at our river banks, hillsides, and quite frankly our lives. Graves have fallen into lakes, houses in places like Shishmaref that used to be a safe distance from the water are now only yards from falling in themselves.

Living in a small village I have seen first hand how erosion could be fought. In the 1990′s cement blocks, held together by cable, were put on one of our river banks in order to preserve it. This has made an immense difference; the beach is still wide enough to play softball on in the summer, and to provide a place for the locals to park their boats. The cross country team is even able to train on the beach because it was saved when the people took action. If it were not for the cement blocks the wide beach may not have been so wide any longer. Another example of success story when dealing with erosion is the village of Noatak, Alaska. In Noatak bags of cement were placed at the bottom of a hillside that was eroding very quickly. These bags have saved this spot of land from falling into their slim river. The fact that the people of Noatak decided to do something about the erosion goes to show that other villages can too. These stories go to tell that erosion is not impossible to fight.

Not only does the changes in land mean adaption, but it also means unneeded work, loss of money, and sorrow. In my village graves that were once on a hillside are now in the lake below. Many of the graves that fell were retrieved and reburied, but this took a lot of work. The permafrost not but a few feet from the surface makes it a very backbreaking job to dig a wide grave deep into the ground. No one should have to bury a loved one twice.

The rivers are always changing due to erosion. A lot of times places we used to travel to are unavailable when a channel is blocked off by fallen land. It is true that the native people are very good at adapting, but there is a great need for villages to take action. There are many examples of success in stopping erosion in vital areas. I believe that the villages that are greatly suffering from eroding land, should not give up, but instead they should take action for their land.

 

 

References 

(2006, December). Human and Economic Indicators: Shishmaref. Arctic Change. Retrieved September 24, 2011, from http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/human-shishmaref.shtml

Essay 1 Cause/Effect – Modern Farms Damage the Environment : Those You Don’t Know About Modern Farms

Zhenzihao Zhang

 

Maureen

 

ENGL213X

 

09/23/2011

 

  Although modern farms are highly productive and seem harmless, the farms actually cause pollution to the environment because chemical fertilizer used in modern farms pollutes nearby rivers and poisons thousands of fish, pesticides are absorbed by plants, and the farms also exhaust the land.

Half a century ago, agricultural yields counted on resources in soil, natural biological control mechanisms, natural recycling of organic material and rainfall patterns in certain areas. Though the yields of agricultural systems were far less than that today, they were stable. The yields were protected by planting more than one variety in same space and time in fields in case of pest breaking out or severe bad weather like hail. According to Altieri’s article, he says: Fields gained Inputs of nitrogen by rotating field crops with legumes. The relation between environment and agricultural output in this type of systems was tough and strong. Also people could hardly find environmental degradation, which is surely sustainable and environment-friendly. In modern society, as agricultural modernization progressed, specialization of agriculture contributed to massive yields fulfilling huge amount of demand, which seems to be a miracle of crop production in agricultural systems.

However, excessive dependence on agricultural specialization has tremendously worsened the environment. Many specialists suppose that the natural ecosystem won’t lead itself to an undesirable condition with its large capacity, but, to their surprise, the specification of food production have been related to some “ecological diseases”. “The diseases can be classified into diseases of the ecotope and diseases of the biocoenosis.”[Altieri] The former one includes loss of soil fertility, erosion, salinization and alkalinization, depletion of nutrient reserves, pollution of water systems and loss of fertile croplands to urban development, while the latter one includes wild plant, loss of crop, dying out of natural enemies, chemical pollution, and destruction of natural control patterns. Three major sources of environmental problems are excessive use of fertilizers, abuse of pesticides and exhaustion of land.

In modern farms, fertilizers have been considered highly related to the increase of crop yields seen around the world. However, fertilizers do negatively impact the environment. A major reason why fertilizers badly affect the environment is due to farmers’ wasteful way of using them and crops’ inefficiency in taking advantage of them. The fertilizers that are not absorbed by the crop end up polluting surface water and ground water. Contamination of water due to fertilizers is widely spread, and in many rural regions of the world, the condition can’t be worse. “People estimate that nitrate level in no less than 25% of the wells for drinking water is beyond the safe level.” [Altieri]  The nitrate pollution is harmful to our health and according to studies, it’s even linked to gastric, bladder and oesophageal cancers. Nutrient in fertilizers entering rivers, lakes and bays can lead to eutrophication, which is characterized by a population explosion of algae. Algal blooms are deadly. It prevents light from reaching beneath upper layers, which kills plants and animals habitat at the lower part by suffocating them. Dead vegetation and animals settle and serve as food for microorganisms in the water. In a short while the water will be depleted of oxygen, preventing the breaking down of organic remains, which then pile in the water. Going on like this, eventually, we can see the elimination of all animals and plants in the water. Scientists calculated that nearly 60% of nutrients around the world that we can see in waters are originated from fertilizers. What’s more, fertilizers can pollute air as well. It has been confirmed that the decrease of the ozone layer and global warming is closely associated with chemical fertilizers. The abuse of chemical fertilizer is also related to the acidification of lands, which further lead to breakout of pests.

A high percentage of grain produced is used for feeding livestock. In modern farms, the grain is planted through intensive growing process that requires great amount pesticides, which generates a series of problems like resistance in pesticide of insects, and contamination of ground water. At the present, many grain crops have been modified through genetic technique, the crops are modified to contain pesticides within their DNA. When livestock eats these crops grown with pesticide, pesticide is going to pile up in the livestock’s body. So the result is, after us humans having the meat and related food that is gotten from these animals with pesticide residue, the toxic ingredients in the pesticides accumulate in our bodies, and we are at risk of having health problems related to these toxic ingredients.  Pesticide residues are known to generate infertility, birth defects, diseases associated with nervous system and even cancer. According to a research, large amount of people in the US are having pesticide residues in their bodies that excess the safety level. “Data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) has displayed that the American children between the ages of six and eleven carry several times the safety level of pesticide residue, which can lead to damage in a long period.”[ “Pesticide”]

Modern farms also exhaust lands, which further decrease output. In factory farms, cycle of nutrients has become more open, while the cycle is nearly closed in a natural farming pattern. Although factory farms are producing large amount of plants remains and manure of animals, recycling nutrient is becoming harder. Plants remains and manure of animals won’t return to the soil due to the fact that production facilities are often far from the other facilities which would complete the cycle. For many factory farms, plants remains and manure of animals is seen as a kind of burden rather than a source of nutrients.

In a nutshell, the modern pattern of producing food is encountering great challenge.  Though they are highly productive, the farms actually cause pollution to the environment and jeopardize our health.

 

Works  Cited

Altieri A. Miguel, “Modern Agriculture: Ecological impacts and the possibilities for truly sustainable farming”, 22 Sept. 2011.

< http://nature.berkeley.edu/~agroeco3/modern_agriculture.htm>

“Pesticide”, Sustainable Table, 22 Sept. 2011.

<http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/pesticides/&gt;

Essay 1 Cause/Effect- The Plastic Pollution Plague: “Please-Stick” to Recyclables

     From the time we hit our plastic alarm clock in the morning until the time we squeeze tooth paste out of its plastic sleeve onto our plastic tooth brush when we go to bed, we are surrounded by plastic. Our food is packaged in it, our children play with toys made from it, we talk on plastic cell phones, and we sit on chairs of plastic at work writing with plastic pens, drinking from plastic water bottles. Plastic is everywhere. Where does all this plastic end up? It does not just disappear when we throw it away into our (plastic) garbage bins (lined with plastic bags). Much of it piles up in landfills; however, we have allowed some plastics to filter into the ocean where it has accumulated into a giant water saturated mountain of plastic trash. And this mass accumulation of garbage is wreaking havoc on delicate salt water ecosystems. Although it has made life easier, overuse of plastic causes a serious pollution problem because it collects in the ocean, is consumed by oceanic life, and deposits onto beaches worldwide.

      Plastic is collecting in the ocean. In fact, so much has collected in a specific area that it has been given a name “The Pacific Garbage Patch”.  The Pacific Garbage Patch was first discovered in 1997 by a seaman, Captain Charles Moore. Captain Moore was navigating his boat through a shortcut from Hawaii to the US when he came upon a large span of floating garbage.  The garbage was largely composed of plastic pieces, which later research demonstrated to be broken down from larger bits of household plastic goods.  All this plastic we are using is finding its way into the ocean where it is breaking up into smaller pieces which are then swept together by ocean currents.  The middle of the ocean is not the only place plastic can be found where it shouldn’t be- it is also being found in the bellies of fish.

      Oceanic life is consuming the plastic waste. The pieces which flow towards current pockets become trapped and turned about until eventually they are spit back out and float away. These different colored plastics break apart so finely as to mimic the natural food sources of many ocean creatures, from the smallest link of the food chain to the largest- and they are not going unnoticed by the wildlife. Hundreds of smaller fish, which sustain larger prey and ultimately us, have already been found to have plastics in their digestive systems. Plastics contain toxic chemicals known as hormone disrupters; now, one-fourth the population of male swordfish is demonstrating unnatural reproductive cycles. The effects of too many plastics are beginning to pile up.

     In fact, they’re beginning to pile up on beaches. They are piling up in the form of plastic “pebbles”. Entire stretches of once pristine beaches are now littered with plastic refuse which is brought to shore by ocean currents. The Hawaiian Islands, as well as Northern Pacific islands, are finding their lava rock coastlines covered in little plastic particles. Whatever plastic the fish don’t eat eventually gets deposited along the shoreline; whatever plastic the birds don’t find end up in gravelly formations. There, on the rocky beaches, unidentifiable particles of plastic laundry detergent tubs and liter soda bottles can be found.  Organic mixed with inorganic. With the ability to break down into enough pieces to dot countless acres of beach, each unrecyclable plastic product poses a threat to the integrity of beaches worldwide.  Our beaches are slowly being transformed into a plastic wasteland.

      Our fascination with all things plastic is fast polluting what was once untainted. While plastics have made our lives easier, the massive amounts of plastics being used and thrown away are causing a serious pollution problem by accumulating in the ocean, by being consumed by oceanic life, and by collecting along beaches. While some polluted areas are worse than others, the issue remains the same:  overconsumption of plastic is a serious global problem which requires a global solution. While most plastic is discarded without much thought, it is not disappearing. The problem of pollution, which used to be invisible, can no longer be denied when it is floating in the ocean. So, maybe today is a good day to begin to forgo the plastic shopping bag at the market. Perhaps that yogurt container can be reused for something else. Perhaps now is a good time to invest in a stainless steel water bottle even though it might cost more than plastic bottled water. Because the cost of plastics’ effect on the environment is more than we can afford. And if we wait until tomorrow, tomorrow may be too late.

 

 

References

Greenberg, Neil (2009). Captain Charles Moore Talks Trash. Earth Island Journal, 24. Retrieved from                                        http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/charles_moore

Cause/Effect Essay Rough Draft

The Dam Effects: Future of the Klamath River?

The dams that span the banks of the Klamath River in northern California and south Oregon have caused drastic changes in the regions ecosystem since they are were put in place. The dams have slowed water moving through the drainage resulting in uncontrolled algae growth from the higher water temperatures. The salmon population has declined due to the excessive energy that is expended trying to navigate through the mazes within the dams and the disease caused by bacteria that thrives in warmer waters. Although the region may face short-lived hardships caused by the destruction of the dams, removal of the dams will cause the environment to stabilize because the river’s flow rate will return to normal, algae growth will be reduced due to lower water temperatures, and the salmon population could improve enough to remove the Coho from the endangered species list.

If the dams across the river were removed the impact on the surrounding area would be instantaneous. The silt that has built up over the last five decades would slowly be washed away, causing the river waters to be murky affecting the fisherman’s ability to target fish easily. The farmers that rely on the water held behind the dams will likely struggle with providing enough irrigation to grow a healthy crop. Transportation on along the river would be limited to smaller vessels that could navigate through the shallow narrow channels. The barren earth along that would be exposed from the receding waters would be more susceptible to erosion. The longer these changes are felt, the closer the river is to returning to its natural characteristics.

As the water begins to gain speed careening through the valley the water temperatures will begin to decline, for the sun’s heat is dispersed by the turbulent currents. Where blue-green algae generally grow in warm nutrient rich lakes, ponds, and slow-moving streams, the algae will not be able to germinate as quickly in the midst of the cool moving water. In faster moving water the algae will not have the ability to form bloom due to not having flagella to propel themselves together through the moving water. By removing the dam the water will move more rapidly, bringing the algae growth to a standstill.

Salmon will face fewer obstacles as they navigate along the cleaner river system. The salmon will travel unabated, up the river channels, conserving much needed energy for spawning instead of looking for passable routes. The water passing over their gills will carry fewer bacteria, whose population will be reduced from the cooler water, reducing the chance of diseases. With larger numbers of healthy returning salmon reaching their spawning grounds the number of fertilized eggs increases, leaving greater odds of population incline over the years to come. As all the salmon species numbers elevate, the closer we would be to removing the Klamath River’s Coho from the Endangered Species List.

The ecosystem will slowly begin to revert back to its former unmolested form as the water travels unobstructed through the valley. Blue-green algae will begin to clear up as the current growth of algae is forced downstream by the turbulent moving water. The sun’s rays won’t be as effective at warming the moving water as they were with the holding waters behind the dam. Reducing the water temperatures in-turn minimize the algae and bacteria growth that has been plaguing salmon over the years. While the immediate effects of removing the dams will impact the human population the most, the faster moving water will cause the ecosystem to revert to its norm of cooler water temperatures, a lack of algae growth, and hopefully a healthier environment for spawning Coho salmon.

Essay #1 rough draft Great Plastic Islands

Do you remember, as a child, what would happen if you tossed a message in a bottle into the ocean, where would it end up? Asia? The Philippines? South America? Chances are if you’re just throwing it from the beach it will wash back up a few miles up or down the shore depending on the tide and currents. If one was out on a boat however, chances are it may end up in one of the greatest trash heaps in the oceans today. Quite a few people may not know about them, but just because they’re out in the middle of seemingly nowhere; doesn’t mean they aren’t causing a ruckus with the environment. They represent a danger to marine life, especially seabirds. About every large ocean has one and they aren’t getting any smaller.

            In the rough area between California and Hawaii, there is a natural phenomenon called the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre. The NPSG is the work of ocean currents combining with high pressure air currents form a clock-wise, slowly moving vortex of a sort. The area is considered an oceanic desert as it houses very few large animals, but like all oceans it does have plankton masses. Due to its lack of large fishes, sport and commercial fisherman don’t go near it and cruise ships take the long way around. It is in this area that the trash that is dumped or thrown into the ocean accumulates and floats around in there trapped by the gyre. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is actually two different patches. The East Patch was already mentioned as it is between California and Hawaii. The west patch sits in the gyre between Hawaii and Japan.  Put together, they form a floating mass of trash that is estimated to be twice the size of Texas and continually grows every year. The trash comes mainly from cruise ships, oil drilling platforms, and land based places. Much of the trash is plastic based, so it’ll never degrade and much of that plastic is still in its polymer form. Polymer is plastic before it is melted down and turned into manufactured goods.

            The impact the ecosystem feels from this huge mass is felt at every level from the plankton to the very top at humans. The patch sits primarily sub-surface thus it blocks vital sunlight that all plankton need to feed and reproduce. Sea birds and mammals, such as seals, mistake the plastic debris for food and subsequently die from it. An estimated one million sea birds and one hundred thousand marine mammals die from eating plastic from the patches. Jellyfish have even been affected by the debris in the patches.

            Unfortunately, since much of the Pacific Ocean is considered international waters. For this reason, countries are unwilling to take blame for the GPGP.

Rough Draft – Essay 3 – Earth Care Club

How can someone look at the beauty all around in the world and not appreciate it?  If you loved something, would it not be worth sacrificing for?  The answer is Yes!  Of course things that are beautiful tend to be delicate, but it is precious how delicate a thing can be and still exist in adversity.  The beauty of nature is one of these things, if you are blessed to live near it, I urge you to help protect it.  That is why I propose that the students at UAF should join Earth Care Club, to start in the backyard so to speak, because litter is sin against nature.  Although the campus is beautiful, the students of UAF should come together and clean litter on and around the campus once per weekend because it will improve the environment, make the beauty more pristine, and protect the wildlife.

 

In America especially, the beauty that the public has access to is unparalleled.  To let it go to ruin is something that cannot be allowed to happen, and if it does, then we have no one to blame but ourselves.  Help prevent the sins of humanity to destroy something that is far greater than any person, or all peoples of the planet.  Join the Earth Care Club and assist in making the campus more beautiful and improve your quality of living.  The club will meet once a week, generally on Saturday, and clean for two hours.  Saturday morning the cleaning will commence at around eleven, and proceed until one.  If there isn’t any trash on the campus, the cleaning will proceed into the surrounding area.  I know that many may think that the chances of our going into the surrounding area are slim, given that litter cleanup is a constant battle, but we will.  Once every month we will go out into the community to clean the litter up, if the campus is very clean, maybe we can go more often.  The purpose of this is so that the community can see that the University students take pride in the environment.  With hope, we can inspire others to clean the environment up or stop littering.

 

A clean campus is attractive to the eye and allows the mind to feel relaxed.  When the campus is cleaned, it will allow the students to travel in a friendly atmosphere and to enjoy nature for what it is.  It would be hard to enjoy the beauty of the roses with candy wrappers and cigarettes littered about the flowers.  To this end I propose that the club also collect cigarettes and discourage people from littering the butts.  Cigarette butts are full of pollutants and do not decay readily, and they look especially bad littering the ground.  Try to encourage others to place the put out butts in the trashcans that are on campus.  The gear that we will petition the chairman to provide is poking sticks, reflective vests, trash bags, and leather gloves.  The world will someday thank you for your sacrifice, but until then, you will have my thanks.  If any of you have any friends that want to come along, please invite them.  We will not be printing flyers for our club, it will have to be word of mouth or maybe a website that we make, as flyers generate pollution.  Please keep in mind that the service that we are providing will count as community service and that you can list the hours as time spent helping the community.  On a side note, if it is raining on Saturday morning, we will meet inside the Wood Center, by the front entrance.  On days of rain we will clean as we see fit, but most likely our club meetings will last longer than the usual five minutes.

 

The standard location of the club meetings will be out front of the Wood Center.  We will meet, talk for about five minutes about any things of importance, and then get cleaning.  Specifically, this is not a social club, although pairs are encouraged to work together so you can get sunshine and company.  Club meetings should be a as brief as possible, as any time spent talking is less time spent cleaning.  Notable objects that are preferred for removal is anything non-biodegradable.  Trash that is plain paper or food remains are not worth the time to remove, these decay rapidly.  Anything that is plastic is the priority, along with anything glass or metal.  The metal and glass can likely be recycled, but the plastic will likely have to be discarded.  Earth Care Club wants to get the plastic as it causes serious damage to the wildlife and eventually washes to the ocean and there it harms aquatic life.

 

All right.  Lets get cleaning!

 

Book Review Draft: Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food

Book Review:  Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food

Two thirds of Americans are overweight, defined by a body-mass-index BMI over 25 (Pollan, p.89).  Body-mass-index is determined by multiplying a person’s weight in pounds by 703 and dividing by their height in inches squared (www.whathealth.com).  One quarter of all Americans has Metabolic syndrome defined by the American Heart Association to be a combination of multiple disorders including high blood pressure, abdominal obesity, high blood triglycerides and insulin resistance (www.americanheart.org).  According to Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food, although America has put its trust in private and federal organizations to tell us what to eat, we are fatter and sicker than ever because most of what we eat is not real food, more than what we need, and more meat than is healthy.

 

Pollan’s argues that in America and other “western diets”, we have moved from eating a diet based on food to a diet based on “nutritionsim” and that nutritionism leads to the “western diseases”:  Obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and diet-related cancers.  But, how convincing are these claims, and how does Pollan arrive at his conclusion that the western diet is the root of the diseases and ailments of our American society.  Pollan begins his story with the transition from foods to nutrients, initiated by English and German chemists William Prout and Justus von Liebig who’s separate research proposed that life and metabolism are governed by chemical nutrients (Pollan, p.20).  It seems that this is the first blunder leading to the downfall of food and culture towards food-like products that do little to sustain us.  Pollan’s reasoning is logical and sound, leading to the 1977 recall of dietary guidelines originally issued by the Senate select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs against eating large amounts of red meat and dairy products.  After receiving heated criticism from the very industries that would be hurt by the Committee’s statement, the rewrite was careful to mention the nutrients “saturated fat” and “cholesterol” to be the offenders and not the foods “red meat” and “dairy products” (Pollan, p.23-24).  Pollan thus shows that the link between nutrients and health is the one made in the minds of Americans rather than the more obvious one of food and health.  This misinformed link is what Pollan continues to call “nutritionism”, that “the key to understanding food is indeed the nutrient” (Pollan, p. 28).  The road that Pollan paves from the idea of food to nutrients is convincing with his use of historic examples and well meaning research.

The next jump from nutrients to the western diet was more difficult to follow through In Defense of Food but still existent.    Rather than laying out a historic road map for us to follow, Pollan simply refers to the existence of the multitude of products that now line store shelves but do not rot or decay like traditional forms of food.  Once America thought that the food as a whole was less important than its microscopic nutrients the race was on to synthesize as many “healthy” food products as possible, gleaning specific vitamins from one source and injecting it into another.  The only tangible definitions of the western diet lie in scattered sentences throughout the book but invariably point to “a tiny handful of staple crops, notably wheat, corn, and soy… lots of processed foods and meat, lots of added fat and sugar, lots of everything-except vegetables, fruits, and whole grains.”  (Pollan, p. 10).  The most interesting tangent of the western diet idea is one made by the English agronomist Sir Albert Howard who wrote that we must regard, “the whole problem of health in soil, plant, animal and man as one great subject.”  (Pollan, p. 99).  I particularly enjoyed this segment of the book because it briefly expanded the discussion far beyond the foods that we eat to the practically the entire world.  Weston Price, a Canadian born dentist turned world diet investigator was also cited along the same thread, “the common denominator of good health, he (Price) concluded, was to eat a traditional diet consisting of fresh foods from animals and plants grown on soils that were themselves rich in nutrients.”  (Pollan, p.98).  This particular segment seems all the more interesting in light of the March 2011 National Geographic article Enter the Anthropocene: Age of Man, which describes a few of the many ways that humans are altering the planet to an extent that it will be evident geologically.  Such impact must have a discouraging affect upon soil quality, which eventually affects our own health as individuals.

Finally, after showing the reader how the well-intended reduction of food to nutrients lead to the western diet, Pollan then explains that the end results are the western diseases.  The actual process by which this occurs is indeed a mystery, to the reader, to Pollan, and to every governmental or private organization that has ever endeavored to discern the root of America’s health woes.  It would be excellent to learn of the mechanisms that create the various western diseases but unfortunately this is not present within In Defense of Food.  Instead of presenting a straight forward cause-effect with a linear transition from one idea to the next, with this final and perhaps most important idea, the reader is left wanting.  But to Pollan’s credit, there is no concrete scientific evidence that links a particular nutrient or lack of to the list of western diseases, but he did present a few very compelling examples towards simple and hearty diets.  The nutrition researcher, Kerin O’Dea is cited for her seven week experiment with Australian Aboriginal natives.  O’Dea enlisted ten over-weight and diabetic Aborigines to live in the Australian bush and eat only the wild foods that they hunted or gathered themselves.  After the seven weeks, O’Dea took blood samples and discovered that every member of the experiment had “greatly improved or completely normalized” metabolism.  Before the seven week study all members had been eating a western diet of refined flour, sugar, alcohol, powdered milk and various fruits and vegetables (Pollan, p.85-87).  After, successfully concluding that the current western diet is not the one best suited for healthy living, Pollan finishes his book with a few simple, qualitative eating rules which are still somewhat foggy but quite helpful.  Rules such as “don’t eat anything your grandmother wouldn’t recognize as food”, “regard non-traditional foods with skepticism”, or “be the kind of person who takes supplements (but doesn’t necessarily take supplements)”.  In short, Micheal Pollan does defend food well.