Tag Archives: term

Is Sustainable Fishing Really Possible Right Now?

Conventionally, the term “sustainable fishing” implies a harvesting model by which fish are captured at a sustainable rate ? i.e. one where?the fish population does not notably decline over time due to?overfishing.

Unfortunately, wild fisheries are believed to have peaked and begun their decline ? some would argue an irreversible one. So where does that leave us? Is sustainable fishing really a possibility in 2018? Let’s take a look.

What makes a fishery?”sustainable”?

The goal of a sustainable fishery is to guarantee long term constant yield ? a.k.a. fishing at a level that still allows nature to adjust to its “new normal,” without compromising future stock.

Sustainable fisheries study the population dynamics of fishing, employ individual fishing quotas, and work to curtail destructive fishing practices by lobbying for better policies and setting up protected areas ? the goal, of course, being to maintain healthy habitats, as well as healthy gene pools, and to avoid depleting?fish populations in general.

That said, whether this is enough to ensure?sustainable?harvesting is a really?touchy subject. Keep reading to see?what the research has to say!

Isn’t there plenty of fish to go around?

There really isn’t ? at least, not anymore. Overfishing,?while?considered economically foolish, is not typically considered?unsustainable,?provided that rebuilding the population afterwards would?take no more than a single generation. Unfortunately, it seems that we’ve been overfishing for too long.

Overfishing precedes severe stock depletion and fishery collapse.?Today, more than 80 percent of fish species are either fully exploited, overexploited, depleted, or recovering from depletion. If we do not halt overfishing, it’s predicted that the stocks of all species currently commercially fished will collapse by 2048. That’s just around the corner.

What about farmed fish. Aren’t they immune to overfishing?

Unfortunately, no. Farmed fish are fed products from wild fish (also called forage fish, prey fish or bait fish), populations of which?are also threatened. Simultaneously, fish that occupy higher trophic levels ??salmon, for example ? are carnivorous and require high protein diets to sustain growth throughout the entire lifecycle, making them very inefficient sources of food energy.

This dependence of salmon farming, for example, on the availability of high-quality proteins such as fishmeal and?fish oil is already having negative effects on wild fish stocks. There’s only so much food to go around.

Is overfishing an isolated problem?

Nope. First, as with most environmental issues, overfishing has the potential to drastically alter the balance of our global ecosystem. Experts?are concerned that heavy?fishing, and the resulting loss of marine diversity, may result in a serious erosion of resilience to environmental fluctuations and, ultimately, an inability to recover former levels of productivity. At some point, the ecosystem just can’t take it any more.

Second, overfishing is happening in the context of climate change?and global warming. Rising ocean temperatures, ocean pollution, and ocean acidification are radically altering marine ecosystems (75 percent of the world’s key fishing grounds are affected), while rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns, and increased drought are putting inland fisheries at risk. No fishery is immune.

Third, overfishing?is beginning to stir up social unrest. With fish supplies declining?all over the world, fisherman are traveling farther and farther to maintain their livelihoods. Frequently, fishermen are forced?to cross over into competitor territory, creating both social and political conflict.

While the geopolitical impact is being felt most strongly in Southeast Asia, mainly the South China Sea, tensions between Mexico and Florida, as well as?Russia and those fishing?in the Bering Sea are growing. If overfishing continues, you can expect international conflict?to grow with it.

What?can I do about it?

As Captain Paul Watson says, there’s no such thing as sustainable seafood in a dying ocean. “If the oceans die, we die.” If you want to protect marine wildlife and prevent the negative affects of overfishing, lowering?your seafood consumption?is the best thing you can do.

You can also make a difference by becoming more informed on issues of overfishing. Many people are still unaware of the consequences of overfishing. Fortunately, you are not!


Does overfishing worry you? ?What are you going to do about it?

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Read article here: 

Is Sustainable Fishing Really Possible Right Now?

Posted in alo, aquaculture, bigo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is Sustainable Fishing Really Possible Right Now?

Puerto Rico could see ‘significant epidemics,’ health experts warn.

A new report from the International Energy Agency surveys the growth of hydropower, wind, and other forms of renewable energy and finds they’re catching up to coal (still the world’s largest source of electricity). At this rate, renewables are expected to provide 30 percent of power generation by 2022.

Hydropower provides the most renewable energy, but the growth is in solar. One wrinkle, though: It can be misleading to focus on the number of panels installed, because solar only works when, ya know, the sun shines. So keep in mind that, while the graph below shows how much new “capacity” we are adding to the system, only a portion of that gets turned into electricity.

IEA

Denmark is leading the way on clean energy installations (shocking, I know). The Scandinavian country currently generates 44 percent of its electricity from wind and solar, and by 2022 it’s on track to get 77 percent from the same sources. (VRE, used in the graf below, stands for “variable renewable energy” — the term of art for wind and solar plants that we can’t switch on as needed.)

IEA

If renewables keep growing as forecast, we’re going to need bigger electrical grids (to move electricity from places where it’s generated in excess to places where it’s needed) and better ways to store energy.

Link: 

Puerto Rico could see ‘significant epidemics,’ health experts warn.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, InsideClimate News, ONA, Paradise, PUR, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Puerto Rico could see ‘significant epidemics,’ health experts warn.

Scale – Geoffrey West

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

Scale

The Universal Laws of Growth, Innovation, Sustainability, and the Pace of Life in Organisms, Cities, Economies, and Companies

Geoffrey West

Genre: Life Sciences

Price: $15.99

Publish Date: May 16, 2017

Publisher: Penguin Publishing Group

Seller: Penguin Group (USA) Inc.


From one of the most influential scientists of our time, a dazzling exploration of the hidden laws that govern the life cycle of everything from plants and animals to the cities we live in. Visionary physicist Geoffrey West is a pioneer in the field of complexity science, the science of emergent systems and networks. The term “complexity” can be misleading, however, because what makes West’s discoveries so beautiful is that he has found an underlying simplicity that unites the seemingly complex and diverse phenomena of living systems, including our bodies, our cities and our businesses. Fascinated by aging and mortality, West applied the rigor of a physicist to the biological question of why we live as long as we do and no longer. The result was astonishing, and changed science: West found that despite the riotous diversity in mammals, they are all, to a large degree, scaled versions of each other. If you know the size of a mammal, you can use scaling laws to learn everything from how much food it eats per day, what its heart-rate is, how long it will take to mature, its lifespan, and so on. Furthermore, the efficiency of the mammal’s circulatory systems scales up precisely based on weight: if you compare a mouse, a human and an elephant on a logarithmic graph, you find with every doubling of average weight, a species gets 25% more efficient—and lives 25% longer. Fundamentally, he has proven, the issue has to do with the fractal geometry of the networks that supply energy and remove waste from the organism’s body. West’s work has been game-changing for biologists, but then he made the even bolder move of exploring his work’s applicability. Cities, too, are constellations of networks and laws of scalability relate with eerie precision to them. Recently, West has applied his revolutionary work to the business world. This investigation has led to powerful insights into why some companies thrive while others fail. The implications of these discoveries are far-reaching, and are just beginning to be explored. Scale is a thrilling scientific adventure story about the elemental natural laws that bind us together in simple but profound ways. Through the brilliant mind of Geoffrey West, we can envision how cities, companies and biological life alike are dancing to the same simple, powerful tune.

Visit site – 

Scale – Geoffrey West

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, oven, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Scale – Geoffrey West

White House Offers Excuse For Improper Behavior: The FBI Started It

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The White House has an official excuse for asking the FBI to debunk a New York Times story about Trump campaign aides having frequent contacts with Russian intelligence officials. Here it is: They started it. That is, the FBI approached them, not the other way around.

I guess that’s appropriate for the Trump administration, which is best thought of as an overgrown kindergartner. However, First Read isn’t sure this defense does them any favors:

This White House explanation raises the question: So what’s worse — the White House asking the FBI to publicly knock down a story, or the FBI pulling aside a top White House official to comment on the big story of the day? Just ask yourself: If you substituted Clinton’s and Lynch’s names for Priebus’ and McCabe’s, would the congressional hearings already be scheduled?

Yep. And if an FBI official really did pull aside Reince Priebus to whisper in his ear that the Times story was wrong, that still suggests an improper relationship between the FBI and the White House. In any case, First Read goes on to suggest that the Times wasn’t all that wrong anyway. Here is Ken Dilanian:

“NBC News was told by law enforcement and intelligence sources that the NYT story WAS wrong — in its use of the term ‘Russian intelligence officials.’ Our sources say there were contacts with Russians, but that the US hasn’t confirmed they work for spy agencies. We were also told CNN’s description of Trump aides being in ‘constant touch’ with Russians was overstated. However, our sources did tell us that intelligence intercepts picked up contacts among Trump aides and Russians during the campaign.

Of course, the Times may have different sources telling them different things. One way or another, it appears that Trump aides were in periodic contact with Russian officials during the campaign, and the only questions are: (a) were they intelligence officials? and (b) how often did they talk? Considering Trump’s bizarre fixation on Vladimir Putin and his administration’s obvious panic over this story, a good guess is that there really is something there they want to keep under wraps.

And just for a final comical effect, after asking the FBI to leak information to the press, Trump himself then took to Twitter to complain about the FBI being unable to stop leaks:

Do you laugh or cry? We’re going to be asking ourselves that a lot, I think. Only 204 weeks to go.

Link – 

White House Offers Excuse For Improper Behavior: The FBI Started It

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on White House Offers Excuse For Improper Behavior: The FBI Started It

The world needs better sidewalks and bike paths, like now.

According to a study by Australian researchers, adding very small amounts of a particular seaweed to bovine diets could reduce the amount of methane cows release by up to 99 percent.

The seaweed, Asparagopsis taxiformis, produces a compound called bromoform that disrupts the enzymes that make methane in a cow’s gut, the Conversation reports. And methane in cows’ guts is a serious issue because it escapes into the atmosphere in the form of burps (and to a lesser degree, farts). Livestock is a major global contributor to methane emissions, and methane traps 86 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 20-year time frame.

While this reduction in cow methane has only been demonstrated in the lab, if adding seaweed works in the field, it could be a big benefit to this ol’ planet we call home — and further evidence that seaweed in general may be the salty savior we’ve been looking for. Beyond its potential application in reducing cow burps, seaweed is also inexpensive, resilient, easy to grow, and improves aquatic ecosystems by filtering excess nitrogen and phosphorous from the watershed and reducing ocean acidification.

So while we are loathe to attach the term “miracle” to any food, seaweed might actually warrant it.

Read more: 

The world needs better sidewalks and bike paths, like now.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Ringer, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The world needs better sidewalks and bike paths, like now.

Oil companies should be scared of electric vehicles.

According to a study by Australian researchers, adding very small amounts of a particular seaweed to bovine diets could reduce the amount of methane cows release by up to 99 percent.

The seaweed, Asparagopsis taxiformis, produces a compound called bromoform that disrupts the enzymes that make methane in a cow’s gut, the Conversation reports. And methane in cows’ guts is a serious issue because it escapes into the atmosphere in the form of burps (and to a lesser degree, farts). Livestock is a major global contributor to methane emissions, and methane traps 86 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 20-year time frame.

While this reduction in cow methane has only been demonstrated in the lab, if adding seaweed works in the field, it could be a big benefit to this ol’ planet we call home — and further evidence that seaweed in general may be the salty savior we’ve been looking for. Beyond its potential application in reducing cow burps, seaweed is also inexpensive, resilient, easy to grow, and improves aquatic ecosystems by filtering excess nitrogen and phosphorous from the watershed and reducing ocean acidification.

So while we are loathe to attach the term “miracle” to any food, seaweed might actually warrant it.

See original article here:

Oil companies should be scared of electric vehicles.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Ringer, solar, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oil companies should be scared of electric vehicles.

Rubio’s new climate excuse: “I am 100 percent in favor of mitigation, if in fact sea levels are rising.”

According to a study by Australian researchers, adding very small amounts of a particular seaweed to bovine diets could reduce the amount of methane cows release by up to 99 percent.

The seaweed, Asparagopsis taxiformis, produces a compound called bromoform that disrupts the enzymes that make methane in a cow’s gut, the Conversation reports. And methane in cows’ guts is a serious issue because it escapes into the atmosphere in the form of burps (and to a lesser degree, farts). Livestock is a major global contributor to methane emissions, and methane traps 86 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 20-year time frame.

While this reduction in cow methane has only been demonstrated in the lab, if adding seaweed works in the field, it could be a big benefit to this ol’ planet we call home — and further evidence that seaweed in general may be the salty savior we’ve been looking for. Beyond its potential application in reducing cow burps, seaweed is also inexpensive, resilient, easy to grow, and improves aquatic ecosystems by filtering excess nitrogen and phosphorous from the watershed and reducing ocean acidification.

So while we are loathe to attach the term “miracle” to any food, seaweed might actually warrant it.

Excerpt from: 

Rubio’s new climate excuse: “I am 100 percent in favor of mitigation, if in fact sea levels are rising.”

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Ringer, solar, solar panels, solar power, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rubio’s new climate excuse: “I am 100 percent in favor of mitigation, if in fact sea levels are rising.”

Donald Trump’s Love Affair With White Supremacists

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The big Donald Trump news over the holiday weekend was Stargate. This refers not to the TV show, but to the Star of David on top of a pile of money that he retweeted to symbolize how corrupt Hillary Clinton is. At first glance, retweeting this anti-Semitic trope seemed like it was probably due to the fact that Trump’s inner circle is almost exclusively a bunch of white men who just didn’t notice that this might be offensive. In other words, dumb and insular, but not malevolent.

Except for a couple of things. First: Trump deleted the tweet within a few minutes and photoshopped a circle on top of the star. Then he went on offense, claiming that the star was really a sheriff’s star, not a Star of David. This prompted an entire Twitter meme (sample: “I was born a conservative sheriff, but my folks converted to reformed sheriff when I was 12”) but also a serious question: If it was really a sheriff’s star, why delete the tweet?

Second and more important: Trump didn’t create this graphic himself. He retweeted it from the account of an obvious white supremacist who plainly meant this to be a Star of David. Was this just a mistake? Did Trump have no idea who this guy was? Perhaps. And yet, why was he—or someone on his staff—following this account in the first place? And why does this “mistake” seem to happen so often? This is hardly the first time Trump has retweeted something from a white supremacist. Here are Ben Kharakh and Dan Primack a couple of months ago in Fortune:

In late January, Donald Trump did something that would have sunk almost any other presidential campaign: He retweeted an anonymous Nazi sympathizer and white supremacist who goes by the not-so-subtle handle @WhiteGenocideTM. Trump neither explained nor apologized for the retweet and then, three weeks later, he did it again. This subsequent retweet was quickly deleted, but just two days later Trump retweeted a different user named @EustaceFash, whose Twitter header image at the time also included the term “white genocide.”

…It is possible that Trumpâ&#128;&#149;who, according to the campaign, does almost all of his own tweetingâ&#128;&#149;is unfamiliar with the term “white genocide” and doesn’t do even basic vetting of those whose tweets he amplifies to his seven million followers. But the reality is that there are dozens of tweets mentioning @realDonaldTrump each minute, and he has an uncanny ability to surface ones that come from accounts that proudly proclaim their white supremacist leanings.

Kharakh and Primack wanted a more quantitative analysis of this, so they hired a firm to perform a network analysis. They identified the 50 most influential “white genocide” Twitter accounts and then looked at Trump’s tweets. Here’s what they found:

Since the start of his campaign, Donald Trump has retweeted at least 75 users who follow at least three of the top 50 #WhiteGenocide influencers. Moreover, a majority of these retweeted accounts are themselves followed by more than 100 #WhiteGenocide influencers.

But the relationship isn’t limited to retweets. For example, Trump national campaign spokesperson Katrina Pierson (who is black), follows the most influential #WhiteGenocide account, @Genophilia, which is best known for helping to launch a Star Wars boycott after it became known that the new film’s lead character was black. (Below are some recent #WhiteGenocide tweets from @Genophilia.)

Fortune also used Little Bird software to analyze the top 50 influencers of the Trump campaign slogan #MakeAmericaGreatAgain, and found that 43 of them each follow at least 100 members of the #WhiteGenocide network.

This could be just a coincidence. White supremacists love Trump, and Trump just accidentally happens to retweet a lot of their stuff. Unfortunately for Trump, you’d have to be an idiot to believe that, and he’s running out of idiots. Even Republicans weren’t trying to defend him over the weekend. Paul Ryan just sighed: “I really believe he’s gotta clean up the way his new media works,” he said diplomatically.

But Trump runs his new media himself. It’s one of his biggest claims to fame. To clean it up, he needs to clean himself up. And he shows no signs of being willing to do that.

This article:

Donald Trump’s Love Affair With White Supremacists

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Love Affair With White Supremacists

What Do Meat Labels Really Mean?

If you’re a meat eater and want to get the healthiest, tastiest cuts, how do you know what to buy?

Most labels today carry some kind of certification from the USDA (US Department of Agriculture), which basically acknowledges that the meat came from a facility that is supposed to meet the USDA’s standards for health and safety. But you might see other words on the label as well, such as “natural,” “fed vegetarian feed” or “no hormones or added antibiotics.” Some of these terms are significant, but others are essentially worthless.

Here’s a guide to the most common labels you’ll see on packaged meat and what they mean.

Grain-fed: These words indicate that at some point in its life, the animal was fed grain. The animal may have been raised in a factory-farm type operation or on a small family farm. Grain-fed doesn’t tell you that information. It only indicates that the animal ate corn, soy, brewers grain or another grain-based feed.

Grass-fed: Rather than being cooped up in a barn eating grain, grass-fed cows roam outdoors eating nothing but grass from the time they’re weaned until the time they go to market. The term does not guarantee that the animals weren’t treated with antibiotics nor confined. Grass is closer to the actual native diet of cows than grain, but that in and of itself might not be a reason to buy meat labeled this way.

AGA-Certified Grassfed: This label has some teeth to it. It says that the cows verifiably ate only grass, that they were not confined in a feed lot, and that they’ve never been given antibiotics or hormones. Unlike other grassfed meat, that which is AGA-Certified Grassfed is guaranteed to have been born and raised in the U.S.

Grass Finished: According to American Grassfed, this label is completely meaningless. It does not meet any standards set by the USDA and is used primarily for marketing purposes rather than to indicate superior quality.

Natural: In this context, “natural” does not refer to how the animal was raised, but rather how its meat was processed and packaged. According to the USDA, describing meat as “natural” means that it contains no artificial ingredients or added color and was minimally processed (such as ground into beef or trimmed into steaks). The word natural does not refer to the animal’s diet or how it was raised.

Naturally-raised: An animal that is “naturally raised” was not fed animal byproducts (like ground up parts of other animals), nor was it administered growth hormones or antibiotics. Other than that, the animal could have eaten either grain or grass and could have spent its life outdoors roaming or confined in a factory-type feedlot.

Organic: The U.S. Department of Agriculture has established a set of standards that farmers must meet if they are to label their meat organic. Those include that the animal was given no antibiotics or synthetic hormones, ate a pesticide and herbicide-free vegetarian diet, and was was fed or ate no food that was tainted with genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Cows may either be fed organic grain or eat organic grass, and they may be confined rather than allowed to roam free.

Pasture-Raised: This is a term that sounds nice, but like “natural,” means essentially nothing. There’s no federal definition for what pasture-raised means, and not much industry cohesion behind the term either. Any producer can put it on any package at any time.

Certified Humane: This label primarily attests to how animals were treated as they were raised. It says that “Livestock must have access to fresh water and a diet formulated or assessed to maintain full health and promote a positive state of well-being. Feed and water must be distributed in such a way that livestock can eat and drink without undue competition.” It prohibits treatment with hormones and antibioticsother than to selectively treat disease and mandates that feeding and watering troughs be kept clean. This label also requires that calves be able to suckle for 24 hours after they’re born and not be weaned for 6 months after birth.

Of all these labels, the ones that mean the most are Certified Humane, Organic and AGA-Certified Grassfed. Don’t waste your money on “natural” or “pasture-raised” beef.

Related:
Five Myths About Grass-Fed Beef
With These Veggie Burger Ideas, You’ll Never Crave Beef Again

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

More here – 

What Do Meat Labels Really Mean?

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Do Meat Labels Really Mean?

Jeb Bush Gives Away the Game on "Anchor Babies"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Jeb Bush wants us all to chill out about his use of the term “anchor babies”:

What I was talking about was the specific case of fraud being committed. Frankly it’s more related to Asian people coming into our country, having children, and….taking advantage of a noble concept, which is birthright citizenship.

Um….no. Bush initially used the term in a radio interview with Bill Bennett. The conversation was entirely about Donald Trump’s immigration plan, securing our southern border, and dealing with our third-largest trading partner. In other words, it was all about Mexico. Bush was very definitely not talking about Asians.

And if he was, there’s already a perfectly good term to use: birth tourism. It’s well known, well documented, and clearly a growing phenomenon. There’s no need to describe it using a term that many people find offensive, since there’s already one available.

Basically, Bush is tap dancing here. But he’s also doing us a favor. In my tedious discussion of “anchor babies” on Saturday, I concluded that its offensiveness depended on whether it was an actual problem in the first place. Bush is pretty much conceding that it’s not—at least as it refers to illegal immigration from Mexico. But if it’s rare or nonexistent, then you’re imputing offensive behavior to immigrant mothers for something they don’t do. And that does indeed make it offensive.

See the original article here:  

Jeb Bush Gives Away the Game on "Anchor Babies"

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Jeb Bush Gives Away the Game on "Anchor Babies"