GreenfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join
Browse By tag All Tags » ENVIRONMENT » WORLD (RSS)

Related Tags

H2O Means Life In Australia

By Janet Evans
Sunday, Oct 12 2008, 09:21 PM

Farmer John Magill in southeastern Australia inspects a dried up dam on his farm.  Over half of
Australia's farmland is in drought. The drought has  also seen a rise is farmer suicides in rural Australia,
with the suicide rate among farm workers being double that of the regular population.
(Photo by Ian Waldie/Getty Images)10/06



Australian farmers are drowning---in drought. Their land has been drying up year after year, to the point that they actually trade water.  Have you ever heard of that before? Trading water is a national market in Australia.

As always with supply and demand, there is money to be concerned about. So we have farmers, with land, the driest continent on the planet, no water, high prices, high stress…




 
For farmer Malcolm Holm, water now is just like a new shovel or tractor — he has to buy it.The amount of water he is allowed to take from nearby Murrumbidgee River has dwindled to nothing for the past three years because of Australia's crippling drought. And so, except for rain he can catch and store himself, he needs to buy water for his 1,000 acres at Finley in New South Wales state, where he grows crops to feed his 600 dairy cows."It's no different to buying a ton of grain or a ton of fertilizer," Holm said. "It's just another commodity."

[...]



"In essence, what the water trade does is make irrigators really focus on the economic value of their water and using it more efficiently," Holm said. "If you can't produce a good crop for the cost of the water, you're better off selling it to someone who can. If the figures add up, you buy it."Holm is anxious. The price right now is too high for him and he is watching his pastures die while he waits for a turn in the market or a drop of rain.

Read the complete article on MSNBC  HERE


Also, Farmers Suicide Rates Double National Average





 




 

Forget About That Corn....

By Janet Evans
Thursday, Jul 17 2008, 07:02 AM





photo by Future-PhD



 How about some algae?



 







Certain strains of algae can be used and algae biofuel production has already begun.


We just don’t want to use this type of algae..those that may have been produced from chemicals and pollutants….


No Major Problems


China Says It Has Cleared Algea From Olympic Sailing Venue




 

Well Blow Me Down or Water World...Your Choice

By Janet Evans
Tuesday, Jul 8 2008, 06:25 PM


We’ve all heard of the Lost City of Atlantis.

Maybe you’ve seen the movie Waterworld.

With the threat of global warming climate change and the ice caps melting, causing more water, there is a concern of the need of additional places for people to live.  After the typoons in Asia, that is another reason to have alternate living sources.

In comes the “Lilypad.”



Floating cities....


"Based on the design of a lilypad, they could be used as a permanent refuge for those whose homes have been covered in water. Major cities including London, New York and Tokyo are seen as being at huge risk from oceans which could rise by as much as 3ft by the end of this century.

This solution, by the award-winning Belgian architect Vincent Callebaut, is designed to be a new place to live for those whose homelands have been wiped out.

The 'Lilypad City' would float around the world as an independent and fully self-sustainable home. With a lake at its centre to collect and purify rainwater, it would be accessed by three separate marinas and feature artificial mountains to offer the inhabitants a change of scenery from the seascape.

Power for the central accommodation hub is provided through a series of renewable energy sources including solar panels on the mountain sides, wind turbines and a power station to harness the energy of the waves. "

I guess Mr. Callebaut didn't see the movie Waterworld.

I did. 

Even though it was fictional....that doesn't mater. 

Who the heck wants to float around on a "lilypad " for the rest of their lives. 

People were meant to live on land, not on the water. 

I suppose if that happens, we may as well evolve and form gills.

Temporary, yes...permanent...no.

Read the story from the Daily Mail     Ã here




 

No Major Problems

By Janet Evans
Sunday, Jul 6 2008, 09:23 AM


The Beijing Summer Olympic organizers have reported that they don't see there will be any major problems next month even though China has been through rioting, a major earth quake, flooding, now mold, algae and even locusts.

View this stunning slide show of the removal of blue-green algae from Qingdao, China beaches.

Bloomberg Slide show algae removal China

About 10,000 people are scooping algae out of the sea at the eastern city of Qingdao, while officials in Inner Mongolia are preparing to fight off a plague of locusts that may arrive in the capital city during the Olympics.


It's unbelievable what the Chinese people have gone through these past several months because of the wrath of nature.  You have to wonder how much manpower is going into the Olympics at the expense of their people.

Read an article from Bloomberg   í here






 


 

Blame It On One Of Two Things...Either George Bush

By Janet Evans
Monday, May 5 2008, 06:40 AM


OR Global Warming….

This one will go under global warming, according to “some experts.”

What is it this time?


This....














"Two deaths in the waters off California and Mexico last week and a spate of shark-inflicted injuries to surfers off Florida's Atlantic coast have left beachgoers seeking an explanation for a sudden surge in the number of strikes.

In the first four months of this year, there were four fatal shark attacks worldwide, compared with one in the whole of 2007, according to the International Shark Attack File at the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainesville."

Read the article from The Guardian Observer


Surge in fatal shark attacks blamed on global warming  í  here



I guess that's enough to convince me.

How about you?

Nah...it really wasn't.


How about some statistics. 

The easiest place to find those...Wikipedia, :

In 2000, there were 79 shark attacks reported worldwide, 11 of them fatal. In 2005 and 2006 this number dropped to 61 and 62 respectively, while the number of fatalities dropped to only four per year. Of these attacks, the majority occurred in the United States (53 in 2000, 40 in 2005 and 38 in 2006).  For the same period, the Global Shark Attack File records 69 unprovoked attacks of which five were fatal.

2008 attacks

An Austrian tourist died February 24, 2008 after being bitten by a shark while diving near the Bahamas in waters that had been baited with bloody fish parts to attract the predators.

A 16-year-old Australian boy died on April 8, 2008 after being attacked by a shark in the coastal town of Ballina, on the mid-coast. The boy died whilst bodyboarding when he and a friend were taking advantage of a teacher's strike; the teenager's friend is now being considered for a bravery award. The shark responsible was thought to be a bull shark.

A 66-year-old man died on April 25, 2008 off the coast of the Southern California city of Solana Beach. The species of shark was a great white shark.

A 25-year-old man died on April 30, 2008 off the coast of Mexico. The species of shark was a nurse shark.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why Sharks Attack...

From HowStuffWorks:


Ninety percent or more of shark incidents are mistakes. They assume that we're something that we are not.- Gary Adkison, diver ("Sharkbite! Surviving the Great White")

Although shark attacks can seem vicious and brutal, it's important to remember that sharks aren't evil creatures constantly on the lookout for humans to attack. They are animals obeying their instincts, like all other animals. As predators at the top of the ocean food chain, sharks are designed to hunt and eat large amounts of meat. A shark's diet consists of other sea creatures -- mainly fish, sea turtles, whales, sea lions, and seals. Humans are not on the menu. In fact, humans don't provide enough high-fat meat for sharks, which need a lot of energy to power their large, muscular bodies.

If sharks aren't interested in eating humans, why do they attack us? The first clue comes in the pattern that most shark attacks take. In the majority of recorded attacks, the shark bites the victim, hangs on for a few seconds (possibly dragging the victim through the water or under the surface), and then lets go. It is very rare for a shark to make repeated attacks and actually feed on a human victim. The shark is simply mistaking a human for something it usually eats. Once the shark gets a taste, it realizes that this isn't its usual food, and it lets go.

The shark's confusion is easier to understand once we start to look at things from the shark's point of view. Many attack victims are surfers or people riding boogie boards. A shark swimming below sees a roughly oval shape with arms and legs dangling off, paddling along. This bears a close resemblance to a sea lion (the main prey of great white sharks) or a sea turtle (a common food for tiger sharks).


Shark Sensory System

Attacks have also frequently occurred when humans were spear fishing in ocean waters. Sharks are attracted to the signs given off by dying fish -- the smell of blood in the water and the electrical impulses given off as the fish struggles. Sharks detect these signals with their ampullae of Lorenzini, a set of "detectors" under the skin on a shark's snout. The ampullae are electrically sensitive cells that connect to the skin's surface through small tubes. Once a shark arrives on the scene, it may become agitated and aggressive in the presence of so much food. A hungry, excited shark can easily mistake a human for its usual prey.

There are cases in which sharks seem to attack out of aggression, rather than hunger. Very little is known about shark behavior, but it is believed that some species, including great whites, display dominance behavior over other sharks. This behavior can take the form of "punching" with the snout, or bites that don't do much damage to the tough skin of a shark. Unfortunately, when a shark makes a dominance display toward a human, these "gentle" bites can still cause horrendous damage.


Sometimes, the cause of a shark attack is simple to determine -- the shark is responding to human aggression. Nurse sharks, for example, are generally placid fish that lie still along the bottom of the ocean floor. For some reason, this makes some divers think that it's a good idea to pull their tails. Irritated nurse sharks have taught several divers to keep their hands to themselves. For this reason, shark attack statistics are divided between provoked and unprovoked attacks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm going to go with a theory of more people being in the water or changing patterns of other animal behavior in the waters that have drawn sharks to the areas. 

But not global warming. 

I can't remember the last year I've had my heat come on in May....but it did this week.

But if people really want to believe global warming is attracting sharks and causing attacks...

Then, get out of the water!









 

Food, Glorious Food

By Janet Evans
Monday, Apr 21 2008, 07:19 PM


Hearing about the insanity of people overreacting to what they believe are food shortages in the United States; where they somehow believe they need to hoard rice, while people in third world countries are actually rioting due to real shortages, brought to mind the 1973 movie Soylent Green. 

"A tale of Earth in despair in 2022. Natural food like fruits, vegetables, and meat among others are now extinct. Earth is overpopulated and New York City has 40 million starving, poverty stricken people. The only way they survive is with water rations and eating a mysterious food called Soylent. A detective investigates the murder of the president of the Soylent company. The truth he uncovers is more disturbing than the Earth in turmoil when he learns the secret ingredient of Soylent Green."




.



Have you seen the movie?  It’s a classic in my book.  A little hard to watch because it was poorly made.  It’s playing quite often on American Movie Classics channel.  Because it’s an old movie, I’m going to take license to talk all about it and the ‘secret,” so for those who haven't seen it, and want to without it being spoiled, don’t go any further.

The early 70’s was a time for this type of movie, and Charlton Heston, who stars in Soylent Green, also starred in another “the world is ending” movie in 1971, called Omega Man.

Here we have only the very wealthy somehow being able to find black market bits of real, old fashioned food, while the masses live on different colors of Soylent – a dry cracker-type product.



Processed Soylent Green               Wikipedia



And because the city is so over-populated, when you feel you just can’t take it anymore, you are encouraged to “Go Home” by way of a center that cleans you up, puts you on a gurney with crisp sheets, an lets you spend your last minutes before you are euthanized watching a surround sound movie of what times used to be like on Earth.  One last feel-good fling.  But there are many, of course who have never known the way the Earth once was.  They have only heard stories about it.



             Edward G. Robinson (Sol) "Going Home"




Then you are wrapped up in your sheets and carted off to a garbage truck, taken by the load-full to a processing plant and processed into….



€

€

€

€

€

Food, glorious food….Soylent Green.


So, in the 70’s, they were warning us...the beginning of the movie is black and white beginning in pioneer times, and moves all the way through industrialization and modern times…showing how we took the beautiful, clean Earth and destroyed and over-populated it.

While we won’t be making Soylent in the near future…. we are already, and have been for quite some time bioengineering food.  There are many people not happy about that.  And there are many concerns regarding the safety of such foods.






 

Someone in Scotland is "nondy"

By Janet Evans
Tuesday, Mar 4 2008, 05:45 PM


You'll have to look that one up...

Unless you can figure it out from this story.

Scotland is considering reintroducing wolves back into their country.

They say Yellowstone, in the U.S. did it....and it worked out well, attracting tourists and generating $3 million a year.

Scotland hardly needs $3 million a year.

And it has plenty of tourists.

The wolves in Yellowstone are contained.

Oh...

And did anyone think about the fact that Scotland farms sheep?

As in, argyle socks?


Sheep farm - Argyll, Scotland



Like I said, someone in Scotland is nondy....


Read about it on BBC News


Call for Serious Debate on Wolf   í  here






 

Save the Planet .... Abort Your Child....

By Janet Evans
Friday, Nov 23 2007, 09:59 AM

 

Meet the women who won't have babies -
because they're not eco friendly
 


“Had Toni Vernelli gone ahead with her pregnancy ten years ago, she would know at first hand what it is like to cradle her own baby, to have a pair of innocent eyes gazing up at her with unconditional love, to feel a little hand slipping into hers - and a voice calling her Mummy. But the very thought makes her shudder with horror. Because when Toni terminated her pregnancy, she did so in the firm belief she was helping to save the planet.”


Read the full story here from the       Daily Mail    ◄

 

Quotes from another Enviro-nutcase in the article, Sara Irving:

"I realised then that a baby would pollute the planet - and that never having a child was the most environmentally friendly thing I could do."

 What I consider mad are those women who ferry their children short distances in gas-guzzling cars."

_______________________________________________


What is WRONG with these women?  

Aborting your baby to save the planet?  Right .... 

You made a big difference, didn't you, Toni? 

Maybe your baby would have been the next great scientist.  

Fine if you don't want to have any more children in the future. 

It's probably better for the world that YOU are not a parent in the first place. 

I have heard of many reasons to abort a child, but this one really has me "Unglued." 


"When I tell people why I don't want children, they look at me as if I was planning to commit murder. "


You Toni are either fooling yourself, or you are a selfish freak of the environment you want to protect . . . .

A baby is not a disposable item for the environment . . . .

 
Alright ...  so go back up and read the article if you didn't. 

Then, let's get ready for the DEBATE. 

I know there will be one.
 

 WHAT DO YOU THINK??????????? 

 



     

 

Why Can't We Have a Structure Like This in Franklin?

By Janet Evans
Wednesday, Nov 21 2007, 05:45 AM

  
 

Name: Beijing Olympic Stadium
Scheduled inauguration:
2008
Building costs: $500 million 
Capacity:
80,000 seats (100,000 during the Olympic games)


Why?  Because we're not Beijing . . . .

We're Franklin, Wisconsin . . ..

 

We can't have all the structures and buildings that other cities have, 

nor should we . . . .


Maybe we need to stop comparing Franklin to every other city and stop

trying to be a WANNABE ....


and instead just be WHAT WE NEED TO BE!

 In the meantime .... Beijing National Stadium or Bird's Nest Olympic Stadium ....
 is pretty cool, huh?

Maybe we could model a new Franklin High School football stadium after it ....


Nah .... too many taxpayers would be "unglued" ....  (I hope)!


 

The Doomsday Vault

By Janet Evans
Sunday, Nov 18 2007, 07:15 AM


Workers spray concrete on the walls of the Svalbard Global Seed
Vault in Longyearbyen, Norway, during the construction phase in August.


In announcing it would create a global seed bank on the Svalbard Islands,
Norway did not say exactly where but the archipelago includes a few
existing settlements like this one at Alesund




Have you ever wondered what would happen to the world's supply of seeds in case
of a global catastrophe? 


Something such as plant epidemics, natural disasters like flooding, the dreaded climate change, or war?

Are you aware of the  Svalbard Global Seed Vault  in Oslo, Norway? 

It is called the "Doomday Vault."

The vault is blasted into the permafrost of the Arctic, 300 miles from the mainland.  The temperature of the vault will be kept at zero degrees Fahrenheit.  It's like a safe-deposit box.  Each country owns what they deposit in the vault and can take it out at their own will 

The vault is due to open February 26, 2008.

"It's very satisfying to see the vault evolve from a bold concept to an impressive facility that has everything we need to protect crop biodiversity," said Norway's Agriculture Minister Terje Riis-Johansen.

Norway first proposed building what it called a "Noah's Ark" for the world's seeds in June 2005, and started construction a year later, blasting a nearly 400-foot (120-meter) tunnel into a frozen mountain and placing the vault for foil-wrapped seeds deep inside. Each sample holds about 500 seeds."


There already are about 14,000 seed banks in the world run by individual countries.  But some of these have already been wiped out, such as in the Philippines, destroyed by a typhoon, South Asia, destroyed by tsunami, or in Iraq (looters) and Afghanistan (by Taliban), destroyed by war.  The Svalbard vault is intended as a final backup for all other seed banks.  

"The vast collection is intended as a hedge against disaster so that food production can be restarted anywhere on the planet should it be threatened by a regional or global catastrophe."


Click on the icon below for information about the complete history of the Doomsday Vault, including frequently asked questions:


Were you aware we even had "seed banks" around the world? 

Do you think this is a cool idea?

Are you "unglued" when you realize the seed banks of some countries have already been destroyed and it took until 2008 to get a "Doomsday Vault?"  I mean, come on .... 


 
More Posts