Who Owns The Arctic?

"Who owns the Arctic Ocean and any resources that might be found beneath those waters?" The United States Geologic Survey estimates that 25 percent of the Earth's oil and natural gas remains under the arctic floor. With that knowledge a significant economic issue arises. How is it determined what countries claim the rights to those resources?

As the issue of global warming arises and the Earth heats up the resources under the arctic become more accessible. Global warming is opening up the hidden resources that remain deep under the arctic floor and opening up new fishing as well.

It was claimed in the "freedom of the seas doctrine" that the remaining of the sea was "common property", so anyone could use it. The doctrine was proposed in the 17th century and is now outdated and is not generally accepted by most countries.

As the demand for fossil fuels run high and supply is low and costly countries are searching for alternative and new ways to access fossil fuels. When countries are desperate for alternative resources and are searching for other locations to mine natural resources, the Arctic will definitely be an area of interest.

In 1982 the United Nations created a treaty known as the "Law of the Seas". Under the “Law of the Seas”, “each country receives exclusive economic rights to any natural resource that is present on or beneath the sea floor out to a distance of 230 miles beyond their natural shorelines”. Under this treaty the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway and Denmark are legally allowed to obtain any resources in the Arctic. But the United States did not agree to this Treaty, which poses a bigger issue. Once the United States agrees to this treaty, they (along with the other select countries) gain the right to obtain resources that will significantly help the demand for natural resources.

Melting Mountains

“Disaster is not destiny if information, innovation and early warning systems are shared and expanded.” This quote from New York Times article Melting Mountains is referring to the melting of the Himalayan-Hindu Kush mountain glaciers as a result of sea levels rising. If the melting of the large ice sheets in Arctic and Antarctic increases, sea level will rise, and therefore would cause the glaciers in the Himalayas to melt. This is a huge problem for the people living in the Himalayan communities and poses a great threat. The most severe effects will occur downstream and could possibly cause glacial lake outburst floods. These floods occur when lakes are formed behind glacial debris, leading them to burst. Not only is the melting of ice sheets a problem for those living in the Himalayas, but also rainfall is highly detrimental. The Himalayan communities are monitoring the issue and have already begun to make some changes in order to adapt for the current and future circumstances. Some changes they have begun to make include building their homes on stilts to avoid flooding, and store crop seeds against potential disasters.

Plausibility of the movie Jurassic Park

As far-fetched as it sounds to recreate dinosaurs from ancient DNA, the premise of the film "Jurassic Park" slithers along the edge of scientific plausibility, biologists say. In fact, some admit that the book and movie give them ethical shivers about doing real-world genetic research that might someday make it possible to copy living or dead animals, or even human beings. With all of the different advances we have had over recent years, it only seems correct to assume that in the near future, cloning of humans and newer species will be possible. In the movie, the scientists used a combination of cloning and recombinant DNA. As the scientist in the movie stated, we get so involved in the 'could' of DNA research, but we must continue asking ourselves if we 'should'. This may seem like a serious moral dilemma for some people, but not for me. Of course I would genetically alter DNA to create dinosaurs. Wouldn't everybody? Our lives would be significantly easier with access to dinosaurs. Late for class? Just hop on your Pterodactyl, and you'll be there on time. Hit rush hour traffic, no worries, you took your T-Rex today and when you take "Reptar" out for a spin, everyone yields for you. Dinosaurs were alive when Fred and Wilma Flintstone were living, and their life was just dandy. My point is, dinosaurs would benefit society, maybe.

The only way we'd ever be able to recreate dinosaurs is if we find traces of DNA from living tissue or preserved blood, so we could reconstruct the DNA sequence. So it is semi-possible. The hardest part would be finding enough prehistoric dinosaur blood that is perfectly preserved, so it could be inspected, spliced and altered. You would need hundreds of nuclei to recreate the DNA sequence. Scientists would also need to know the complete dinosaur genome to determine what has been damaged. Actually, Jurassic Park is pure science fiction, a very well written science fiction novel / film.

Obama to attend Copenhagen Conference in December

President Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen next month to participate in a long-anticipated, high-stakes Climate Change summit, a White House official said. These Climate change talks are supposed to revise the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 that expire in 2012. New emission standards and more sustainable practices are needed to prevent a future change in the global climate. Unchecked, climate change could lead to a 4 degree average rise in global temperature which poses huge consequences for foreign policy. It could mean 4 billion people would regularly suffer from severe water shortages in 2080. It could stimulate mass migration of a further 150 to 200 million people. It could accentuate areas of pre-existing conflict like in the Middle East where currently 5% of the world’s population is drawing on only 1% of the world’s water. Global Climate change is a real problem that the leaders of the main industrialized countries need to seriously address. The significance of Obama attending the conference is that in 1997, there was no representative of the United States present. The fact that Obama is even attending these discussions, is a sign that America is acknowledging climate change as an issue. The focus of the Climate change discussions must be on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and beyond. Agreement must also be reached on how the international community can support those nations that are already suffering the consequences of climate change. Preventing climate change will be no inexpensive operation. Carol Browner, Obama's assistant for energy and Climate Change cited a $173-per-year estimated cost in a briefing Wednesday — a figure for a family of four calculated by the Congressional Budget Office. Republicans say costs would be higher. The EU(European Union)’s 27 national leaders endorsed estimates by the European Commission that rich nations will have to offer developing countries around €100 billion per year by 2020. Western governments would pay between €22 billion and €50 billion towards that sum. This is a tremendous topic in the world of Earth Science and the environment, and I will update more prior to, and during the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

Polar bears and sea ice

Courtesy of Reanne Oberhelman:

Macroevolution.net is a scientific website made up of articles about human evolution, biology, marine biology, animals, and other topics in earth science. The word macroevolution is described as ‘the process producing new forms of life treated as distinct species’, which is what this site is dedicated to. A recent article on macroevolution.net titled, “Polar Bears Eating Goose Eggs” discusses Arctic polar bears and how they must adjust to the warming climate in order to survive.

Each spring, the Arctic thaws earlier and earlier than the year before providing polar bears with a different type of food in the Hudson Bay, goose eggs. Eating the goose eggs whole, or breaking the shells and then eating them, provides the polar bears with an alternative source of highly nutritious food as they come into contact with these goose nests.

Polar bears, or Ursus maritimus, are on the United States’ Endangered Species List as “a threatened species” because their population is declining, an issue that will increase as the climate gets warmer. Polar bears in the Arctic are known for hunting seals on the sea ice, but as this sea ice melts sooner each year, the polar bears are forced back onto land to live off their internal stored fat reserves. As they retreat to the tundra they come into contact with the nesting grounds of the snow geese. Fortunately, the population of snow geese in the Arctic is too high in the summer to be supported by the area, so the fact that polar bears are using them as an alternative source of food is a good thing, for the present time.

The rate of change of ice breakup has been calculated as .72 days earlier each year and present trends indicate that the arrival of polar bears will overlap the mean hatching period in 3.6 years. At this point, a polar bear must eat the eggs of 43 nests to make up for the average seal hunting day. A projection of ten years indicates that a bear would only need to consume the eggs of 34 nests because of timing changes. At this time, the embryos of the goose eggs are younger, and therefore more nutritious.

Because polar bears depend on the sea AND the ice to get their sources of food, will they become extinct as these climate changes continue; or will the polar bears be able to adapt like they have so far?

Phoenix Islands

Courtesy of John Heidenstrom:
The Phoenix Islands are over one thousand miles south west of Hawaii and still largely unpopulated by humans. Other than a small settlement of around fifty people, no other human inhabitants exist on the Phoenix Islands. That’s group of people that are there are only their to monitor the islands as instructed by the Kiribati government. The Phoenix Islands are important because they are one of the last oceanic coral archipelago ecosystems, or coral reefs that exist naturally and unharmed. Although the Phoenix Islands are extremely remote even by comparison to Hawaii they were first visited by humans over two hundred years ago. Any visit by humans is shore to result in some type of destruction to the habitat or nature in general. The Phoenix Islands are no different; the large sperm whale population of the area promoted heavy whaling activities for a number of years. The whale population as almost completely knocked out as a result. Fallowing the whaling the United States and Brittan also took advantage of the large amount of guano in the island chain and harvested it to a great extent. The guano or animal droppings were useful due to the large amount of phosphate found in it. The islands were also used as a fueling stop for sea planes flying to New Zealand. All of this activity did leave its mark on the area. Some divers have found traces of metal ship parts attached to the coral reefs and in other areas around the islands. The government of Kiribati is now in control of the Phoenix Islands since 1979 when they declared their independence. Today the Phoenix Islands are the world’s largest protected marine area. That accomplishment is largely due to the help of the New England Aquarium and their conservation efforts. The fact that even such a remote area as the Phoenix Islands can be impacted by the great extent of the human race obviously alarmed the New England Aquarium research team and the Kiribati government, and it should. The fact that an area that remote can even fall victim to the destructions of the human race does not say much for the future of the habitats right near our home. People need to be carful when they develop areas that they don’t completely destroy all the nature around it. With all of the organization and governments protecting it, hopefully the Phoenix Islands will remain a shining example of what the world used to look like.

Melting Snow Caps

Global warming is an often debated topic especially by environmentalists and politicians. Arguments occur over whether global warming is actually occurring, as well arguments surround the ideas of what the reasons are, and what the outcomes will be. The only way to support such an argument for either global warming occurring or not occurring is through scientific evidence. The concept of global warming is strongly evident by the melting of glaciers. Specifically, it has been found that the mountaintop glaciers atop the peak of mount Kilimanjaro have been melting. The white peaks of the African mountain are both receding as well as thinning. Researchers found that, of these mountaintop glaciers, the northern ice field thinned roughly 1.9 meters, and that the southern ice field had melted roughly 5.1 meters during the seven years from 2000 to 2007. The quickly shrinking ice fields atop Kilimanjaro are very concerning signs to many scientists that the temperatures near Earth surface are increasing. This increase in temperature in the mid to upper tropical troposphere is clear evidence that global warming is in fact occurring. Even more frightening is the evidence of global warming that Kilimanjaro is not the only mountain that is rapidly losing it’s snow covered peaks. Three other examples of mountains that have vanishing snow caps are Mount Kenya and the Rwenzori mountains, in Africa, as well as the Himalayas, in South America. These mountains in the tropics and sub-tropics serve as clear evidence of melting mountaintop glaciers. Data collected by scientists has reveled that roughly 85 percent of the ice, that existed atop Mount Kilimanjaro in 1912, had melted by 2007. In addition, research found that in just seven years a quarter of the ice that had been been there in 2000 was gone by 2007. The research discovered about Mount Kilimanjaro suggests that global warming is having its effects, especially on snow covered mountains, and proposes the question of how much longer these mountains will retain their infamous white peaks. The information previously discussed comes from an article called “snow cap disappearing from Mount Kilimanjaro”, written by Randolph E Schmid.

Water Found on the Moon

Have you ever thought water on the moon was possible? That a place that has shown no form of earth like features could possibly, actually have some. It is an exciting new discovery that researchers from NASA's Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite say that there has been water found on the moon! Not only did they find water but they found at least 26 gallons of it. A satellite known as Lcross crashed into a crater on the moon which dug a huge hole into it. Researchers and scientists have been trying to find water on the moon for decades and so they staged a plan to find some. The plan was to crash a rocket into the moon and hit a crater that is 60 miles wide and 2 miles long (the actual hole that was dug was 60 to 100 feet wide) and then use a smaller machine to measure what was kicked up in the process. The satellite that found the 26 gallons of water was traveling at 5,600 miles per hour! However when scientists and science crazy folks watched to see the impact in October they sadly saw nothing. Even though debris wasn't seen or picked up by photographs they did see through analysis some slim shifts in color which shows signs of water on the moon. Water molecules were shown on the analysis which absorbed certain wavelengths of light. Besides water molecules showing up on the data there were also signs of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and methane molecules. Below the crater that was hit it is a minus 365 degrees which means anything that is in that crater at the bottom, will stay there. Scientist didn't always believe that the moon had water on it, before that they thought it was a dry area. However evidence showed that there was ice in the craters which led to the finding that, maybe there is water on the moon. Now after an extraordinary experiment we have finally discovered that water does exist on the moon. Who would have thought that we would be alive for this great discovery? Who knows what can happen now on the moon. [Science is] not belief, but the will to find out.-Anonymous

The Threat of Landslides

To many of us, Landslides are foreign concepts which we see on television as a result of a natural event or disaster. But researchers with the United States Geological Survey have begun attempts to understand the threat and cause of landslides which they feel is often overlooked. Dennis Staley, a USGS researcher has begun a program in Santa Barbara, California to evaluate the causes and effects of landslides, also known as mudslides or debris flows. What many people do not know, including me until now, is that landslides do not necessary have any correlation with major natural events like storms or earthquakes. Rather, they are their own individual natural disturbance with their own set of causes. Like USGS researchers, I believe that it is crucial to various areas of our nation that we understand what environments may be affected by the occurrence of these landslides which have killed many and wiped out home, and even entire towns. The phenomenon of landslides it not their power, but rather the fact that they occur due to unrecognized conditions of soil composition and precipitation, and that they occur rather unexpectedly. When soil becomes saturated, the water can only runoff the land. The pressure and weight of this water causes a mudslide. This issue has been especially important in California during the recent months because of the extensive wildfires that have occurred. Most people do not consider the effects of wildfires on the cause of something like a landslide but the effect is in fact very great. The accumulation of ash in and on top of the soil make the soil something like a blacktop parking lot, preventing absorption of water. This lack of absorption causes the mudslide unexpectedly. After a period of wildfires, the area is usually desperate for rain, but this can actually be detrimental because of the overlooked risk of landslide. The research that has been done by Dennis Staley and his colleagues has provided a great deal of unknown information and understanding to geologists. It is important for all people to understand that it is very difficult for these landslides to be prevented, even with this research and information. However, the information is very beneficial because geologists believe that they will be better able to predict when an area may be at high risk for a landslide based on the condition of the soil and the land, and therefore take preventative measures against extreme destruction. I think that this is a tremendous advancement. Many people will benefit from this information, especially when you consider that last year, there were 540 landslides world wide which occurred solely due to rain, and these landslides were responsible for 2100 deaths. Just imagine the lives and homes that might be saved as a result of this extensive research. Like always with science, the possibilities are endless.

Local Wineries using Green Technology

A few local wineries have been using techniques to become, as they say, "Carbon Neutral". They strive to prove to their customers that their wine is not contributing to the destruction of the planet.

"It's going to be increasingly important for consumers to know that the wines they choose are participating in the green revolution that our planet is going to have to go through to survive," said Robert Nicholson, principal of Healdsburg wine consulting firm International Wine Associates.

Paul Dolan's Parducci Winery in Ukiah, CA declared itself the nation's first carbon neutral winery in early 2007. But over the next two and half years, while many wineries rolled out various green initiatives, none of the more than 6,000 U.S. wineries followed suit. With the new interest in preserving the environment, many large businesses such as Walmart and Sams Club have been inquiring with their suppliers about the environmental impact of their products and what they are doing to become more sustainable. But corporations like these wineries, have nothing to worry about. They use various technologies at their winery. After accounting for the solar panels, which eliminate the need for an estimated 350 tons of greenhouse gases, and the vineyards, whose growth sucks an estimated 1,063 tons of carbon from the atmosphere, the winery sought to offset nearly 2,000 tons of emissions that remained by paying money to programs that have a beneficial impact on the atmosphere.

Coral reefs offer more than just fascination for snorkelers and scubadivers, they also play into the economy. With seafood, tourism, and protection from storms, the reefs have a value of $375 billion. The reefs are currently in danger because of human practices. One factor that affects the sustainability of the coral reefs is pollution. We do not always realize it but we may be contributing to the pollution of oceans. Even if we do not live close to the ocean, things like streams and lakes carry pollutants toward the sea. Another way in which we affect coral reefs is through warming. The overuse of energy in businesses and in our homes has helped to change natural temperatures of the earth, forcing all other life to adapt. The last major cause of deteriorating coral reefs is a result of fishing practices. Because of advances in technology, fishermen are able to capture more sea life efficiently. Although this is good for their businesses, it disrupts the ecosystem. With all of these forces combined, coral reefs are at great risk. If we do not act soon to preserve the reefs their beauty and economic advantages will be lost.

New Ocean in Africa

Earth Science is a topic that is discussed a lot in the news since it is important for us to understand what is happening on our planet. One recent finding of earth scientists relates to what we have learned in class about seafloor spreading and tectonic plates. Researchers believe that the 35 mile rift in the Ethiopian desert will likely become a new ocean. This rift, twenty feet wide in spots opened in 2005. The process that is creating this rift is the exact same process that occurs on the ocean floor. The main cause of this 35 mile rift is volcanic activity. In class we learned how volcanic activity and tectonic plates are related. In this particular case, a volcano on the northern end of the rift, Dabbahu, erupted causing magma to be pushed up through the middle of the rift area and separating the land in both directions. This development shows that highly active volcanic boundaries along the edges of tectonic ocean plates could suddenly break apart in large sections rather than small bits as previously believed. Researchers have determined that the events occurring in Ethiopia are similar to the events that occur on the bottom of the ocean floor. Since the two processes are analogous then the rift in Ethiopia could serve as an ocean rift lab. We learned about seafloor spreading or rifting in class. Sea floor spreading is a process in which new sea floor is created by magma intrusions into the sea floor. This process occurs along divergent plate boundaries. The African and Arabian plates meet in the remote Afar desert of Northern Ethiopia at a divergent plate boundary. At this boundary, the plates have been moving apart at a speed of less than one inch per year for the past 30 million years. This rifting is responsible for the formation of the Red Sea. Researchers believe that the Red Sea will eventually flow into the newly created rift in about one million years. This would create a new ocean that would connect the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. This rift is something that scientists will continue to monitor and try to predict what will happen in the future.

Global Climate Change Strikes Again!!

The newest global assessment on biodiversity has ruled that an additional 11 species are fully extinct or extinct outside of captivity. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) updated its Red List of Threatened Species, considered the authority on the status of the world's species, to an all-time high of 17,291 species threatened with extinction. The assessments results show that 37% of freshwater fish, 35% of invertebrates, 30% of amphibians and 28% of reptiles are threatened. This is horrible for biodiversity, because it displays the horrible effects of Global Climate Change. As climate change, invasive species, and habitat destruction place greater pressure on wildlife, more species are disappearing at rates faster than conservationists can react to ensure the species' survival. This means that countless more species will meet their demise unless we work harder to combat climate change.

Gas Company Won't Drill New York Watershed

One of the nations largest gas companies, Chesapeake Energy, has opted against drilling for natural gases in upstane New York's watershed. Chesapeake Energy is the largest leaseholder in the Matcellus shale. This is a subterranean layer of shale that runs from New York to Tennessee. It is believed there is natural gas in the shale.
The problem is getting the gas from te shale. Getting the gas out includes a method called hydraulic fracturing. This method puts chemicals in the water and then the water is blasted down thr gas well. This will make the gas flow more easily. The problem is the water would be laced with chemicals and that water is drinking water for half the states population. This includes over eight million people in New York City and another million in Westchester, Putnam, Dutchess(where i live) counties. The problem with this is the water doesnt get filtered from the watershed. So nine million people would be drinking this water.
Even though this would put many people in danger, this wouldn't be illegal for Chesapeake to do. Because of the economic possibilities legislation in New York doesn't band drilling in the watershed. Enviromental groups are mostly to thank for the company not drilling. They put a lot of pressure on Chesapeake and Chesapeake didn't feel it would be worth the "headache." Enviromental groups are hoping this decision by Chesapeake will spark New York legislation to adapt stricter policies on drilling.
I think this is a great thing that Chespeake isn't drilling in the watershed. Despite owning the land and being legally able to, Chesapeake listened to the cocern of several worried groups and opted against the drilling. It shows there is still some integrity left in oil companies. Also had the company gone ahead and drilled the watershed I would have been directly affected by this. Since I'm from dutchess county, my family and I would have been drinking this water.

“Polar Bear Habitat Proposed for Alaska”

On October 22, 2009 the Interior Department proposed to give the polar bears more than 200,000 miles of ice, land and sea on the northern coast of Alaska. This is because of the shrinking population and habitat for the polar bears. This area will encompass two different species of polar bears, the Chukchi Sea and Southern Beaufort Sea. Within these two groups are only about 3,500 polar bears. Officials say that the polar bears’ shrinking habitat is due to global warming. According to the article, “In May of 2008 the Interior Department declared, under the terms of the Endangered Species Act, that the polar bear was threatened with extinction.” However, the Bush administration along with Thomas Strickland does not think that it should be classified under the Endangered Species Act since it is addressing global warming. The Obama administration thinks otherwise. I understand the thinking of the Bush administration by saying that it should not be classified under that act because it is dealing with global warming, however, the issue of the decreasing population of polar bears needs to be addressed under the Endangered Species Act. We have to protect these creatures’ habitats so that they can survive for many years to come. The proposed protected area for the polar bears is not protected from the oil companies at the moment. That same week of the proposal, Shell Oil Company was given permission to drill in the polar bears’ habitat. This activity is not only harmful to their environment but could also possible be as dangerous as climate change because they are going into their home directly and taking over and as a result this forces the polar bears to go somewhere else. Now government agencies and commercial interests are required to show that their activity, including drilling for oil, will not harm or destroy the polar bears’ habitat in any way. That is a step forward in helping the polar bears. Other things must and can be done to save the polar bears. This may mean that more “green” products will have to be created. Having electric powered cars and automobiles will reduce the pollution rate substantially which will decrease climate change. Another way to help decrease climate change is if people would recycle more and use more environmentally friend products. The bottom line is that the polar bears are decreasing in population along with their habitat and something has to be done to stop this from continuing.