Debris from Japan Tsunami is Floating Toward Hawaii -- Laura Frei

Remember the Japanese tsunami back in March? The magnitude 9.0 earthquake, and the devastating tsunami that followed left nearly 21,000 people dead or injured. Although it occurred across the Pacific Ocean, Americans on the West Coast may be seeing the aftermath of the disaster for years to come.
Jan Hafner, a scientific computer programmer and oceanographer Nikolai Maximenko, have been researching ocean currents since 2009. In the midst of the devastating earthquake and tsunami, they used their research to predict the path of the debris through the Pacific Ocean using computer modules. However, they had no first-hand observations of the field site. That changed last month thanks to the Russian ship STS Pallada. The STS Pallada was sailing from Honolulu when it spotted debris from Japan. The debris included refrigerators, appliances, electronics, and a Japanese fishing boat. The debris was all the evidence Hafner and Maximenko needed to prove that their research was heading in the right direction.
So what does this mean for the USA? According to predictions, this debris from the disaster could reach Hawaii by 2013, and could appear on the coast of Washington, Oregon, Alaska and Canada by 2014. Although it is unlikely that the debris contains radioactive material from the Fukushima plant, it is important to remember the repercussions of debris in oceanic waters. Debris is on the same ground as pollution, which can cause injury or death to aquatic life, and can harm beach-goers. It can also cost money for cleanup efforts, as well as contribute to a decline in tourism of beaches.

This article relates to Earth Science because of its discussion of Earthquakes, tsunamis, and oceanic currents. All of these phenomena can be studied in the field of Earth Science, and extensive research can be done about these various topics. Hafner and Maximenko's hypothesis and research demonstrates the scientific method that we discussed in class.
I never considered the idea that the tsunami in Japan could ultimately impact the United States for years to come. When the disaster occurred, most people were thinking of ways to help the victims and survivors. Although the odds of radioactive material washing up on the shores of the United States is unlikely, pollution of beaches and the oceans is still a huge problem. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is doing all that it can to gather information about debris sightings. This is reassuring that the NOAA will work hard to ensure that the situation is handled properly to minimize the damaging effects of pollution in the oceans. It will be interesting to see how this develops in the next few years and to monitor the impact that the debris has on oceanic life and ecosystems.

Sources:
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/10/debris_from_japanese_tsunami_i.html
http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/marinedebris/factsheet_marinedebris_debris.cfm

Climate Change Affecting Body Size of Birds- Mickey Sutton

A study done by San Francisco State scientists has found that birds' wings have grown longer and birds are increasing in mass over the last 27 to 40 years. What exactly is making these birds larger? The researchers think it might have something to do with climate changes on Earth's surfaces. However, this finding seems to contradict modern thought on climate change's effect on body sizes in animals. A well-known ecological rule, called Bergmann's Rule, "states that animals tend to be larger at higher latitudes. One reason for this rule might be that larger animals conserve body heat better, allowing them to thrive in the generally colder climate of higher latitudes." Using this rule, scientists have come to believe that a rise in earth's temperature over the past 100 years would result in the reduction of size over time of animal species. However, Rae Goodman and her colleagues at SF State are thinking that the connection between temperature and body size might not be so direct. Their study showed that within the data collected from over 35,000 birds in two "banding stations" in California, that their size has actually increased in the past 40 years in both wing span and body mass. While they note that an increase in body size may be due to a change in diet and food storage in the birds, after testing and discarding numerous counter explanations, Goodman and her band of researchers are confident that climate change is behind this never before seen growth in the birds. They say that "the birds may be responding to climate-related changes in plant growth or increased climate variability in central California." These findings provide the scientific community a small glimpse at the effects of climate change over a variety of species due to the changes documented over such a short period of time. However, trying to understand her findings in an optimistic manner, Goddman said, "But in some ways, it gave me a little more hope that these birds are able to respond -- hopefully in time -- to changes in climate."
After reading about this study, I was immediately reminded of Jeff Amorello's previous post about global climate affecting species size in a negative way, that is, that they are becoming smaller. Whether or not one believes in the accuracy or validity is irrelevant to the actual study at hand. This article stood out at me for various reasons. Namely, it shows that scientific research can ultimately develop two totally contrasting ideas about why specific occurrences are happening. Throughout the year, we have conversed about the validity an reliability on certain scientific findings. We have asked the questions, "Is the source credible?" or "Are there any motives or biases that might not be seen that a driving these scientists to certain conclusions?"
In the case of this study, done by Goodman and her colleagues, I find it very intriguing that the first study done on climate change's effects on North American birds, yields a conclusion found to be opposite of other studies done in other areas on the globe. Were there perhaps any motives behind the agency to conclude at these results? Or are the effects on species in North America different than those found in studies in Asia and Europe? No matter the varying results, it is clear that scientific findings still provide us with a wide spectrum of debate. Fortunately, scientific thought does not stop after one attempt, and only if the researchers remain diligent in their studies and also their global correspondence, can the truth be found.




Sources: 1. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111031154127.htm

2. Rae E. Goodman, Gretchen Lebuhn, Nathaniel E. Seavy, Thomas Gardali, Jill D. Bluso-Demers. Avian body size changes and climate change: warming or increasing variability? Global Change Biology, 2011

Obama administration announces desert "solar energy zones" - Hillary Fortin

On Thursday, the Obama Administration revealed plans for solar energy development in which “solar energy zones” are set up in California’s Mojave Desert and other areas in the West by the Bureau of Land Management. These large-scale industrial projects will be directed to 285,000 acres of desert in the Western U.S. as well as 20 million acres of the Mojave Desert.
These energy zones are meant to promote development in areas that do not have any cultural or environmental conflicts. They are also to make landscapes that are most sensitive in the desert “less desirable for solar prospecting.” They do this by identifying “sweet spots” that already comply with environmental requirements thus promising “expedited permitting,” says U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. 17 solar energy zones in six Western states have been found to not have any major cultural or environmental conflicts.
Both industrial and environmental groups say there is a lot at stake with the release of this plan. For billions of dollars in subsides, solar developers need to site projects ahead of deadlines. Meanwhile, conservationists claim that the desert is not able to handle such large scale industrial change. There is also concern about the amount of money spent on these projects. According to an analysis by the Interior Department’s inspector general, these projects have consumed nearly 80% of the Recovery Acts funding that was put aside for the bureau’s entire renewable program. Renewable energy is a main concern of Obama’s energy policy, but there are areas of much concern in terms of money spent on the development of solar operations.
I think that desert areas such as Mojave are appropriate places for solar energy projects. I think it is a good way to make use of the land because of the amount of light it receives. Plus the “sweet spots” they identified have already met environmental requirements and many solar energy zones do not have any major cultural or environmental conflicts. I think this is an important aspect and that they should continue to focus on such areas. These areas can assist in Obama’s energy policy which, as stated in the article, “aims to reduce American dependence on foreign oil while developing domestic clean energy that creates jobs.” I can understand how money is a significant concern, but if they could continue to launch more projects in other areas where there are no major conflicts it could help in creating jobs and more renewable solar energy zones.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-solar-desert-20111028,0,7889585.story

NPP Weather and Climate Satellite Launches

At 2:48Pm local time in Vandenberg, California, NASA and NOAA launched NPP, with input from the US Department of Defense. NPP is a $1.5 billion weather and climate satellite that will test new-style Earth observing instruments while providing operational data to meteorologists for general forecasting. It has five instruments on board that will monitor a wide range of land, ocean, and atmospheric phenomena - from temperature and humidity, to the spread of algal blooms in the ocean or the state of the Arctic ice. "NPP's observation will produce long-term datasets which will help scientists make better models, which then lead to better predictions, which hopefully can be used to make better decisions", says Dr. Jim Gleason. NPP stands for National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System Preparatory Project. There is a concern, however, that NPP is being asked to do too much. Its climate role requires it to continue datasets acquired over the past 10 years, but NPP must also bridge the gap between NOAA's existing system of polar-orbiting weather satellites and the agency's future fleet. NASA is concerned about the longevity of the instruments on board. The US has geosynchronous weather satellites that sit 36,000km above the panet, but these cannot deliver some of the high-resolution atmospheric information that meteorologists need to make their forecasts. The loss of NPP before a replacement is flying would therefore be a blow to weather forecasting and climate studies on both sides of the Atlantic. Dr. Louis Uccellini, who directs NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Prediction, said NPP's importance was underscored by events in 2011, which he described as "the year of the billion-dollar weaher disasters", speaking of the ten weather events, in the US, each costing over a billion dollars in damages. NPP's advanced data feeding give new expectation to extend forecasting skills out to five to seven days in avance for extreme weather events.
This is an interesting new advancement. I like the topics that combine Earth Science with Astronomy (Astronomy part being the use of rocket ships and talk of orbiting the Earth). I believe that the launching of this new satellite will be beneficial for the US and countries across the globe. The advanced microwave and infrared data reading system gives hope to all the communities that have been affected by natural disasters in recent years, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and tsunamis. We should be able to get many more people out of these areas before something devastating happens. Also, we should be able to better track the effects of Global Climate Change. One of the main things this satellite will look at is the state of the Arctic ice. This will give us a better idea of what is happening with sea levels and currents, and help plan for the future state of coastal cities.
This article relates to Earth Science in its conncetion with all spheres: the atomosphere, the hydrosphere, the geosphere, and the biosphere. Its connection wiht the atmosphere comes from NPP's direct observation of weather conditions, which occur in the troposphere (part of the atmosphere). It will tell us more detail about past, present, and future weather patterns as well as more detail for how these phenomenons work. It also connects the atmosphere to the biosphere in helping collect data of the greenhouse gas build up, which will inevitably affect life on Earth. Rising average global temperatures are starting to rapidly change naural conditions faster than humans and other life forms can adapt to. NPP also will monitor, directly, the state of the hydrosphere through ocean levels and the state of the icecaps. It will also link observations between the hydrosphere and biosphere by monitoring the spread of algal bloom in oceans and seas. Also, by monitoring the state of the Arctic ice, we can see how animals' habitats in the poles (such as polar bears) might be changing. The new satellite will give us information about the geosphere in aspects such as total land surface (which is being reduced by rising sea levels) and composition of rocks and soils being affected by temperature and humidity changes and increased acid rainfall. These topics show the connection between the geosphere with the hydrosphere and atmosphere. Lastly, we get insight into the future of life and what seems to be our main concern, human progress. The biosphere is affected by all of these things. The toxins that are building up in the air and water are affecting longevity of oraganisms living in theses heavily affected areas. Marine life is being affected by higher temperatures causing coral bleaching and deafness in some fish (such as clown fish). Land life is affected by acid rain, desertification, submerging of land surface, and increased natural disasters (as well as other factors).
Hopefully with this new data collection system, we can start to find new ways to address these issues.

Reference:
Amos, Jonathan. NPP weather and climate satellite launches. BBC News. Oct. 28, 2011. Accessed from BBC.com on October 28, 2011.

Global Warming 'Confirmed' by Independent Study : Response by Katie Marino

The article that I have chosen to analyze is entitled, “Global Warming ‘Confirmed’ by Independent Study”. It was written by Richard Black, the Environmental correspondent for BBC News and published on October 20, 2011. In the article, the issue of global warming and the validity of claims that climate scientists have made were raised. When the original research to support the theory of global warming was conducted, the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the UEA’s Climatic Research Unit all drew similar conclusions, namely that global warming exists and is affecting the earth. Unfortunately, groups of skeptics widely criticized the accuracy of their claims and worked hard to degrade the research of “the world’s most important and established groups” (Black 2). In a fruitful attempt to restore the legitimacy of these groups and provide the world with another concrete analysis of global warming, the Berkeley Group conducted the Berkeley Earth Project to challenge the “Climategate” campaign that asserted that global warming had been exaggerated.

Founder of the group, Richard Muller Berkeley, gathered a team of 10 scientists including the year’s Nobel Physics Prize winner, Saul Perlmutter. Together, the group was able to prove that the existing data was accurate and show that their “record of global land temperature mirrors existing ones closely” (Black 3). As this was a huge triumph for the scientific community, the real issue at stake here is the idea that no matter how credible a source is, people will still try to challenge difficult results. The study concluded that the “average temperature over land has increased by 1C” since the 1950’s (Black 3). This is a stunning result that many Americans have trouble coming to terms with. What is unfortunate is that their solution is not to work to reduce the human contribution to global warming but instead, to criticize and discredit accomplished and hardworking scientists. Now that this independent study has yet again confirmed the theory of global warming I hope that former skeptics apologize for their previous allegations and care enough about the issue to ask, now what? Now that global warming is a generally accepted truth of our world, what are scientists going to do to combat this issue and what should we, as citizens of the world, do to reduce our involvement in global warming?

Before reading this article, I was unaware of the fact that the notion of global warming had been so widely challenged. I understand that there are always proponents and opponents to grand claims, but I was surprised to learn that people found ground to criticize groups like the NOAA and NASA. I support the idea of independent study and not taking things for face value, but I do believe that in some cases, when considering the source, and their intentions, claims against them are most likely unreasonable. In summation, I was pleased to learn that the reputations of the discredited scientists were restored by the work of the Berkeley Group. Unfortunately however, that means that global warming is indeed a fact of today’s society. My hope for the future is that scientists can spend less time trying to validate previous conclusions and more time combating the negative effects of global warming.

Researchers shed light on source of Earth’s water

Jenn Peone

No one has ever been able to determine conclusively how the water on earth got here.Scientists know that the early Earth was far too hot to hold water or water vapor, but then, in relatively short geological time, the oceans appeared. Now, researchers are saying that a new discovery has shed some light on the age old question. A european team reprted finding a very colld reservoir of water vapor in space that could explain earth’s water.

The region they discovered surrounds a star 175 light years away. The star is in the early stages of forming a planet or planets. Similar to how earth was formed 4.5 billion years ago. Scientists concude that the water on earth was almost certainly brought to erth by comets and asteroids known to originate in these cold but water filled zones. It is assumed that these were present when earth was forming. The observations scientists have made indicates that enough water exists in the disk of cold vapor to fill earhs oceans.

It has long been suspected that these “reservoirs” of cold water vapor existed but until now we have not found any signs of them in hotter regions closer to the sun. The theory seemed unlikely because cold asteroids and comets are formed in the outer reaches. But now we have evidence to make the theory stronger.

Also, it is likely that water has been delivered to some of the billion other planets to exist beyond our solar system, meaning there might be many other “ocean worlds” throught the galaxies.

The 10 million year old star is the closest planet forming star yet identified. Efforts to find the cold water vapor in the past all failed because the instruments were not powerful enough.around 4.1 billion years ago began a period of “heavy bombardment,” when Earth was pummeled by comets and cold meteorites — both of which carry water — from the outer reaches of its disk. some researchers hold that the water came primarily from other sources. For instance, water is believed to have been released from early volcanos that belched up molten material from deep within the planet, including H2O. Water could also leak out of certain minerals in rocks as the planet cooled.

This discovery can relate to many of the things we talk about in class. First, it can be related to the missoula flood and water on mars in terms of finding sources of water and proving an outrageous hypothesis. This story has to do with the entire earth and the way it work. How it was formed and how it can be affected in the future. Without the oceans and water on earth, there would be no life; we would not be here.

It is important to understand the way the earth was formed to understand the way it works and how it is affected by the rest of the universe. The story is definitely intriguing and I am not surprised that it has many people questioning the hypothesis. However, good points are made and no other legitimate explanations have been made to challenge the idea.

What is also another interesting topic mentioned is the discovery of the forming planet, or possible planet. Never before have we seen one so close. These observations will help us to understand our own planet due to the similarities of the formation that has taken place so far.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/clue-to-how-our-oceans-were-filled/2011/10/20/gIQAmBRs0L_story.html?wprss=

Warming Revives Dream of Sea Route in Russian Arctic

Jess Brennan

Every year the polar ice caps seem to be getting smaller. This past summer several ships sailed across the Arctic Ocean from one side of Russia to the other, a feat that was previously was extremely rare and dangerous because of the ice. This path can be particularly useful for shipping goods from the north of Europe and Asia because it is much shorter than going through the Suez Canal, which connects the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea through Egypt. Many people seem to be for this new shipping path including Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, who said, “The Arctic is the shortcut between the largest markets of Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. It is an excellent opportunity to optimize costs”. Iceland’s president, Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, also is in support for the path but understands that what is causing the depletion of the ice is not good. In a recent Arctic Ocean shipping conference in Russia President Grimsson said, “It is paradoxical that new opportunities are opening for our nations at the same time we understand that the threat of carbon emissions have become imminent.” Not only does this path take less time, but it also can save countries and companies millions of dollars because they are taking fewer days to complete trips, there are more places for oil companies to check for oil, and new fishing grounds. Although this pathway is great tool to use for shipping people still have to worry about avoiding huge chunks of ice in the water so they do not end up like the Titanic. Authorities in the Russia, Norway, and the United States are trying to see if transferring the goods from a regular freighter to vessels that can navigate through the ice chunks.

Not only is this topic prevalent to Earth Science but also to businesses and the economy. It touches on global warming affecting the hydrosphere, not only the atmosphere. Because of this route more people are going to have jobs because there will be more ships going to and from the different ports around the Arctic Circle. There will also be more people able to send out fishing boats to go fishing. I totally agree that this is a smart choice when thinking about shipping goods from Europe to Asia or the United States to European Russia. This pathway will lead to better connections between the countries that utilize it because it will be easier and faster to get goods to the countries that need them. I think that it is unfortunate that the reason this pathway is now opened is due to things that us humans are doing to hurt the Earth.

Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/business/global/warming-revives-old-dream-of-sea-route-in-russian-arctic.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&ref=science