Unique Cloud Forest Trees  Are In Danger Because of Climate Change

University of California scientists have learned that tropical montane cloud forest trees actually drink water through their leaves in defiance of conventional scientific wisdom that says trees take in moisture only through their roots.

The trees may be in for a difficult time, however, as the clouds they now drink from are drying up due to climate change.  Changes in cloud cover have already been correlated to declines and disappearances of cloud forest animal populations, such as frogs and salamanders.  The trees may be the next to go.

Full details from the UC Berkeley News Center.

Membrane Autopsy

By Ryan Lessing, WATTS Water Technologies

Introductory Note:  The following piece, by Ryan Lessing of the Engineering Dept. of Watts Water Technologies,  San Antonio, TX, is reprinted from the Winter 2011 issue of H2O Quality magazine, a publication of the Texas Water Quality Association.  Ryan’s article is intended for large reverse osmosis membranes, but the same principles can be applied to small  residential undersink RO membranes.  Residential membranes usually last for several years.  When they fail prematurely,  applying Ryan’s autopsy procedure may allow you to diagnose and fix the issue to protect subsequent membranes.   For example, if it appears the membrane is failing due to hardness scaling, pretreatment to soften or condition the water’s hardness can prevent future failures; if the membrane appears to be damaged by chlorine, you may need to change your carbon prefilter more often; if you cut the membrane open and it’s full of dirt, you definitely need to change your sediment and carbon prefilters more often.   –Gene Franks, Pure Water Products.

Membranes can be cleaned by following the cleaning chemical manufacturer’s
guidelines. As a rule of thumb, if the membranes require up to 15% more feed pressure
to make the same amount of permeate as when they were new or make up to 15%
less permeate at the same feed pressure as when they were new they can be cleaned.
Exceeding either of the 15% benchmarks may mean the membranes may not respond
well to cleaning.

Autopsying a membrane is helpful in determining what is causing the scaling or fouling
issue. I follow a simple procedure that can be very telling. Begin by making a shallow
cut to the membrane’s outer wrapping from top to bottom. Remove the tape or fiberglass
wrapping. Again make a shallow cut from top to bottom, this time through the first layer
of the membrane. The membrane should now unroll like a roll of paper towels. Look at
what is on the membrane surface. At this point, given your water analysis results, you
can begin to draw some conclusions.

 

Red may indicate the presence of iron or clay, or both. Grey to black could indicate
manganese (gray could also mean silt). Fine loose powder could be silt. Hard grit (with
a caked-on sand paper-like texture) is scale. Dry a section of the scale and put vinegar
on it. If it foams up it is most likely calcium carbonate and this means the softener is
not working properly. If the scale looks like sugar crystals and does not foam when
vinegar is applied it may be a sulfate-based scale. Calcium is still required to make this
form of scale so the softener could still be the problem. Is the membrane slimy? Let the
membrane warm up to room temperature and smell it.

Does it have a fishy smell? Microbiological fouling could be the problem. With each
of these tests, look back at the pretreatment responsible for addressing that issue. Is it
functioning properly, is it sized properly? Then you can make the proper adjustments or
add what component might be missing.

Gazette Fair Use Statement

 Jellyfish and Sea Urchins Know Things That We Don’t About Disease Resistance and Longevity

In 1988 a young German Marine-Biologist captured and began observing a fairly rare marine creature known to biologists as Turritopsis dohrnii.  The creature is now commonly referred to as The Immortal Jellyfish.  After several days he noticed that his Turritopsis dohrnii was behaving in a very peculiar manner, for which he could imagine no explanation. Plainly speaking, it refused to die. It appeared to age in reverse, growing younger and younger until it reached its earliest stage of development, at which point it began its life cycle anew.

Here’s how NY Times writer Nathaniel Rich explains the process:

Like most hydrozoans, Turritopsis passes through two main stages of life, polyp and medusa.  A polyp resembles a sprig of dill, with spindly stalks that branch and fork and terminate in buds. When these buds swell, they sprout not flowers but medusas. A medusa has a bell-shaped dome and dangling tentacles. Any layperson would identify it as a jellyfish, though it is not the kind you see at the beach. Those belong to a different taxonomic group, Scyphozoa, and tend to spend most of their lives as jellyfish; hydrozoans have briefer medusa phases. An adult medusa produces eggs or sperm, which combine to create larvae that form new polyps. In other hydroid species, the medusa dies after it spawns. A Turritopsis medusa, however, sinks to the bottom of the ocean floor, where its body folds in on itself — assuming the jellyfish equivalent of the fetal position. The bell reabsorbs the tentacles, and then it degenerates further until it becomes a gelatinous blob. Over the course of several days, this blob forms an outer shell. Next it shoots out stolons, which resemble roots. The stolons lengthen and become a polyp. The new polyp produces new medusas, and the process begins again.

 All this, of course, flies in the face of our most basic assumption about our world:  “first you are born, then you die.” The jellyfish, though, acts like a chicken that can turn back into and egg which hatches and grows again into a chicken which then turns back into an egg, and so on.

Although there is strong reason to believe that the simple creatures of the sea hold secrets that teach of immortality and the cure of cancer, there seems to be little will to study them.  For example, cancer funding, which is high dollar business,  is directed toward the study of actual cancers and drugs that can be used to make money. “Venture capitalists” do not want to open their pockets on long-shot studies of jellyfish.  There is also the problem that there are so few experts in hydrozoans.  Few want to make a career of studying jellyfish when there are sexier creatures to be examined.  It is also a very difficult research area because hydrozoans don’t like laboratory life and are tedious to maintain as research animals.

That doesn’t erase the fact that we may be looking in the wrong places.  One scientist says that to learn about life we need to look at the roots rather than the tree.  The simple creatures of the ocean have much to teach us.

“Immortality might be much more common than we think,” one researcher says.  “There are sponges out there that we know have been there for decades. Sea-urchin larvae are able to regenerate and continuously give rise to new adults.” He continued: “This might be a general feature of these animals. They never really die.”

For the full, fascinating story of the immortal jellyfish, you should read the  full article from the NY Times.

In Our Age of Information, Information About Fluoride and IQ in Children Is Hard to Find

by Hardly Waite, Senior Editor

An October 2012 publication of research done at the Harvard University Department of Environmental Health   surveyed numerous previous studies and reached the conclusion that ingesting fluoride has an effect on children’s neurodevelopment and that, in fact, “. . .children in high­ fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low­ fluoride areas.”

The sad thing about the finding is that you probably aren’t going to read about it in your local paper or hear about it

on the evening news.  And what’s doubly sad is that it isn’t news at all.  The Harvard researchers  (Anna L. Choi, Gufian Sun, Ying Zhang, and Phillippe Grandjean) made no startling discovery on their own.  They simply reviewed the findings of many, many previous studies that have shown similar results but have also failed to be reported on the evening news.

Fluoride Action Network had identified at least 36 previous studies that came to the same conclusion.  Michael Connett and Tara Blank write:

As of September 2012, a total of 42 studies have investigated the relationship between fluoride and human intelligence, and a total of 17 studies have investigated the relationship fluoride and learning/memory in animals. Of these investigations, 36 of the 42 human studies have found that elevated fluoride exposure is associated with reduced IQ, while 16 of the 17 animal studies have found that fluoride exposure impairs the learning and memory capacity of animals. The human studies, which are based on IQ examinations of over 11,000 children, provide compelling evidence that fluoride exposure during the early years of life can damage a child’s developing brain.

The relationship between fluoride and the dumbing down of children isn’t new and it isn’t secret.  It is surprising, though, how few people are aware of it.  The next time your dentist speaks out for fluoride, ask him if he’s aware of the Harvard research showing that fluoride has a demonstrable bad effect on the neurodevelopment of children.  If he says that the Harvard research is part of a commie plot to ruin America’s teeth, look for another dentist.

As Water Grows Scarcer by the Day, The Texas Legislature Finally Promises Action

Texas has just experienced a year of extreme drought.  Added to that, economic growth, with its ensuing demand for water, has been strong. At long last, the Texas legislature seems ready to make some tough decisions.

In 2011 Texas experienced the worst drought in its history.  The realization has come that the state isn’t ready for another drought of of that magnitude.

Texas’ strong economy has led to predictions that the state’s population will grow from 25 million in 2010 to 55 million in 2050.  Water, clearly, will be in demand.  The short-term forecast is for an 18 percent increase in demand coupled with a 10 percent drop in supply.  More people and more industrial activity also use more electricity which uses more water.

The Texas Water Development Board  predicts that failing to take action now to assure a sufficient water supply could lead to a loss of 1 million jobs and $115.7 billion in business by 2060.  The board has a $53 billion plan that includes  new reservoirs, dams, pipelines and wells over the next 50 years to meet the growing demand for water, but so far the Legislature has not appropriated a penny to fund any of this.

Those skeptical or unhappy with the ambitious development plans (which address only increased supply and seem to ignore conservation) include the Environmental Defense Fund, residents and industries whose land may be lost to eminent domain purchases,  timber companies, fishermen, and many cities.

Another troublesome issue that the legislature needs to tackle is a hopelessly out of date law that was upheld last year by the Texas Supreme Court.  The law gives landowners the right to all groundwater under the land.  It’s a concept that goes back to medieval Europe, but it is still in force in Texas, greatly complicating the state’s ability to manage water.

Groundwater levels are  dropping fast in Texas, and climatologists are warning of another drought in 2013. Texas lawmakers have their hands full.

Reference:  CBS Local.

A Case of Health of Many vs. Wealth of a Few: A Hard Look at Horizontal Fracking

Editor’s Note.  The following description of the practice of fracking, excerpted from Why the War Against Fracking May Be Our Most Crucial Conflict, by Ellen Cantarow, underlines the seriousness of  the practice of horizontal fracking.

Developed in 2008 and vastly more expansive in its infrastructure than the purely vertical form of fracking invented by Halliburton Corporation in the 1940s, high-volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing is a land-devouring, water-squandering technology with a greenhouse gas footprint  greater than that of coal. The process begins by propelling one to nine million gallons of sand-and-chemical-laced water at hyperbaric bomb-like pressures a mile or more beneath Earth’s surface. Most of that fluid stays underground. Of the remainder,  next to nothing is ever again available for irrigation or drinking.  A recent report  by the independent, nonpartisan U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded that fracking poses serious risks to health and the environment.

New York State’s grassroots resistance to fracking began about four years ago around kitchen tables and in living rooms as neighbors started talking about this frightening technology. Shallow drilling for easily obtainable gas had been done for decades in the state, but this gargantuan industrial effort represented something else again.

Anthony Ingraffea  of Cornell University’s Department of Engineering, co-author of a study that established the global warming footprint of the industry, calls this new form of fracking an unparalleled danger to the environment and human health. “There’s much more land clearing, much more devastation of forests and fields. . . thousands of miles of pipelines. . . many compressor stations [that] require burning enormous quantities of diesel. . . [emitting] hydrocarbons into the atmosphere.” He adds that it’s a case of “the health of many versus the wealth of a few.”

Against that wealth stands a movement of the 99% — farmers, physicists, journalists, teachers, librarians, innkeepers, brewery owners, and engineers.  “In Middlefield we’re nothing special,” says Kelly Branigan, a realtor who last year founded a group called Middlefield Neighbors. “We’re just regular people who got together and learned, and reached in our pockets to go to work on this. It’s inspiring, it’s awesome, and it’s America — its own little revolution.”

Read more about the grassroots struggle of the many against the apparently overwhelming wealth and power of the few.

Fifteen Million Americans Now Suffer From Food Allergies: Pesticides in Tap Water May Be the Cause

Editor’s Note:  The following is excerpted from an excellent article by Sarah Glynn published in Medical News Today. We would add that the persistent presence of dichlorophenols in tap water provide a strong argument that every home should have an effective carbon drinking water filter. — Hardly Waite.

The finding was published in Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, the scientific journal of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI), and came from a team of experts led by Elina Jerschow, M.D., M.Sc., ACAAI fellow and allergist.

According to the researchers, high levels of dichlorophenols, a chemical used to chlorinate water and also used in pesticides, is linked to food allergies when it is found in a person’s body.

Dr. Jerschow explained:

Our research shows that high levels of dichlorophenol-containing pesticides can possibly weaken food tolerance in some people, causing food allergy. This chemical is commonly found in pesticides used by farmers and consumer insect and weed control products, as well as tap water.

Data of 10,438 people from the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2006 was analyzed for purpose of the study. Dichlorophenols was found in the urine of 2,548 subjects, but 2,211 were further observed.

Results showed that 411 of the 2,211 analyzed had a food allergy, and 1,016 had an environmental allergy.

Dr. Jerschow said:

Previous studies have shown that both food allergies and environmental pollution are increasing in the United States. The results of our study suggest these two trends might be linked, and that increased use of pesticides and other chemicals is associated with a higher prevalence of food allergies.

Although drinking bottled water may seem less risky for developing an allergy than drinking water from the tap, the results from this research indicate that making the switch to bottled water may not be effective in preventing allergies.

“Other dichlorophenol sources, such as pesticide-treated fruits and vegetables, may play a greater role in causing food allergy,” added Dr. Jerschow.

Between 1997 and 2007, food allergy increased by 18%, according to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

A previous report, published in Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, found that 7.5 million Americans have at least one food allergy, and young black children seem to be at the highest risk.

The most frequently reported food allergens are:

• peanuts
• tree nuts
• wheat
• milk
• eggs
• soy
• shellfish
• fish

Full Article.

Gazette Fair Use Statement

Would You Rather Be Cremated in  a Factory or Buried Under a Christmas Tree?  An Introductory Note by Hardly Waite.

Daily we face  environmental dilemmas  that have no clear answer.  Paper or plastic at the grocery store is a good example. The Christmas tree dilemma discussed in the article below has already been aired in the Gazette.   We first printed Real Christmas Trees Are Second Only to No Tree At All, which was quickly answered by staff writer Tiger Tom in his snarling essay called “In Defense of Phoney Plastic Christmas Trees.”

When all the arguments are in, I’ll confess that although I don’t know why anyone would want a Christmas tree,  I side with the real tree people.  I feel this way for the same reason that I think cemeteries aren’t such a bad thing.  A friend who prefers cremation to burial as a more environmentally  sound way of getting rid of  dead people  feels  that cemeteries are a waste of land.  May be, but would the land be better used if we instead put up parking lots or convenience stores?  Cemeteries, after all,  usually have trees and plants and peace and quiet and don’t produce a lot of noise or light pollution.  The world would be a nicer place with more cemeteries and fewer freeways.   Same with Christmas tree farms, I say.  A tree orchard is better use of  land than a factory.

The piece below,  by Arlington, TX-based writer Teresa McUsic, is reprinted here from an email newsletter published by Green Source DFW.

 

 Real Christmas Trees Are the Green Choice

by Teresa McUsig

The holidays are a time for lots of buying decisions, which makes it a perfect time to go green.    What better way than to start with the tree.

Many consumers still face the annual question of whether it is better for the planet to cut down a real tree or buy an artificial one. But Will McClatchey, vice president of research at the Botanical Research Institute in Fort Worth, said there is little room for debate—real trees are better.  “Absolutely, for lots of reasons,” said McClatchey, who has his PhD in evolutionary biology.

Artificial trees come in packaging, are generally shipped from China and eventually end up in a land fill, McClatchey said. The whole cycle leads to a higher carbon foot print, and a bigger mpact on the environment.       In contrast, live Christmas trees come from sustainable farms and are “completely recyclable,” McClatchey said.     “Those trees are planted for that purpose and in some cases the farms are on land not terribly good for much else,” he said.

McClatchey’s assessment is backed up by several studies, most notably one from Canada that shows consumers must hold onto a fake tree for 20 years before it equals the environmental impact of a real tree. Unfortunately, North Americans keep their fake trees for just six years, according to the study by Ellipsos, a sustainability development consultant in Montreal.  Using the six-year framework, the amount of carbon dioxide emission is much higher for artificial trees.

“The hot topic these days is climate change,” the study reads. “When looking at these impacts, the natural tree contributes to significantly less carbon dioxide emission (39%) than  the artificial tree.”  The study can be read here.

More than 30.8 million trees will be cut for Christmas trees this year, according to the National Christmas Tree Association. Natural trees sales outpace artificial trees 3 to 1, the association said.      And most consumers—31 percent–buy their trees at local farms, according to a survey by the association.

But in North Texas you better act fast. The 2011 drought has still reduced the number of trees available and many households have already been out buying.  Jim Wilson, owner of Main Stay Farms in Cleburne, said he has sold almost all of the 400 trees tagged to be cut this year from his farm of 6,000 trees.      “We had hordes of families here the weekend after Thanksgiving when we first opened,” he said. “We’re down to our last 10 percent of trees available to cut.”

Wilson said he still had some Virginia Pine and Leyland Cypress available, as well as around 300 of the 550 Frasier firs he had shipped from North Carolina. Next year, he will begin selling a new tree for cutting, a white-barked Arizona Cypress.

“I ordered 1,400 of the trees for planting and they’ll be ready next year,” he said. “The tree is really pretty and doesn’t take as much water to grow.”

The 2011 drought slowed down some of his tree production, which usually allows for around 700 trees to be available each season, he said. It takes about six years to grow a tree to the holiday size, he said.To find a local farm for your Christmas tree, put your town or zip code into a directory available by the Christmas Tree Association at www.ChristmasTree.org   Wilson advises buying a tree that does not sit out in the Texas sun after being cut. After buying, cut ½ inch off the trunk and soak in water. Once inside your home, water daily and keep always from heat vents.

Gazette Fair Use Statement