News Forum Archives: May 2003
Garden tools shouldn’t pollute
by David Suzuki
Part of the Science Matters series, published weekly in newspapers across Canada.
May 09, 2003
It’s spring, and that means Canadians are finally able to spend more time outdoors, in our parks and our gardens. In past years at this time, I’ve warned readers about the indiscriminate use of herbicides and pesticides. Today, it’s heartening to see municipalities across the country, and the entire province of Quebec, taking steps to reduce the unnecessary cosmetic use of pesticides. But many people don’t realize that other activities are also complicit in making our gardens sources of pollution and toxins, rather than health and recreation.
The biggest problem is the lawn mower - specifically, the standard, two-stroke gasoline lawn mower. Most Canadian homes have such a machine. They are cheap, convenient and the engines last forever. But they are also a serious source of air pollution.
When I mention this problem to some people, they scoff. How could a mower with such a little engine be a problem? They don’t even burn that much gasoline! The problem is, they burn both gasoline and oil, and they do so very inefficiently. In fact, using a standard gas mower for one hour emits the same amount of common air pollutants as driving a car for almost 600 kilometres! And these days lawn mowers aren’t the only noisy culprits. Weed trimmers, lawn edgers and those things I hate the most - leaf blowers - have become staples in many Canadian garages.
All these machines together create a cacophony of noise and pollution. Added up, they are responsible for about five per cent of Canada’s urban smog. In addition, homeowners and gardeners spill small amounts of gasoline and oil onto the ground during each fill. Because of their frequency, these spills really add up, contributing to both ground and surface-water pollution.
The most frustrating thing about this problem is that it is so unnecessary. Much like the indiscriminate use of pesticides, many homeowners continue to purchase and use inefficient, gas-powered tools out of habit or ignorance. Of course they don’t want their children breathing air filled with toxic particulate matter, but it never occurred to them that this is what happens when they mow the lawn with a standard mower.
At one time, there weren’t many options to the two-stroke engine. Today, there is a tremendous variety of low or zero-emission garden tools on the market. Electric lawn mowers are suitable for most lawns, and rechargeable electric mowers offer the convenience of being cordless. Leaf blowers, lawn edgers and weed trimmers are also all available with electric motors. True, the electricity needed to run these machines is often produced by burning fossil fuels at a power plant, but that is much more efficient than running thousands of little gasoline engines. Even modern four-stroke gasoline mowers are far less polluting than their two-stroke cousins.
Push mowers may seem old-fashioned, but they are making a comeback. Modern push mowers are engineered to cut grass easily, without too much effort. They are quiet, emission free and a good way to get exercise. In addition, they cut the grass into smaller pieces, which can be left on the lawn to decompose and slowly release nitrogen back into the soil, eliminating the need for chemical fertilizers.
Canadians are re-assessing their lawns. Since the 1950s, a big, carefully manicured lawn has been regarded by many as a sign of success and prosperity. Unfortunately, lawns suck up a disproportionate amount of water and fertilizer, and the trend of keeping them completely weed free necessitated the use of chemical herbicides. In our obsession with uniformity and perfection, we created the equivalent of parking lots - large, empty spaces virtually devoid of life.
That’s changing as Canadians become more aware of the problems associated with lawns and lawn tools. Some are choosing to replace all or part of their lawns with drought-resistant, low-maintenance alternatives. Others are simply grabbing a push mower, breathing the fresh air and enjoying the peace and quiet.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)Commercial Fleets Reduced Big Fish by 90%, Study Says
By Andrew C. Revkin
New York Times
In just 50 years, the global spread of industrial-scale commercial fishing has cut by 90 percent the oceans’ population of large predatory fishes, from majestic giants like blue marlin to staples like cod, a new study has found.
Oceanographers not connected with the study say it provides the best evidence yet that recent fish harvests have been sustained at high levels only because fleets have sought and heavily exploited ever more distant fish populations.
Other studies had shown such trends for individual species and some coastal fisheries, but experts said this was the first systematic study to measure the effect throughout the oceans.
The study is to appear on Thursday in the journal Nature and is online at www.nature.com.
The authors, from Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said they hoped the findings would spur countries to honor a declaration most signed last summer at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, which called for restoring stocks by 2015.
American fisheries officials and representatives of the fishing industry said that declines in fish stocks were inevitable but that progress was being made in stemming damage to the most depleted stocks.
The study, drawing on decades of data from fishing fleets and research boats, paints a 50-year portrait of fish populations under siege as advances like sonar and satellite positioning systems allowed fleets to home in on pockets of abundance.
Even as sought-after species like tuna and swordfish declined, many other less popular fishes also dropped enormously in numbers as they were caught unintentionally on long lines of baited hooks or in bottom-scouring trawls.
“With all this technology together, the fish hardly have a chance,” said the lead author, Dr. Ransom A. Myers, who spent 10 years combing archives of information from Japanese long-line fleets, research trawling expeditions and other sources.
But representatives of the seafood industry called the study unnecessarily alarmist.
Glenn R. Delaney, a consultant to American fishing companies and a government-appointed member of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, said some fleets had overfished in the past and some continued to do so, particularly rogue vessels connected mainly to Taiwanese companies. But he said that major ocean fisheries were being managed better now.
The study was financed mainly by the Pew Charitable Trusts, a foundation that has long promoted efforts to alert the public to problems with the oceans. It was extensively reviewed by experts from the industry and other institutions before appearing in Nature, the authors said.
The authors and other experts said recent improvements in stocks of some species, like swordfish, were creditable but reflected only a tiny increase in populations that remained the dimmest shadow of what they were two generations ago.
This level of depletion not only threatens the livelihood of fishers and an important source of protein, but could also unbalance marine ecosystems, experts and the study’s authors said.
In some places, the study found that when top predators were removed, competing species thrived and filled the gap in the food web. When cod declined in the Grand Banks east of Canada in the 1950’s, flatfish numbers soared, and when populations of blue marlin plunged in the tropical Atlantic as they were caught on tuna hooks, sailfish and then swordfish became abundant.
But in each case, the statistics showed, the replacement species were quickly decimated by overfishing or by accidental catches. That left the oceans largely bereft of big predators as a whole.
One remarkable aspect of the new study is the 50-year statistical portrait it paints that reveals not just the extent of the damage, but also the pattern, with charts showing year by year how, as oceangoing fleets fanned out, catches boomed each time they reached new waters, then plummeted in their wake.
In almost all exploited areas, it generally took just 10 or 15 years for populations to crash. One measure was fish caught per 100 hooks on the Japanese lines. The study said the rate went from 10 fish per 100 hooks to 1 or less in that period.
“This shows that the reason we’ve had so much tuna and swordfish, the only reason this has been sustained, is because boats kept going farther and farther away,” said Dr. Jeremy B. C. Jackson, a professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Dr. Jackson has conducted other studies showing declines and ecological effects in coastal waters but was not involved in the new work.
“The problem now is there’s no place left to go,” he said. “There are a lot of people out there willing to fish the last fish. But that’s just not going to work.”
One of the biggest concerns is the potential effect on global ecosystems, said Dr. Boris Worm, the second author of the study. He is affiliated with Dalhousie and the University of Kiel in Germany.
“You can’t cut off the head of an ecosystem and expect it to behave the same way,” he said. “From all we’ve studied in parts of the ocean, you can end up with things being less stable, less predictable, and maybe less hospitable.”
He said that for most fish species, recovery was possible, even from such low numbers.
“On land, we did it with buffalo,” Dr. Worm said.
“They went from 30 million to a thousand,” he added, “and we saved them because we wanted to. With fish we haven’t thought the same way yet.”
There are already efforts underway to curb overfishing, create reserves that serve as nurseries for valued species and encourage consumers to avoid the most endangered fishes.
Fishing industry representatives also note that tuna and swordfish populations are stabilizing in many places. But the authors of the study and other experts note that most of these efforts are voluntary and grossly insufficient.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)First U.S Federal Facility to Harness Biogas
SolarAccess.com
May 13, 2003
Washington D.C. – The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is the first federal agency to directly use landfill gas to produce energy at one of its facilities. The federal space agency is using this Renewable Energy source to heat buildings at the Goddard Space Flight Center, located in Greenbelt, Maryland. The gas comes from the Sandy Hill Landfill owned by Prince George’s County, Maryland.
“It is very encouraging that a large federal institution like NASA is using a local landfill as a source of Renewable Energy,” said EPA Administrator Christie Whitman. “This project at Goddard Space Flight Center demonstrates how the federal government can lead the way in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and utilizing alternative energy sources.”
NASA’s decision to utilize landfill gas, a Renewable Energy source, will result in significant economic and environmental benefits. By reducing their use of fossil fuels, NASA will save taxpayers millions of dollars over the next 10 years. The switch to a cleaner fuel source will also prevent as much pollution annually as planting 47,000 acres of trees, or removing 35,000 cars from Maryland’s roads.
“Understanding and protecting our home planet is one of NASA’s key missions,” said NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe. “NASA monitors and studies our planet from our unique vantage point in space, and our Earth Sciences Enterprise also looks for ways to improve the quality of life on earth. This project directly benefits the earth by removing a significant amount of methane, a greenhouse gas, from the environment. We use this energy, virtually pollution-free, for power. Hopefully, projects like these will demonstrate the clean, efficient, cost effective use of renewable sources of energy.”
The Goddard Space Flight Center landfill gas project is the culmination of a successful public-private partnership between Prince George’s County, Maryland, Waste Management, Toro Energy, NASA and EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program in pursuing the economic and environmental benefits of landfill gas energy. Currently, more than 340 landfills in the United States harness landfill gas for energy. If the greenhouse gas reductions from these projects were combined, it would have the same annual climate change benefit as planting 17 million acres of forest, or eliminating the emissions from 12 million cars.
EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program is a voluntary assistance and partnership program that promotes the use of landfill gas as a Renewable Energy source. By preventing emissions of methane through the development of these energy projects, this EPA program helps businesses, states, and communities protect the environment and build a sustainable future.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
Continue Reading First U.S Federal Facility to Harness Biogas
New Jersey Asks Residents To Limit Pesticide Use
TRENTON, New Jersey
May 5, 2003
ENS
“Homeowners and licensed applicators need to protect themselves and the environment from pesticide misuse and overexposure,” said New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner Bradley Campbell. “I encourage all residents to explore alternative pest control measures that are not only safe, but also help New Jersey minimize the contribution of pesticides to water pollution.”
The risk to human health, Campbell explained, can result from several sources – direct exposure through improper use, residual pesticides on food, and release into the environment from improper storage or disposal. In his announcement, Campbell stressed that children and infants are in particular susceptible to pesticide exposure.
The effects of exposure to pesticides include poisoning, eye damage, disruption of the endocrine/hormone system, and respiratory ailments.
DEP, through its Web site www.nj.gov/dep, posts information on alternatives to pesticide use, including biological controls, barriers and household remedies such as the application of soap and water.
Campbell suggested that homeowners check the credentials of professional pesticide applicators to ensure they have the proper state licenses. New Jersey licenses applicators for weed, termite and household pest control, among others.
The public must be informed of any large scale outdoor applications of pesticides, such as for gypsy moth or mosquito control, Campbell said. The DEP requires the pesticide applicators to place one legal advertisement and one prominent display advertisement in two newspapers circulated in the proposed target area at least seven days before the scheduled application date.
Commercial pesticide applicators also are required by law to give an individual advance notice of pesticide application if that individual requests it of the applicator.
Sign posting on lawns and at public buildings is also required when pesticides are being used.
Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2003. All Rights Reserved.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
Original article
Continue Reading New Jersey Asks Residents To Limit Pesticide Use