Our World and Everything in It

“Strange Days on Planet Earth” series from the National Geographic channel previewed the North Pacific Gyre, a swirling clockwise vortex, of ten million square miles. We wonder where all the debris goes that gets into the water.  It ends up where it’s ashamedly known as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Among other things tons of plastic has accumulated here. Some argue plastics do eventually bio degrade, well, not so much. Plastic photodegrades, which means it gets smaller and thinner, and thinner until it is in micro pieces.

Most people are not aware of this gyre. Others know to avoid it’s swirling outer perimeter and the dead calm center. So many haven’t actually experienced the mess. In the series “Strange Days,” a boat decided to motor across the gyre to cut down on time on its way to another environmental study. It would only take a week to cross. But once the boat entered, the captain could not believe what he encountered day after day. He said it was literally a cesspool of large items and what appeared to be floating flakes. The captain decided to lower a skim for plankton that pretty much looks like a cheese cloth wind sock meant to gather plankton. What he gathered were small plastic particulates in the millions. According to Wikipedia: “These pieces, still polymers, eventually become individual molecules, which are still not easily digested.^[1] Some plastics photodegrade into other pollutants.”

Birds and other mammals are feeding on this stuff. Birds feed it to their offspring. Industrial plastic pellets are washing up near shorelines also, and look like fish eggs. Baby albotross’ dead on the beach showed exposed stomachs filled with plastics of all kinds. There is more polymer in the N. Pacific Gyrate than there is plankton. According to Wickipedia: “Besides ingestion and entanglement of wildlife, the floating debris absorbs toxins in the water which, when ingested, are mistaken by the animals brain for estradiol, causing hormone disruption in the affected wildlife.” This is evidence of more hormone disruptors that affect the genetics of young life. We’re seeing gender bender fish, wait until we start finding gender bender birds and mammals. That’s food for thought. Right now we’re eating into this polluted animal chain, and will more than likely suffer the same consequences in the future if not already. So keep using and throwing out plastic of all kinds and keep saying man doesn’t have an affect on his environment and that recent rapid changes in climate are happening naturally. Sure. 

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/oceans/pollution/trash-vortex

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7312777.stm

http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/the-plastic-killing-fields/2007/12/28/1198778702627.html?page=fullpage

As part of the “Strange Days on Planet Earth” by National Geographic that I watched on PBS, was a segment about compounds found in plastic like bisphenol A that leached into a Missouri Tributary, and into the fish and animals in a remote area. Bisphenol A acts like estrogen, and is an endocrine interrupter. It doesn’t take much for this stuff, 30 parts per trillion, to affect estrogen response in fish because they have an extremely sensitive system.

I went to find out more about this because I’ve already written about fish in N.Y. and recently the Potomac River in Washington that have both sexes, have changed gender, or are sexless due to estrogen discharged in the effluents of sewage treatment plants. When I watched this latest presentation about fish in Missouri that are altered by bisphenol A, I thought I would rummage around and found website after website from different places all over the country with gender bender fish.

There was even a study about perch in Michigan’s lakes on jestor @ http://www.jstor.org/pss/3435861. The article listed various endocrine disruptors present in the water like the estrogen from sewage plants but also bisphenol A. Read the article because it states “gonadal intersex was observed in male white perch collected from the Bay of Quinte (22-44%) and Lake St. Clair (45%), [] Intersex was not observed in hatchery-reared white perch or in white perch collected from an uncontaminated reference site (i.e., Deal Lake) in the United States.” So the lower Great Lakes are considered contaminated.

This does not bode well for our water systems. The “Strange Days” series continued about bisphenol A in plastic from which we eat and drink. It’s dangerous for our health. That’s why we’re being told lately not to microwave anything in a plastic container. As for baby bottles it’s really bad news.

The series stated that hormones control genetic programming in developmental stages of life, so babies are really affected by bisphenol A. Heating plastic baby bottle causes 10 times the amount of bisphenol A to leach out. They didn’t have to connect the dots any further. Do not use plastic baby bottles unless it’s documented they don’t contain bisphenol A.

HP has found a use for leftover plastic bottles. When we return our used HP (Hewlett-Packard) print cartridges, they “undergo a multi-phase recycling process that reduces them to raw materials such as plastics and metals.” The plastic from the inkjet cartridges gets mixed with recycled bottle resin and other binders to create brand new ink cartridges according to an article in Environmental News Service. They are not remanufactured. Other cartridge suppliers have yet to do this. The amount of recycled content varies from 70 to 100 percent, while the finished product remains at HP’s highest standard.

That’s a pretty good solution for some of our leftover plastic problems considering mixing plastics usually diminishes the strength and durability of a finished product. There are 10,000 different types of plastics, and many are not compatible together. If you haven’t noticed, most recyclable bottles are stamped with numbers. These numbers are to group the different plastic materials together when reprocessing.

But new research just might change things in the future. HP has discovered a way, and according to an article by Michigan Molecular Institute, “researchers from Eastman Kodak, Eastman Chemical, and the University of Florida (UF) accomplished that goal by establishing the fundamentals of compatibilization of multiphase polymer blends.” Researchers found effective methods to compatibilize comingled-plastic waste.” In other words they’ve found a way to mix some of the normally incompatible leftover plastic we toss to make new plastic.

Sharp has developed “a new technology to blend plant-based plastic that uses corn as the raw material, and waste plastic recovered from scrapped consumer electronics” according to an article on Physorg.com.  Now this is real news because Sharp is getting away from petroleum based plastics, which is the common raw material for most plastic. I don’t think corn should take a hit again, because of its overuse by the ethanol industry, but who knows, corn today, rutabaga tomorrow as a raw material for plastic. 

With new technology coming out all the time relative to plastics, hopefully we will greatly reduce the environmental impact our leftover plastic products produce. Next on the list, we need to see plastic that easily strips away in one zip from the cloth part of those dirty disposable diapers that get tossed. Anybody got any ideas about that? 

Read more about HP at: http://world-wire.com/news/0801300001.html

About MMI’s article on mixed plastic technology read:  http://www.atp.nist.gov/eao/sp950-1/mmi.htm.

About Sharp: http://www.physorg.com/news5062.html.
 

I don’t know if any other people interested in moving forward with all types of alternative energy have noticed the purposeful placement of the word “foreign” in many of the presidential contenders, Bush/Cheney, and legislator’s speeches. When a politician says they will make sure to fund research for new technologies to get us away from “foreign” oil dependence, they are probably talking money for a new type of oil drilling process. Technically, they won’t be lying, just misleading, if you tend to disregard that tricky little word “foreign.”

Granted, it’s been said that we do not have alternative technology available yet to take up the brunt of our oil demand, but it seems we keep looking to only one, and not a combination of alternative sources. What about a combination of alternative energy sources? I hear this idea floating around, but no gelling. The Sierra Club of Michigan has a very good presentation that shows a combination of energy sources, wind, solar, geothermal, etc., plus conservation programs like reclaiming wastewater, and recycling may meet all of our energy demands in Michigan. But we’re not advancing toward a future that will no longer be reliant on one big massive conglomerate like the oil cartel is to us right now. It seems we work toward monopolies in this country. Then we’re upset when we’re stuck with them without a choice. We should be looking to all venues to move forward for our energy future, not reinforcing the idea of fossil fuel again, like it’s all right because it belongs to us. 

I see the big push to get away from “foreign” oil as the big ruse to drill in the Arctic circle, the polar bear habitat, Utah, even Livonia, MI for Pete’s sake, and anywhere a slant oil drill can legitimately be utilized to “not’ enter our protected National Parks. They do so anyway at an angle right under protected habitat, while doing a great deal of damage with all the accompanying paraphernalia like roads, pipeline, trucks, heavy equipment, and trash. Ditto for coal mining. Using coal is getting away from “foreign” oil, all oil, but is still perpetuating the use of filthy fossil fuel that will eventually run out. Sure it might be thousands of years before it does, but at what price, gutting the countryside, ruining the earth trying?

So beware of that tricky little “foreign” word that comes before oil. It’s not a detail that should go unnoticed, because it doesn’t make any difference. It does, or they wouldn’t be slipping it in there.  It makes all the difference in our lives, our environment, and our world whether our future continues to poke around the earth and the oceans below for oil or coal that is “OURS.” Our oil and coal burn just as filthy as the “foreign” stuff.

Wonder what’s been going on behind the scenes on Capital Hill while the campaign takes over the news? I have. I don’t trust them. While the campaign smoke screen is up a lot has been transpiring, or rather conspiring against wildlife and the environment in an effort to get us away from foreign oil.  How will the Saudis like that? Is that why we’re supplying guns and ammo to them,  because we’re weaning them off?  Anyway, here is a sample of the urgent e-mails I’ve been getting from many environmental groups because our dubious administration is at work again.

I belong to Care2.com, a wonderful website of over 8 million members who care passionately about something, kids, people’s rights, animal welfare, the environment, etc. I got an e-mail to petition none other than Dirk Kempthorne, Secy. of the Interior, again. The same guy that is angling to kill off the entire wolf species in Idaho, and possibly Wyoming by aerial hunting, snares, etc. It seems we haven’t done enough to polar bears, now Kempthorne’s positioned to allow drilling for oil in the middle of their habitat too. Here is what the petition states: “At a time when the polar bear’s future is literally on thin ice, it’s no time to add insult to injury by drilling in their fragile Arctic habitat. But it could happen. Alaska’s Chukchi and Beaufort Seas - also known as the Polar Bear Seas - could be opened to drilling as early as February.” Better start pressuring Kempthorne, or join Care2.com and sign the petition, and many others on their website for a better world. This is almost a done deal. It doesn’t look like Kempthorne’s going to add the polar bear to the endangered list.

The Wilderness Society posted an e-mail that states: “A draft environmental impact statement to be released next week by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will pave the way for 110,000 acres of wildlife habitat within the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to be traded to the native-owned Doyon Corporation for oil and gas development. Under the proposed deal, Doyon also would obtain 97,000 acres in subsurface rights within the Refuge. Doyon would turn over approximately 150,000 acres of corporation land to the Refuge in the proposed exchange.” Sounds OK? Not so much. As the USFWS well knows, “Oil and gas development are not compatible with the purposes of the refuge—something that USFWS itself has acknowledged in the past. Development poses a threat to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence cultures, and the wilderness and recreational values of the refuge and its adjacent public lands.”

A Clean Water Action e-mail stated: “Polluter attacks on the Clean Water Act continue. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is accepting public comments until January 21 on a policy that will determine which rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands are fully protected.” This maneuvering by “[t]he Bush Administration has sought to limit Clean Water Act protections through direct attacks on the law, by misinterpreting Supreme Court decisions and through a series of “No Protection” instructions to the federal and state bureaucrats.” But the e-mail asserts, “Congress is considering legislation to clarify that the Clean Water Act is meant to protect all water bodies. But the e-mail asserts, “Congress is considering legislation to clarify that the Clean Water Act is meant to protect all water bodies. In the meantime, we have to stop these backdoor attacks on the laws that protect our water quality.” This is a good link to take you right to the EPA site.

The only good e-mail I received is that the Greenpeace boat, the Esperanza, caught up with the Japanese whalers and is chasing them around the Southern Ocean. You might want to donate to any or all of these charitable organizations. We have no idea the sacrifice these people make to protect things we cherish like our national parks and rivers, lakes, wildlife, and environment. People like you and me are up all hours, in bad parts of the world, arguing/fighting with foreign countries sometimes, in adverse conditions for what they believe in. Imagine boarding a ship, leaving loved ones, to chase and confront another ship in frigid seas and rotten conditions out of passion for the cause. And we take them for granted. These organizations of everyday citizens are the “THEY” we all have spoken about when we say: “Oh well, THEY will do something about it,” or “I’m not worried, THEY will come up with something.” But THEY not only need monetary support, if THEY ask for people to write to congress or the Queen, please do it. It costs nothing but the time you’re spending goofing around on your pc anyway. And every voice behind these people shows those in charge that it is a force of many, many more people than THEY that are out there actually doing the job. God Bless THEM.
 
To write to Kempthorne about drilling in polar bear habitat: http://www.doi.gov/contact.html. Read more about Kempthorne ignoring senators, fishing industry, petitions, etc., http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/Release/20080102.cfm

To join Care2.com and sign many petitions about many causes and meet a network of 8 million worldwide who care: http://www.care2.com/.

For more about the Alaskan Land Swap: http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Magazine/Summer2007/yukonflats.cfm.

For more about the Clean Water Act: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2155/t/203/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=22196.

I had a big revelation in the body lotion, potion aisle in the grocery store about how even the smallest things are affected by politics, the environment, big business, etc. I couldn’t find any body lotion that didn’t have mineral oil or petrolatum in it. I stood staring at a huge section of lotions and nary a one in that selection was free of the stuff. There were a lot of brands, smells, types, but all pretty much the same. That wasn’t the case 10 years ago.  

For most cosmetics, the first 3 ingredients listed are the bulk of what’s in that container. I found mineral oil way down the list on some items but it was there. After reading all the labels, I remembered not that long ago, mineral oil in cosmetics was taboo. Water is the liquid that is readily absorbed by the body. The example was to “dunk a dried up piece of leather in water and one in oil and see what is absorbed fastest.” Good point. Plus all of our faces look best when rinsing.  Look in the mirror and it’s all plumped out but sopping wet. Can’t go around like that. So the next best thing is to follow up with some sort of natural oil, they say olive is most like the skin, to lock in that water. Another good point.

There used to be all kinds of lotions without mineral oil or petrolatum, but in this government of big oil, we’re seeing this by-product back in cosmetics. I suppose I could look at it as environmentally sound that big business has found a way to recycle the by-product from the production of gasoline by putting it in stuff that goes on our bodies and faces, but the stuff is nasty. Besides if I wanted mineral oil, I’d just buy a cheap bottle of the stuff, add some sort of essence and call it a day. 

My experience with gasoline, even if it is only a by-product of the production of gasoline, is not something I want to spread all over. I don’t know about you, but when I get gas on my hands, at first it feels oily. If I don’t get it washed off right away, my skin looks ashy later on. That ashy color is dried up skin. I know.  I looked at it under a magnifying glass once to find out what was going on. I can see a whole bunch of problems down the line using this stuff. I can certainly see that it cyclic. Put lotion on, feel good for awhile, dry up. Apply lotion, dry up. Apply lotion, dry up. Good racket.  

So this is what I thought about while standing in the lotion, potion aisle thinking of yet another good reason to get away from oil and oil by-products. For an informative view of why it’s not natural to use mineral oil read: http://www.dld123.com/q&a/qandatemp.php?id=Q77.
 

BP says it will stick to the limitations in its former permit for wastewater emissions at its Whiting Refinery in Indiana. This comes after pressure from environmentalists in Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois that were joined by politicians. BP will try to redo the plans for its new expansion to accommodate that former permit, but said if they can’t, and the material costs go too high, they may have to scrap the expansion in Indiana.

This is another example of a company waving pollution vs. jobs again, like the Holcim plant in Dundee. BP claims to be putting millions into alternatives for the environment in its commercials, but are only giving-in now due to the large outcry and publicity over their newly won permit. The new permit would have allowed 54% more ammonia, and 34% more sludge into Lake Michigan.

I could see if there were absolutely no other alternatives for BP but there are filtration systems used by other refineries that double filter the water to counteract unnecessary pollution. Why didn’t BP do that in the first place if they claim to be so environmental? Costs?  They worry about money! How much more can they possibly want? While BP isn’t Exxon Mobil, they’re close enough. Exxon Mobil made $75,000 per minute last year. The Holcim plant that threatens to close its doors is the same way. A billion dollar company and it won’t put 6.5 million into finally cleaning up its act. It spends every bit as much to lobby every year to get its way and pollute.

I don’t like the spin of pollution vs. jobs. It’s dangerous and usually based in greed. It’s also unnecessary, when there are all sorts of jobs to be had in a green economy too. The Eco Tech series on the Science Channel thought upwards of 250,000 jobs would be created with green business. It’s waiting to happen if we can get  fossil fuel people to move over. It would do our world and everything in it a whole lotta good. 

Read more about BP:

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=43729&newsdate=16-Aug-2007 http://www.takingdownwords.com/taking_down_words/2007/08/make-it-go-away.html