PDS APES 8th Period 2009-10

My question comes from #17 on the study guide about treatment methods for hazardous waste.  This is what I understand so far:  biological methods include bioremediation and phytoremediation, chemical methods include incineration, right? … I’m confused about physical methods of hazardous waste treatment methods (I’m guessing I completely missed this in the book, but I read over it several times).  In the book I see where it says, “…where three-fourths of the waste is detoxified by physical, chemical, and biological methods” (pg392).  Then it goes on to talk about these methods and then the storage of hazardous wastes; I feel like it never fully discusses each type of method available for treating hazardous waste.  Does anyone know about the physical methods?  Or can anyone point out where this might be in the book?  Or correct me if I’m totally wrong, please!  Thanks!!!

We’ve mentioned effluent several times in class while discussing water pollution.  I’m a little confused as to what it actually is… I know we labeled it as the “discharge of pollutants,” and that makes sense considering how we labeled the material being released into the water in the decomposition zone of the oxygen sage curve today.  I guess I’m asking:  what substances is effluent comprised of?  Is it just any sort of (water) pollutant?  Is effluent always considered a pollutant, or can it be just a release of water into another body of water?

SOURCES… Oil spills’ sources can be both point source pollution and non-point source pollution.   Several sources of oil spills include:  offshore wells (these usually contribute to “blowouts” or the leakage of oil due to high pressure), tanker wrecks (such as the Valdez), pipelines, storage tanks, and runoff from highways.  Runoff from highways is thought to be one of the leading sources of oil ocean pollution.     *Below is a picture of the Alaskan pipeline.

IMPACTS… There are numerous direct and indirect effects of oil spills on ocean ecosystems:  the death of many ocean-dependent organisms, the loss of animal insulation and buoyancy (like the coating of oil on birds’ feathers or otters’ coats), and the smothering of aquatic organisms (such organisms like crabs, oysters, and mussels settle at the bottom of the ocean where the more dense parts of a crude oil mixture sink).  Oil spills can be especially destructive toward the ocean ecosystem because the bottom levels of the food chain are affected not long after the spill (for example:  microorganisms like zooplankton).  Other impacts can include those on coastal communities that depend on the ocean for food (seafood consumers) and income (fishermen and areas that count on tourist activity).      *Below is a picture of a bird covered with oil.

At this point in class, we watched a movie produced by Exxon in 1992 (just three years after the Valdez oil spill); it was titled:  Scientists and the Alaska Oil Spill.  The video was pretty keen on ensuring the audience that scientists and experts were on sight to carry out a proper cleanup and recovery for Prince William Sound.  The main focus of the Exxon video was cleanup and recovery of the oil spill- it mentioned several impacts of the spill as well as what had been to to help the ecosystem recover.  There were some scientists who encouraged the cleansing of the environment on its own and letting nature do its work by itself.  Other points of view recommended that we help out some way to kick-start cleanup of the environment.  Below is a short video clip that’s great recap of the Exxon movie as well as the chapter “Oil on the Rocks” in Watersheds 4 focusing on the environmental recovery aspect of an oil spill.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/hsw/24657-legacy-of-an-oil-spill-environmental-recovery-video.htm

CLEANUP… It’s said that most ecosystems can recover from crude oil spills in about three years, but recovery from refined oil spills may take up to ten through twenty years.  There are three general categories of cleanup:  1) mechanical,  2) chemical,  and 3) biological.  Mechanical cleanup methods include:  booms (large floating containment barriers that lift oil out of ocean water), skimmers (way of skimming the surface of the water to lift oil out), and blotters (thick sponge-like device that can “blot up” oil from the surface of the water).  Chemical cleanup methods include:  dispersing agents (they’re essentially detergents that divide or disperse the oil) and coagulants (these do the opposite of dispersants- instead of breaking up the oil, these concentrate the oil).  Lastly, Biological cleanup methods include bioremediation (uses naturally occurring microbes to consume the hydrocarbons of oil).

Here is a link to a website with some awesome descriptions of oil spill cleanup methods:  http://science.howstuffworks.com/cleaning-oil-spill.htm

Here is a link to the EPA’s A Citizen’s Guide to Bioremediation:  http://www.epa.gov/tio/download/citizens/bioremediation.pdf .  I found this particularly helpful in understanding the concept of bioremediation as a means of cleaning up oil spills.  Below is a cartoon version of bioremediation:

SOLUTIONS… Well the most effective solution would be to discontinue our use of oil, but that is impossible for our oil-dependent world.  We can, however, improve standards for the transportation of oil; keep people and tankers away from reefs; use double hulls on tankers; increase the intensity of penalties for oil spills and tanker accidents; create new methods of cleanup; and introduce legislation such as the Oil Pollution Act.  Here is link to a summary of that act from the EPA:  http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/opa.html.

On the Chapter 14 study guide, question 7 asks us to “establish the relationship between pollution prevention and the precautionary principle.”  My understanding is that the precautionary principle suggests using pollution prevention and changing the way we evaluate risks.  Since we don’t know a vast amount about many chemical effects, we should go ahead and try using prevention rather than waiting around to see what the risks of chemicals really are to us.   In addition to this understanding, I have the definitions of both of these concepts, but I was wondering if I am establishing a correct or even relative relationship?  Does anyone have other ideas about this relationship?  Thanks!

As I looked at the titles of our study guides, I realized I’m a little confused about distinguishing strategies and tactics of the species and ecosystem approaches.  I know the Species Approach focuses on protecting the actual species itself, and the Ecosystem Approach focuses on protecting populations of species in their natural habitats while protecting their habitat areas.  It makes sense to me that the Ecosystem Approach would focus on the larger picture by protecting different habitats, which would ultimately end up help to protect entire populations of species.  My question comes in with the Species Approach- in our notes (from 1/7/10), I have written down that the Species Approach strategy includes protecting the endangered species’ habitats, and under tactics, I have one written down about managing the habitats of endangered species… does this mean that the Species Approach will have to use parts of the Ecosystem Approach??   It just seems like the Species Approach is similar to the Ecosystem Approach (besides that fact that it protects and identifies individual species).  Also, I would think that the Ecosystem Approach may be better in the long run for protecting endangered species (as well as the environment)… Perhaps I missed this, but which of these approaches is most likely to “work the best” (if we can generalize it that much)??

Reviewing material from the first chapter and the first test, I found that I had some trouble understanding Ecological Footprint calculations wtih the Global Eco Capacity.  One Test 1, number 29, I’m a little confused as to why the total footprints of the U.S. and India are so different.  I do understand how to calculate them using the P x A x T = I  formula, but after this I guess I’m a little confused on how one country’s impact can be so much higher due to one factor, though its other factors are so much less; like Molly said in the scribe post, “it’s about the trade offs.”  To clarify what I’m asking:  how do we know what causes each country’s impact to be greater or lesser than another country’s impatct?  Is it just due to factors like population, affluence, and technology?  To me this makes sense, but how does something like affluence offset something like population (the U.S. and India question)?  Thanks!

Question 1:  I just wanted to verify that when doing “population math,” the only time you convert the AGR percent to a decimal is when you are finding an Actual Annual Increase –by multiplying the AGR (converted to a decimal) with the current population.  Is this correct?  and any other time you use AGR with the formulas we learned, you use the number of the percent?

Question 2:  We talked about about solutions to the problem of AGR being too high, and such things to fix this include:  family planning; raising the standard of living by using industry; and improving educational opportunities for women.  As for one nation, I know we discussed incentives versus punishments through policies, laws, regulations, taxes, etc.  But, I’m still a little unclear on when AGR is negative.  What solutions exist to fix this problem?  I’m guessing that one nation’s government could use incentives in this case as well, but it would encourage couples to have more children.  Does anyone know of any other solutions to this population problem?  Thanks! (and sorry this was kind of last minute!!)

I understand what J and S curves are and the fact that neither of these curves seen in a textbook are not perfect real-life examples (a J-curve represents exponential growth, and an S-curve represents logistic growth).  Next, I understand that r-selected species have a high capacity for population growth, while k-selected species are competitor species.  So, this is where I have my question (and I know we’ve gone over this a lot, but I still have a little confusion, so bare with me please):  are r-selected species usually paired with some sort of J-curve growth? and are k-selected species usually paried with some sort of S-curve growth?  I know this is a comparison of reproductive patterns and population growth patterns, but are there other such relationships?  This one would make sense to me, but I guess I’m also wondering whether there are other ways to categorize such species groups?  For example, what about generalist species versus specialist species?  Here’s my understanding of that pairing, but someone please correct or clarify:  generalist species would most likely have a J-curve growth and tend to be r-selected species as well?

Last week during class, I tried to note general trends found in biomes all across the globe.  Here is a brief list that I came up with:

• Increased rainfall = increased plant height
• Increased rainfall = increased biodiversity
• The Tropics contain broadleaf evergreen trees
• The Temperate zones contain broadleaf deciduous trees
• The Poles contain coniferous evergreen tress
• Land Ecosystems- rank of NPP: 1)forests  2)grasslands  3)deserts
• Water Ecosystems- rank of NPP: 1)estuaries  2)swamps/marshes  3)lakes

First:  What other major trends am I missing?!  Second:  In class, we talked about how swamps and marshes have a much higher NPP than do lakes for multiple reasons including shallow water… but I’m a little confused on why this makes such a huge difference.  If anyone could help me out that would be great! Thanks!

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/earth/Atmosphere/images/mesosphere_diagram_sm.jpg

Next, we talked about global winds that occur in the upper troposphere/ lower stratosphere.  (These winds are part of what we call the Jet Stream).  Global winds are created by “global air circulation,” which is determined by (1) uneven heating of earth’s surface by the sun, (2) rotation of the earth on its axis, and (3) properties of air, water, and land.  We watched a short video called The Unchained Goddess, which taught us about wind.  First, the ultimate cause of wind is the sun.  The sun heats the equator more directly and intensely than the poles, so warm air is constantly rising and moves towards the poles. The poles, have cooler air, which is constantly falling and moving towards the equator.  This creates the movement of North and South winds; however, wind also moves East and West.  The earth is curved and is always rotating on its axis- because of this, the big loop of the winds moving North to South and South to North, is broken up into three small loops that circulate in different directions.  Wind is given direction by the Coriolis Effect.

The Coriolis Effect is essentially what makes the winds “curve.”  For example, think about two children on a carrousel throwing a ball; both children are moving with the carrousel.  When one child throws the ball, the other child doesn’t catch it because it appears as if the ball is moving on a curved path; however, this is not the case.  The ball is thrown straight, but it is the catcher that is moving away from the original target of the ball.  Click on the link to see an animation of the Coriolis Effect.  http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/genbio/tlw3/eBridge/Chp29/animations/ch29/global_wind_circulation.swf