Conservation 101: the Compete to Conserve Blog

photo credit: ..· ✈Katherina ➳·..

As host of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, China missed key opportunities to leave a meaningful, lasting environmental legacy.

In a recently released report, Greenpeace commends China for living up to many of its environmental promises. But, the watchdogs note, a lack of transparency and independently verified data made evaluation difficult. And many solutions, especially those relating to Beijing’s air quality, are temporary fixes that will not continue after the games, and therefore not be of real benefit to the people of Beijing.

Here’s a quick look at Beijing’s missed opportunities:

• Waste management
  Instead of moving toward a zero-waste policy, polluting incineration was encouraged and more landfill was created.
• Car ownership
  While four new rail lines were added to boost public transportation infrastructure, little was done to curb private car ownership. About half a million cars were added to Beijing’s roads last year, a pace that is expected to continue.
• Air quality
  Dramatic quick fixes like temporarily halting industrial production and banning most private cars from the road may improve air quality for the games, but they are not lasting, cost-effective solutions. A better approach would be to enforce stricter emission standards for manufacturing, make public transportation viable for more riders, and move away from reliance on coal-burning energy plants.
• Water conservation
  Water-saving technologies used at the Shunyi Olympic Rowing and Canoe Park could have been more widely adopting to prevent and further strain on Beijing’s dwindling water supply.
• Air-conditioning and refrigeration
  Most of the cooling technologies used eschew ozone-depleting CFCs, but many use climate-boosting hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Because most of these systems are new and will likely not be replaced for some time, it represents a failure to leapfrog to more-efficient, greener technologies.
• Building construction
  Green building techniques were encouraged but non-binding, limiting their implementation.
• Sponsors
  Electronic companies Lenovo and Panasonic provided equipment containing known toxic substances like PVC and BFR.

More resources:
Greenpeace’s full report:
http://www.greenpeace.org/china/en/news/green

“IOC Could Have Done More,” TreeHugger
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/07/beijing_ioc_get_mixed_report_greenpeace.php

photo credit: Mark Sadowski

The flap over Beijing’s air pollution levels during the 2008 Summer Olympics has us wondering: what are the real implications for athletes? And what do air pollution levels mean for the rest of us?

Most people will tell you they can feel the effects of a particularly smoggy day, but air pollution is of particular concern to athletes, especially those who participate in endurance sports like long-distance running and cycling.

Athletes Take in More Air

Athletes breathe in up to 20 times more air than sedentary individuals, which means they breathe in up to 20 times more pollutants. When pollutants make up a higher percentage of air, it also means less oxygen is taken in, which could affect an athlete’s performance.

Once air pollutants (called “particulate matter” or PM for the tiny harmful particles and liquid droplets that make up pollution) are in the lungs, they cause irritation and inflammation and can exacerbate existing heart, pulmonary, or respiratory conditions such as asthma. Common reactions are coughing, breathing difficulties, eye irritation, chest pain, and darkened mucous secretions. More serious reactions include asthma attack, heart attack, even death.

The Worst Pollution Is the Kind You Can’t See

The most harmful particles measure less than 10 micrometers in diameter and are called PM10. (For size reference, a human hair measures about 70 micrometers in diameter.) High PM10 levels are particularly dangerous because the particles are small enough to lodge deep in the lungs and sometimes even enter the bloodstream.

When you hear reporters talk about air pollution levels, they are usually talking about the amount of PM10 in the air. That’s how Chinese officials are measuring their success at reducing air pollution during this week’s Olympic events. Beijing’s goal is to reach 50 micrograms of PM10 per cubic meter. A typical day in Beijing can measure 250 micrograms, so it’s a laudable, if difficult to achieve benchmark. (A typical day in London measures 21 micrograms.)

How to Reduce PM10 Levels

So what can you do to reduce PM10 in the air? Most PM10 comes from cars, power plants, and factories, so you can make the biggest impact by driving less and using less electricity. Perhaps the even bigger lesson in Beijing, however, is that voluntary measures have great limitations. It wasn’t until severe restrictions were placed on drivers, utilities, and manufacturers that air quality improved.

The International Olympic Committee is hoping that many of Beijing’s green measures will improve the environmental quality of life after the games are over. How Beijing fares will serve as a lesson for the rest of world.

Basic Information on PM from the EPA
http://www.epa.gov/oar/particlepollution/basic.html

photo credit: Vanessa Pike-Russell

A recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows air quality is improving in terms of Second Hand Smoke (SHS).

The report states SHS exposure dropped approximately 70 percent from the late 1980s through 2002. The decline is attributed to “widespread implementation of laws and policies prohibiting smoking in indoor workplaces and public places.”

Analysis was conducted using data from the 1988-1994 and 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, in which serum cotinine (a biologic indicator of SHS exposure) was measured in nonsmoking kids, teens and adults.

The results showed a significant decline throughout the US population, but there was less of a decrease for 4-19 year olds than for their adult counterparts—underscoring the need to reduce SHS exposure at home, the primary source for children and teens.

The report also notes: “the prevalence of cigarette smoking has decreased during this period, from 28% in 1988 to 21% in 2004,” which may also account for less SHS. But despite this reduction in exposure, almost half of U.S. nonsmokers still had detectable levels of serum cotinine, indicating that SHS exposure remains an important issue for public health.

To check out the CDC report, go to: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5727a3.htm

photo credit: mugley

Fourth of July fireworks spectaculars bring communities together, instill civic pride, and wow us with their bright beauty. They also release fuels, metals, and other toxins that can remain in the air and water sources months later.

The problem, it seems, is that the technology powering most fireworks shows hasn’t changed much since the 1930s. Blends of black powder, oxidizers, metals, and fuels are ignited. Then traces wind up in the air and water and spread long distances.

According to a report in the July 3, 2008, issue of The Los Angeles Times, “concentrations of fine particles, or carbon soot, skyrocket for up to 24 hours after the Independence Day shows, reaching levels as high as those from wildfires.” These fine particles can inflame airways, lodge in the lungs, and trigger breathing problems, coughing, and sore throats. It’s of even more concern for those with heart and respiratory ailments such as asthma. Hospital admissions spike when there are high levels of fine particles in the air.

Also troublesome are heavy metals, such as barium, and fuels, such as perchlorate, that the explosions release. Metals give fireworks their brilliant colors, and perchlorate, a cancer-causing and hormone-altering substance, is used as an oxidizer. (Perchlorate is also used a rocket fuel and is increasingly found in our nations waterways from various sources.)

All this said, it’s hard to give up a good fireworks show. As a nation, we love and expect them as a matter of patriotic duty. That’s why some fireworks boosters, like the Walt Disney Company, which puts on fireworks displays nightly at its theme parks during the summer months, are working with scientists to develop with greener solutions.

Now Disneyland uses ultra-low-smoke and perchlorate-free technologies developed at places such as Los Alamos Labs and DMD Systems. The park also uses an aerial launcher with compressed air so that less soot is released.

Now that the technologies are being developed, why doesn’t everyone use them? The answer, as with many environmentally friendly alternatives, is cost. Today, greener fireworks can cost as much as 10 times standard issue fireworks imported from China.

The hope is that as technologies improve and demand for greener fireworks increases, costs will come down. What you can do as an individual, is educate the people you know about the risks and benefits of traditional fireworks, and ask those who put on the displays (local theme parks, city governments, etc.) to consider new, greener alternatives.

More resources:

Along with Beauty, Fireworks a Beastly Mix of Pollutants, The Los Angeles Times, July 3, 2008
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-me-fireworks4-2008jul04,0,3738169,full.story

Pyrotechnic for the Planet, Chemical & Engineering News, June 30, 2008
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/86/8626cover.html

Chemists Brew Greener Fireworks, Cnet, July 3, 2008
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9983246-54.html?hhTest=1

Eco-Friendly Pyrotechnics, Physorg.com
http://www.physorg.com/news124961394.html

EPA Considers Regulating Perchlorate in Ground Water
http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/ccl/perchlorate/perchlorate.html