Conservation 101: the Compete to Conserve Blog

photo credit: Nicholas_T

After looking into China’s Weather Modification program, and its Olympic Weather plans, I began to wonder what kind of effect such practices could have long term.

Putting aside the image of regional farmers equipped to work rocket launchers and anti-aircraft artillery—which leads to a whole different set of concerns—I wondered about the dangers of shooting silver iodide into the sky. Wasn’t anyone concerned about what kind of rain was coming back down?

Turns out, they are.

While researchers from organizations like North American Weather Consultants Inc (NAWC) claim that the silver iodide crystals are so dispersed only trace amounts can be found in test samples that fall to Earth, others are crying foul.

(more…)

photo credit: (nutmeg)

A new report from the environmental watchdogs at Greenpeace says that Beijing has lived up to many (though definitely not all) of its green promises made in its bid to host the 2008 Summer Olympics.

As the Olympic Committee has noted, part of its selection decision was based on the hope that sustainable development would benefit China as it continues its crash course in rapid development. While there are many areas that could have been improved, sustainable development advocates are hoping that Beijing’s environmental successes will serve as a blueprint for other developing cities in China and around the world.

Greenpeace found that “Beijing achieved and in some cases surpassed original environmental goals but missed some opportunities that could have ensured a better short- and long-term environmental Olympic legacy for the city.”

Here’s a quick look at Beijing’s laudable green triumphs:

• A Shift Away from Polluting Fossil Fuels
  New Olympic venues showcase an array of sustainable energy technologies, including solar hot water, geothermal heating and air-conditioning, and solar photovoltaic systems. And wind power from a new nearby wind power station will provide enough energy to meet the annual demands of 100,000 families.
• New Energy Efficient Upgrades
  More than 32,000 household-heating systems have been upgraded from coal to electricity. And more than 50,000 large-scale boilers have been upgraded to be more energy efficient.
• Stringent Vehicle-Emission Standards
  Ahead of what was originally promised, new vehicles must now meet EURO IV emission standards, which are among the strictest in the world.
• Improved Public Transportation
  Four new rail lines have been added in Beijing. A fleet of new, natural-gas buses are running during the games. And fares have been reduced to encourage ridership, which now averages 19.5 million a day. (Olympic ticket-holders can ride free, for 51 days.)
• Improved Wastewater, Water Reuse, and Sewage Systems
  Drinking water now meets World Health Organization (WHO) standards and new reusing technologies should help with increased water demand. Rural sanitation construction is set to protect groundwater supplies. And the government has cracked down on illegal construction, farming, and mining, which pollutes waterways.
• Sponsors Going Green, Too
  Coca-Cola’s nearly 6,000 refrigeration units are HFC-free. (Hydrofluorocarbons replaced ozone-depleting CFCs in refrigeration units in the U.S. in the 1980s, but have since been pinpointed as a source of global warming because of their heat-trapping properties.) And Samsung is providing cell phones that are free of polluting polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and bromide flame retardants.

Overall, Greenpeace commends China and the city of Beijing for its efforts and for demonstrating that, given the political will, it is possible for a rapidly developing city to leap ahead of polluting technologies. But for any of the green initiatives to have any meaningful and lasting impact for China after the games, the country must engage in long-term energy reforms and move away from its dependence on hyper-polluting coal as an energy source.

Read the full Greenpeace report at:
http://www.greenpeace.org/china/en/news/green

photo credit: Montrasio International

If provided with another chance, would China have wanted to host the Olympics this summer?  If China knew that hosting the Olympics in 2008 would actually have a detrimental impact on its economy while bringing to the international spotlight the country’s environmental and human rights practices, would we be watching Istanbul 2008?

The International Olympic Committee selected Beijing to host the 2008 Summer Olympics back in 2001.  In generating support for the Olympics in Beijing, China argued, in part, that 2008 would be the creation of the first “green” Olympics.  Cleaning up Beijing for the 2008 games, Chinese officials suggested, would be an inspiration to other Olympic venues.  Seven years later, air quality is still a major concern to the athletes.  And if air quality was not enough to keep China from “breathing easy”, in February the United States Olympic Committee announced it would bring its own food to the Olympics.  Perhaps inspired in part by the worldwide food contamination scare for U.S. domestic pets, the decision disappointed Beijing nonetheless.  Add to that the recent scrutiny of China’s human rights and political practices, is this really what China needs right now? (more…)

photo credit: linh.ngân

In the years approaching the 2008 Games, the Chinese government formed a Weather Modification office to address weather and pollution concerns. The goal: Create optimum conditions by making it rain when they want and keeping it away when they don’t.

When the country first started fooling with Mother Nature, back in 1958, the primary focus was farm regions, where drought lingered and crops suffered. But over the decades the techniques they developed have been used to fight fires, prevent hailstorms, replenish riverheads and reservoirs, sweep away pollution and ease a heat wave.

Does that mean the grey haze over George Hincapie and other Olympic cyclists or the rain that fell on beach volleyball competitors were signs of China’s weather control success? When you consider the clear skies over the Opening ceremony…maybe.

(more…)

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: Addictive Picasso

With just days to go, China’s government is working overtime to meet air pollution reduction goals set for the upcoming Olympic games in Beijing.

Named the world’s 13th most polluted city by the World Bank, Beijing has implemented stiff measures to reduce its infamous air pollution, including:

• Tightening emission standards on cars
• Temporarily restricting traffic in Beijing
• Temporarily halting some construction projects
• Ordering some high-polluting factories to temporarily stop work
• Updating coal-burning plants

And while the measures have had some effect—Chinese government officials say Beijing’s air pollution is down 20% from 2007—it may not be enough. Due in part to warm, dry weather and a lack of wind during the past week, Beijing’s air pollution index is twice the maximum recommended by the World Health Organization.

If pollution levels keep up, the government says it is prepared to further restrict driving in Beijing (taking up to 90% of the city’s private cars off the road), halt more construction sites, and order more factories to shutter operations during the games.

More resources:

“Beijing Pollution: Facts and Figures,” BBC News, July 18, 2008
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7498198.stm

“Beijing May Take New Measures on Olympic Pollution,” Bloomberg, July 28, 2008
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&sid=agMq3gnpy6V8&refer=home

“Beijing Mulls Emergency Green Plan for Games,” China Daily (a state-run newspaper), July 28, 2008
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-07/28/content_6880332.htm

photo credit: TheeErin

Here’s something the dry cleaning industry doesn’t want you to know: You don’t need them. Really. Most items in your closet, even the ones labeled “dry clean only” are hand-washable in mild detergent. I know. I’ve tried it myself on suits for work, wool sweaters, silk shirts, and more. Over the course of a year, I easily save $200-$350 just skipping the dry cleaner.

Save Even More Compared to “Green” Cleaners

I save even more if you compare what I’d spend at a “green” dry cleaner. I tried one once. It cost me $20 compared to the $6 at my standard cleaner, and it shrank my sweater. Good thing 3/4-length sleeves are “in” right now! Though, in all fairness, they did warn me that their environmentally friendly method has a tendency to shrink woolens.

Sure, dry cleaning has its immediate benefits, namely, someone else is doing your washing and pressing. But when you take the economic cost to you and the environmental impact (lots of non-biodegradable plastic bags and wire hangers in the landfill, toxins released into your home and our waterways) and compare it to a little extra work on your part, the choice is clear.
(more…)

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