Animal Rights
Animal rights is a very fragile topic. Opposing sides have strong reasons
to stand for either of their believes, leading to many ethical questions.
One of the major questions is who is right and who is wrong? There is no
one right answer, but instead million of them based upon our own individual
opinion, and the opinions are formed on how we feel about the facts. Animal
research, test, and use has taken humanity a long way, with its advances in
medicine and as a major source of food, but it is not morally correct to
abuse, test, use, and ultimately kill the animals unnecessarily, especially
for our comforts, luxuries, and greed.
Many benefits have been obtained through animals, mostly in the field of
Medicine. The medical world has rapidly moved forward finding cures for many diseases through animal testing, giving new alternatives and shining a new light for illnesses that did not have a cure before. Working with animals
like monkeys and dogs have resulted in successful open heart surgeries on
people, as well as organ transplants, and the cardiac pace maker.
The disease polio, which killed and disabled many children, is almost
completely vanished from the United States by the used of preventive vaccines that were perfected on monkeys. Not only polio, but also mumps, measles,rubella and smallpox have been eliminated through antibiotics tested on monkeys. Major diseases have been alleviated and have had major advances totheir cure, diseases such as leukemia in children among other types of cancerand tumors. Animals not only contribute greatly in medicine, but through out the history of human kind they have been consumed as food, being a majorsource for the basic nutrition.
Unfortunately, some research has gone too far, putting many animals through unnecessary pain. According to Jean Bethke Elshtain, a Centennial Professor of Political Science at Vanderbilt University, the abuse that animals go through is intolerable. Monkeys are dipped in boiling water and pigs are burnt, without any type of painkillers to see how they react to third degree burns. Even more horrifying is the fact that dogs and other animals are left without care bearing open incisions, infected wounds, broken bones among other things in a miserable atmosphere, surrounded by rotting food and their own feces. What breaks my heart to read is how when some animals are being tested, the researchers sometimes remove the defenseless animals vocal chords by an operation called centriculocordectomy, so this way they will not hear the animals' cries, groans and yelps while they are being
experimented on.
Research it's not only limited to the medical field, but also in many other
areas. "Monkeys are the most likely subjects of experiments designed to
measure the effects of neutron-bomb radiation and the toxicity of chemical
warfare agent.....Radiation experiments on primates continue. Monkeys' eyes
are irradiated, and the animals are subjected to shocks of up to 1,200
volts." Monkeys are exposed to these radiations to observe
how cancer progresses. But what observers actually see is "primates that are
so distressed that they claw themselves and even bite hunks from their own
arms and legs in a futile attempt to stop the pain." The pain these
animals endure and go through is unbearable and unnecessary, other means
could be use to do the research, considering many times these type of
research is unnecessary. Even worse is the fact that animals are been used
in the production of things such as make-up and household products. Is it
really necessary for a whale to die so we can wear lipstick for couple of
hours, or so we can wax our floors? The price of these commodities is
ridiculous, an animal should never even be at risk of been hurt for such
superficial things. Many companies such as Gillette test their products on
animals before putting them on the public market. This is simply cruel,
animals are hurting and dying for things that are superficial. The worst is
the FUR COATS!!! It is a a a greedy murder.
If anything we are the ones that owe the animals a great debt. Without themwe would be years behind in medicine and many things that are done now wouldnot be able to be accomplished. But how far are we willing to go for thesake of medicine, technology, comforts, luxuries and looks? Is all theseworth the death and abuse of millions of animals? The answer is no. Grantedthat they have helped us greatly in the ordeal of human kind, by letting ustest on them and eat them, we are ultimately responsible for most of the diseases and the habits and they should not pay for it. Even in the name of Medical Science, the life of an animal that is taken unnecessarily was a
mistake that will never be repaired.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Animal Experimentation
Introduction
Animal experimentation has been a part of biomedical and behavioral research for several millennia; experiments with animals were conducted in Greece over 2,000 years ago. Many advances in medicine and in the understanding of how organisms function have been the direct result of animal experimentation.
Concern over the welfare of laboratory animals is also not new, as reflected in the activities of various animal welfare and antivivisectionist groups dating back to the nineteenth century. This concern has led to laws and regulations governing the use of animals in research and to various guides and statements of principle designed to ensure humane treatment and use of laboratory animals.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Use of Animals in Research
Some of the earliest recorded studies involving animals were performed by Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), who revealed anatomical differences among animals by dissecting them (Rowan, 1984). The Greek physician Galen (A.D. 129-199) maintained that experimentation led to scientific progress and is said to have been the first to conduct demonstrations with live animals--specifically pigs-a practice later extended to other species and termed "vivisection" (Loew, 1982). However, it was not until the sixteenth century that many experiments on animals began to be recorded. In 1628, William Harvey published his work on the heart and the movement of blood in animals (French, 1975). In the 18OOs, when France became one of the leading centers of experimental biology and medicine-marked by the work of such scientists as Francis Magendie in experimental physiology, Claude Bernard in experimental medicine, and Louis Pasteur in microbiology and immunology-investigators regularly used animals in biomedical research (McGrew, 1985).
Research in biology progressed at an increasing pace starting around 1850, with many of the advances resulting from experiments involving animals. Helmholtz studied the physical and chemical activities associated with the nerve impulse; Virchow developed the science of cellular pathology, which led the way to a more rational understanding of disease processes; Pasteur began the studies that led to immunization for anthrax and inoculation for rabies; and Koch started a long series of studies that would firmly establish the germ theory of disease. Lister performed the first antiseptic surgery in 1878, and Metchnikoff discovered the antibacterial activities of white blood cells in 1884. The first hormone was extracted in 1902. Ehrlich developed a chemical treatment for syphilis in 1909, and laboratory tissue culture began in 1910. By 1912, nutritional deficiencies were sufficiently well understood to allow scientists to coin the word "vitamin." In 1920, Banting and Best isolated insulin, which led to therapy for diabetes mellitus. Mter 1920, the results of science-based biological research and their medical applications followed so rapidly and in such numbers that they cannot be catalogued here.
Concerns over Animal Use
The first widespread opposition to the use of animals in research was expressed in the nineteenth century. Even before this, however, concern had arisen about the treatment of farm animals. The first piece of legislation to forbid cruelty to animals was adopted by the General Court of Massachusetts in 1641 and stated that "No man shall exercise any tyranny or cruelty towards any brute creatures which are usually kept for man's use" (Stone, 1977). In England, Martin's Act was enacted in 1822 to provide protection for farm animals. In 1824, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) was founded to ensure that this act was observed. In 1865, Henry Bergh brought the SPCA idea to America (Thrner, 1980).
He was motivated not by the use of animals in research but by the ill-treatment of horses that he observed in czarist Russia.
In the second half of the nineteenth century, concerns for the welfare of farm animals expanded to include animals used in scientific research. The antivivisectionist movement in England, which sought to abolish the use of animals in research, became engaged in large-scale public agitation in 1870, coincident with the development of experimental physiology and the rapid growth of biomedical research. In 1876, a royal commission appointed to investigate vivisection issued a report that led to enactment of the Cruelty to Animals Act. The act did not abolish all animal experimentation, as desired by the antivivisection movement. Rather, it required experimenters to be licensed by the government for experiments that were expected to cause pain in vertebrates.
As animal experimentation increased in the United States in the second half of the nineteenth century, animal sympathizers in this country also became alarmed. The first American antivivisectionist society was founded in Philadelphia in 1883, followed by the formation of similar societies in New York in 1892 and Boston in 1895. Like their predecessors in England, these groups sought to abolish the use of animals in biomedical research, but they were far less prominent or influential than the major animal-protection societies, such as the American SPCA, the Massachusetts SPCA, and the American Humane Association (Turner, 1980).
Unsuccessful in its efforts toward the end of the nineteenth century to abolish the use of laboratory animals (Cohen and Loew, 1984), the antivivisectionist movement declined in the early twentieth century. However, the animal welfare movement remained active, and in the 195Os and 1960s its increasing strength led to federal regulation of animal experimentation. The Animal Welfare Act was passed in 1966 and amended in 1970, 1976, and 1985. Similar laws have been enacted in other countries to regulate the treatment of laboratory animals (Hampson, 1985).
Concern over the welfare of animals used in research has made itself felt in other ways. In 1963, the Animal Care Panel drafted a document that is now known as the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council, 1985a). As discussed in Chapter 5, the Guide is meant to assist institutions in caring for and using laboratory animals in ways judged to be professionally and humanely appropriate. Many professional societies and public and private research institutions have also issued guidelines and statements on the humane use of animals; for example, the American Physiological Society, the Society for Neuroscience, and the American Psychological Association.
PRESENT SITUATION
Despite the long history of concern with animal welfare, the treatment and use of experimental animals remain controversial. In recent years a great expansion of biomedical and behavioral research has occurred. Simultaneously, there has been increased expression of concern over the use of animals in research. Wide publicity of several cases involving the neglect and misuse of experimental animals has sensitized people to the treatment of laboratory animals. Societal attitudes have also changed, as a spirit of general social concern and a strong belief that humans have sometimes been insensitive to the protection of the environment have contributed to an outlook in which the use of animals is a subject of concern.
Of course, any indifference to the suffering of animals properly gives rise to legitimate objections. From time to time some few members of the scientific community have been found to mistreat or inadequately care for research animals. Such actions are not acceptable. Maltreatment and improper care of animals used in research cannot be tolerated by the scientific establishment. Individuals responsible for such behavior must be subject to censure by their peers. Out of this concern that abuse be prevented, organizations have emerged to monitor how laboratory animals are being treated, and government agencies and private organizations have adopted regulations governing animal care and use.
Discussions about laboratory animal use have also been influenced in recent years by the emergence of groups committed to a concept termed "animal rights." Some of these groups oppose all use of animals for human benefit and any experimentation that is not intended primarily for the benefit of the individual animals involved. Their view recognizes more than the traditional interdependent connections between humans and animals: It reflects a belief that animals, like humans, have inherent rights" (Regan, 1983; Singer, 1975).
Their use of the term "rights" in connection with animals departs from its customary usage or common meaning. In Western history and culture, "rights" refers to legal and moral relationships among the members of a community of humans; it has not been applied to other entities (Cohen, 1986). Our society does, however, acknowledge that living things have inherent value. In practice, that value imposes an ethical obligation on scientists to minimize pain and distress in laboratory animals.
Our society is influenced by two major strands of thought: the Judeo-Christian heritage and the humanistic tradition rooted in Greek philosophy. The dominance of humans is accepted in both traditions. The Judeo-Christian notion of dominance is reflected in the passage in the Bible that states (Genesis 1:26):
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and
let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
However, the Judeo-Christian heritage also insists that dominance be attended by responsibility. Power used appropriately must be used with the morality of caring. The uniqueness of humans, most philosophers agree, lies in our ability to make moral choices. We have the option to decide to dominate animals, but we also have a mandate to make choices responsibly to comply with the obligations of stewardship.
From tradition and practice it is clear that society accepts the idea of a hierarchy of species in its attitudes toward and its regulation of the relationships between humans and the other animal species. For example, animals as different as nonhuman primates, dogs, and cats are given special consideration as being "closer" to humans and are treated differently from rodents, reptiles, and rabbits.
Most individuals would agree that not all species of animals are equal and would reject the contention of animal rights advocates who argue that it is "speciesism" to convey special status to humans. Clearly, humans are different, in that humans are the only species able to make moral judgments, engage in reflective thought, and communicate these thoughts. Because of this special status, humans have felt justified to use animals for food and fiber, for personal use, and in experimentation. As indicated earlier, however, these uses of animals by humans carry with them the responsibility for stewardship of the animals.
Several recent surveys have examined public opinion about the use of laboratory animals in scientific experimentation (Doyle Dane Bernbach, 1983; Media General, 1985; Research Strategies Corp., 1985). Most of the people interviewed want to see medical research continued, even at the expense of animals' lives. Beyond that, people's thoughts about animal use depend on the particular species used and/or on the research problem being addressed. Almost all people support the experimental use of rodents. Support for the use of dogs, cats, and monkeys is less, and people clearly would prefer that rodents be used instead. Most people polled believe that animals used in research are treated humanely.
Animal experimentation has been a part of biomedical and behavioral research for several millennia; experiments with animals were conducted in Greece over 2,000 years ago. Many advances in medicine and in the understanding of how organisms function have been the direct result of animal experimentation.
Concern over the welfare of laboratory animals is also not new, as reflected in the activities of various animal welfare and antivivisectionist groups dating back to the nineteenth century. This concern has led to laws and regulations governing the use of animals in research and to various guides and statements of principle designed to ensure humane treatment and use of laboratory animals.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Use of Animals in Research
Some of the earliest recorded studies involving animals were performed by Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), who revealed anatomical differences among animals by dissecting them (Rowan, 1984). The Greek physician Galen (A.D. 129-199) maintained that experimentation led to scientific progress and is said to have been the first to conduct demonstrations with live animals--specifically pigs-a practice later extended to other species and termed "vivisection" (Loew, 1982). However, it was not until the sixteenth century that many experiments on animals began to be recorded. In 1628, William Harvey published his work on the heart and the movement of blood in animals (French, 1975). In the 18OOs, when France became one of the leading centers of experimental biology and medicine-marked by the work of such scientists as Francis Magendie in experimental physiology, Claude Bernard in experimental medicine, and Louis Pasteur in microbiology and immunology-investigators regularly used animals in biomedical research (McGrew, 1985).
Research in biology progressed at an increasing pace starting around 1850, with many of the advances resulting from experiments involving animals. Helmholtz studied the physical and chemical activities associated with the nerve impulse; Virchow developed the science of cellular pathology, which led the way to a more rational understanding of disease processes; Pasteur began the studies that led to immunization for anthrax and inoculation for rabies; and Koch started a long series of studies that would firmly establish the germ theory of disease. Lister performed the first antiseptic surgery in 1878, and Metchnikoff discovered the antibacterial activities of white blood cells in 1884. The first hormone was extracted in 1902. Ehrlich developed a chemical treatment for syphilis in 1909, and laboratory tissue culture began in 1910. By 1912, nutritional deficiencies were sufficiently well understood to allow scientists to coin the word "vitamin." In 1920, Banting and Best isolated insulin, which led to therapy for diabetes mellitus. Mter 1920, the results of science-based biological research and their medical applications followed so rapidly and in such numbers that they cannot be catalogued here.
Concerns over Animal Use
The first widespread opposition to the use of animals in research was expressed in the nineteenth century. Even before this, however, concern had arisen about the treatment of farm animals. The first piece of legislation to forbid cruelty to animals was adopted by the General Court of Massachusetts in 1641 and stated that "No man shall exercise any tyranny or cruelty towards any brute creatures which are usually kept for man's use" (Stone, 1977). In England, Martin's Act was enacted in 1822 to provide protection for farm animals. In 1824, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) was founded to ensure that this act was observed. In 1865, Henry Bergh brought the SPCA idea to America (Thrner, 1980).
He was motivated not by the use of animals in research but by the ill-treatment of horses that he observed in czarist Russia.
In the second half of the nineteenth century, concerns for the welfare of farm animals expanded to include animals used in scientific research. The antivivisectionist movement in England, which sought to abolish the use of animals in research, became engaged in large-scale public agitation in 1870, coincident with the development of experimental physiology and the rapid growth of biomedical research. In 1876, a royal commission appointed to investigate vivisection issued a report that led to enactment of the Cruelty to Animals Act. The act did not abolish all animal experimentation, as desired by the antivivisection movement. Rather, it required experimenters to be licensed by the government for experiments that were expected to cause pain in vertebrates.
As animal experimentation increased in the United States in the second half of the nineteenth century, animal sympathizers in this country also became alarmed. The first American antivivisectionist society was founded in Philadelphia in 1883, followed by the formation of similar societies in New York in 1892 and Boston in 1895. Like their predecessors in England, these groups sought to abolish the use of animals in biomedical research, but they were far less prominent or influential than the major animal-protection societies, such as the American SPCA, the Massachusetts SPCA, and the American Humane Association (Turner, 1980).
Unsuccessful in its efforts toward the end of the nineteenth century to abolish the use of laboratory animals (Cohen and Loew, 1984), the antivivisectionist movement declined in the early twentieth century. However, the animal welfare movement remained active, and in the 195Os and 1960s its increasing strength led to federal regulation of animal experimentation. The Animal Welfare Act was passed in 1966 and amended in 1970, 1976, and 1985. Similar laws have been enacted in other countries to regulate the treatment of laboratory animals (Hampson, 1985).
Concern over the welfare of animals used in research has made itself felt in other ways. In 1963, the Animal Care Panel drafted a document that is now known as the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council, 1985a). As discussed in Chapter 5, the Guide is meant to assist institutions in caring for and using laboratory animals in ways judged to be professionally and humanely appropriate. Many professional societies and public and private research institutions have also issued guidelines and statements on the humane use of animals; for example, the American Physiological Society, the Society for Neuroscience, and the American Psychological Association.
PRESENT SITUATION
Despite the long history of concern with animal welfare, the treatment and use of experimental animals remain controversial. In recent years a great expansion of biomedical and behavioral research has occurred. Simultaneously, there has been increased expression of concern over the use of animals in research. Wide publicity of several cases involving the neglect and misuse of experimental animals has sensitized people to the treatment of laboratory animals. Societal attitudes have also changed, as a spirit of general social concern and a strong belief that humans have sometimes been insensitive to the protection of the environment have contributed to an outlook in which the use of animals is a subject of concern.
Of course, any indifference to the suffering of animals properly gives rise to legitimate objections. From time to time some few members of the scientific community have been found to mistreat or inadequately care for research animals. Such actions are not acceptable. Maltreatment and improper care of animals used in research cannot be tolerated by the scientific establishment. Individuals responsible for such behavior must be subject to censure by their peers. Out of this concern that abuse be prevented, organizations have emerged to monitor how laboratory animals are being treated, and government agencies and private organizations have adopted regulations governing animal care and use.
Discussions about laboratory animal use have also been influenced in recent years by the emergence of groups committed to a concept termed "animal rights." Some of these groups oppose all use of animals for human benefit and any experimentation that is not intended primarily for the benefit of the individual animals involved. Their view recognizes more than the traditional interdependent connections between humans and animals: It reflects a belief that animals, like humans, have inherent rights" (Regan, 1983; Singer, 1975).
Their use of the term "rights" in connection with animals departs from its customary usage or common meaning. In Western history and culture, "rights" refers to legal and moral relationships among the members of a community of humans; it has not been applied to other entities (Cohen, 1986). Our society does, however, acknowledge that living things have inherent value. In practice, that value imposes an ethical obligation on scientists to minimize pain and distress in laboratory animals.
Our society is influenced by two major strands of thought: the Judeo-Christian heritage and the humanistic tradition rooted in Greek philosophy. The dominance of humans is accepted in both traditions. The Judeo-Christian notion of dominance is reflected in the passage in the Bible that states (Genesis 1:26):
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and
let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
However, the Judeo-Christian heritage also insists that dominance be attended by responsibility. Power used appropriately must be used with the morality of caring. The uniqueness of humans, most philosophers agree, lies in our ability to make moral choices. We have the option to decide to dominate animals, but we also have a mandate to make choices responsibly to comply with the obligations of stewardship.
From tradition and practice it is clear that society accepts the idea of a hierarchy of species in its attitudes toward and its regulation of the relationships between humans and the other animal species. For example, animals as different as nonhuman primates, dogs, and cats are given special consideration as being "closer" to humans and are treated differently from rodents, reptiles, and rabbits.
Most individuals would agree that not all species of animals are equal and would reject the contention of animal rights advocates who argue that it is "speciesism" to convey special status to humans. Clearly, humans are different, in that humans are the only species able to make moral judgments, engage in reflective thought, and communicate these thoughts. Because of this special status, humans have felt justified to use animals for food and fiber, for personal use, and in experimentation. As indicated earlier, however, these uses of animals by humans carry with them the responsibility for stewardship of the animals.
Several recent surveys have examined public opinion about the use of laboratory animals in scientific experimentation (Doyle Dane Bernbach, 1983; Media General, 1985; Research Strategies Corp., 1985). Most of the people interviewed want to see medical research continued, even at the expense of animals' lives. Beyond that, people's thoughts about animal use depend on the particular species used and/or on the research problem being addressed. Almost all people support the experimental use of rodents. Support for the use of dogs, cats, and monkeys is less, and people clearly would prefer that rodents be used instead. Most people polled believe that animals used in research are treated humanely.
animal ethics
Animal ethics is concerned with the status of animals, whereas environmental ethics concerns itself with the relationship to the environment. I will show the existence of animal ethics depends on the existence of environmental ethics. I will prove this by showing that such philosophers who have practiced animal ethics such as Singer, Regan, and Taylor are limited because they are individualistic. Which means they are limited to animal concerns, and nothing else. But with the environmental ethics such philosophers as Leapold, Wesra and Naess look at the environment ethics collectively. Which means they look at the big picture which includes the animals and its environment.
I will first look at the views of Peter Singer, who is a utilitarian. A utilitarian is someone who believes the greatest amount of good for the greatest number. Singer wants the suffering of animals to be taken into consideration. He states "If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering...". What this means is that the suffering of animals is not justified. He also states how he thinks a major way to stop the suffering of animals is to stop the experimenting on animals. He states"...the widespread practice of experimenting on other species in order to see if certain substances are safe for human beings, or to test some psychological theory about the effect of severe punishment or learning...". When he is talking about the experiments and suffering of animals. He is concerned most with domestic animals, he is not too concerned with the other animals in the word. Views like these make Singer limited.
Singer is limited and individualistic because he is not concerned with the environment in which animals live and since he is a utilitarian, equality is not something he is concerned with. Even other philosopher criticizes the utilitarian point of view exhibited by Singer. Regan protests "Utilitarian has no room for the equal moral rights of different individuals because it has no room for their equal inherent value or worth. What has value for the utilitarian is the satisfaction of an individuals interests, not the individual whose interests they are". If things are not given equal rights, that includes the environment there will be a tomorrow to look forward to.
Singer has also been known to show a lack of compassion and sympathy. As stated by Westra "IT is probable that, at a minimum, instrumental values has always been ascribed to those animals which have contributed in some way to the human community down through ages...Still it is possible to raise doubts about sympathy, as many claim to have no such feeling, including such animals defenders as Singer". Westra goes on to describe how Singer is not only unsympathetic to that of animals with intrinsic value but to those people in the third world. Singer feels that since the people of the third world are so far away that it is not of his concern. Singer wants the suffering of animals to stop because it is not justified, but what makes the suffering of third world countries justified? Because they are further away? Such individualistic approaches will not save the habitat in which the animals live and without that the environment will not survive. Singer is not the only one with an individualistic approach.
Another philosopher of environmental ethics Tom Regan also displays the individualistic approach. Regan believes in Cantianism. What that means is that the individuals have rights. Regan has modified it a bit to say that everyone is subject to a life. Regan believes that animal and humans all have intrinsic value, therefor they have a right to life. He calls for three changes "1) The total abolition of the use of animals in science. 2) The total dissolution of commercial animal agriculture. 3) The Total elimination of commercial and sport hunting". He believes that animals should not be treated as our resources. he also believes that since everyone is subject to a life people should not believe in contractarianism. Contractarianism states that in order to gain morality you must be able to sign and understand a contract and if they can not sign a contract (i.e. infant) you do not have the right to morality. But Regan also views things individualisticly.
He, like Singer also looks at the concerns of animals, of "Value". Those animals used in science experiments, agriculture, and commercial and sport hunting. But what about the animals not included in the list, who is going to protect the rights of those animals? Without all animals and especially the environment. Regan will not just have to worry about the reform of animal rights.
The last philosopher concerned with animal ethics in which I am going to look at is Paul Taylor. He is an egalitarian, which means everyone's interests count and count equally with the like interests of everyone's else's. He argues that humans are no more valuable than any other living thing put should see themselves as equals. He calls for two changes "1) Every organism, species population, and community of life has a good of its own which moral agents can intentionally further or damage by their actions....2) The second concept essential to the moral attitude of respect for nature is the idea of inherent worth". What this means is to respect everything and everyone even if that means the little creepy crawlies on earth. But if we respect everything intern we are respecting nothing.
One of Taylor's biggest flaws is that he has no hierarchy which intern some animals lose out. Westra sums it up best "Further, it is such an intensely individualistic ethic that it requires me to consider every leaf I might pick from a tree, every earthworm that might be lying across my path. It will also be extremely different to apply to aggregates, such as species, or community, such as ecosystems". With no hierarchy he is looking at things individualistic which means something is going to lose out.
Another problem with Taylor's that he can be applied to animal ethics as well as environmental ethics in order to make a stranger argument he should stick to either one or the other.
One way we can avoid this individualism outlook is to look at things holistically such as Leapold. He believes that we should see ourselves not as conquerers of the Land but as members of the community. He proposes we can do this by having a land ethic. The Land Ethic states "the land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals a collectively; the land". This is like an animal ethic but expanded to include the environmental ethics. He also proposes we have a land pyramid which consists of "1) That land that is not merely soil. 2) That the native plants and other animals kept the energy circuit open; others may or may not. 3) That man made changes are of a different order than evolutionary changes, and have effects more comprehensive than is intended or foreseen". The land pyramid states that changes must be made to the whole ecosystm and everything in it. It looks at things collectively. But lie everything it has its faults.
When we are looking at things holistically we are leaving some things out. And for whose to say that the land pyramid is correct, and will work? Who is Leapold to decide how and what is more important than other things.
Another philosopher who views the world collectively is Westra. Westra is concerned with the principle of integrity. She states that " 'Integrity' thus includes the wholeness of a living system". Therefor she wants to look at the ecosystem as a whole. She protests that there are four sections of ecosystem integrity. They are first ecosytem health. The second is the capacity to withstand stress and regenerate itself afterward. The third is optimum capacity (for place and time, including biodiversity). The fourth is the ability to continue development and change. With these four features an environment has a good chance of survival.
Another reason why she has a holistic approach is because she says "It counsels respect for the basis of life as well as for all entities living within ecosystems, including animals, which would involve the abolition of agribusiness, factory farming, and all other wasteful, explosive practices". She believes everything should be looked at as equal. But her views are too controversial.
Westra sates that there should be an abolition of agribusiness, but she herself admits that she eats 'free-range' chicken. It to is an agribusiness so why does it make it OK for free-range? And if we are looking at things holistically who is she to say that one type of business is any better than factory farming or agribusiness. Sure they are taking advantage of animals, but if she is to look at things holistically any business that runs successfully involves expletive practices in some manner.
The last philosopher of environmental ethics in which I am going to look at is Arne Naess. He looks at the environment in terms of deep ecology. What this means is that 1) holistic perspective. 2) biospherical egalitarianism (everyone's valuable). 3) principles of diversity and symbiosis. 4) anticlass posture, no racism, no sexism. 5) fight against pollution and resource depletion. 6) complexity not completion, cutting up science. 7) local autonomy and decentralization. They are a matter of steps or hierarchy and you have to start from the bottom and start fixing till you make it to the top. Or should I say if you make it to the top because if you can not fix each level you can not continue to the next level until its fixed. But this way of looking at things can cause problems.
Viewing the world like this could leave us right were we started from because if we can not fix it we can not move on. Another problem is when you get near the top of the steps you hit a point where you should look at things threw an egalitarian point of view. Which can bring you back to where you started from because you are supposed to respect everything which intern you end up respecting nothing.
In conclusion do to the arguments I have shown, we can conclude the existence of animal ethics depends on the existence of environmental ethics. I have shown this by demonstrating the individualistic ways in which Singer, Regan and Taylor look at this world will only save the rights of animals , and the world can not survive with just animals. I have also shown that by demonstrating the holistic views of Leapold, Westra, and Naess will preserve the rights of the environmental as a whole.
I will first look at the views of Peter Singer, who is a utilitarian. A utilitarian is someone who believes the greatest amount of good for the greatest number. Singer wants the suffering of animals to be taken into consideration. He states "If a being suffers, there can be no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into consideration. No matter what the nature of the being, the principle of equality requires that its suffering be counted equally with the like suffering...". What this means is that the suffering of animals is not justified. He also states how he thinks a major way to stop the suffering of animals is to stop the experimenting on animals. He states"...the widespread practice of experimenting on other species in order to see if certain substances are safe for human beings, or to test some psychological theory about the effect of severe punishment or learning...". When he is talking about the experiments and suffering of animals. He is concerned most with domestic animals, he is not too concerned with the other animals in the word. Views like these make Singer limited.
Singer is limited and individualistic because he is not concerned with the environment in which animals live and since he is a utilitarian, equality is not something he is concerned with. Even other philosopher criticizes the utilitarian point of view exhibited by Singer. Regan protests "Utilitarian has no room for the equal moral rights of different individuals because it has no room for their equal inherent value or worth. What has value for the utilitarian is the satisfaction of an individuals interests, not the individual whose interests they are". If things are not given equal rights, that includes the environment there will be a tomorrow to look forward to.
Singer has also been known to show a lack of compassion and sympathy. As stated by Westra "IT is probable that, at a minimum, instrumental values has always been ascribed to those animals which have contributed in some way to the human community down through ages...Still it is possible to raise doubts about sympathy, as many claim to have no such feeling, including such animals defenders as Singer". Westra goes on to describe how Singer is not only unsympathetic to that of animals with intrinsic value but to those people in the third world. Singer feels that since the people of the third world are so far away that it is not of his concern. Singer wants the suffering of animals to stop because it is not justified, but what makes the suffering of third world countries justified? Because they are further away? Such individualistic approaches will not save the habitat in which the animals live and without that the environment will not survive. Singer is not the only one with an individualistic approach.
Another philosopher of environmental ethics Tom Regan also displays the individualistic approach. Regan believes in Cantianism. What that means is that the individuals have rights. Regan has modified it a bit to say that everyone is subject to a life. Regan believes that animal and humans all have intrinsic value, therefor they have a right to life. He calls for three changes "1) The total abolition of the use of animals in science. 2) The total dissolution of commercial animal agriculture. 3) The Total elimination of commercial and sport hunting". He believes that animals should not be treated as our resources. he also believes that since everyone is subject to a life people should not believe in contractarianism. Contractarianism states that in order to gain morality you must be able to sign and understand a contract and if they can not sign a contract (i.e. infant) you do not have the right to morality. But Regan also views things individualisticly.
He, like Singer also looks at the concerns of animals, of "Value". Those animals used in science experiments, agriculture, and commercial and sport hunting. But what about the animals not included in the list, who is going to protect the rights of those animals? Without all animals and especially the environment. Regan will not just have to worry about the reform of animal rights.
The last philosopher concerned with animal ethics in which I am going to look at is Paul Taylor. He is an egalitarian, which means everyone's interests count and count equally with the like interests of everyone's else's. He argues that humans are no more valuable than any other living thing put should see themselves as equals. He calls for two changes "1) Every organism, species population, and community of life has a good of its own which moral agents can intentionally further or damage by their actions....2) The second concept essential to the moral attitude of respect for nature is the idea of inherent worth". What this means is to respect everything and everyone even if that means the little creepy crawlies on earth. But if we respect everything intern we are respecting nothing.
One of Taylor's biggest flaws is that he has no hierarchy which intern some animals lose out. Westra sums it up best "Further, it is such an intensely individualistic ethic that it requires me to consider every leaf I might pick from a tree, every earthworm that might be lying across my path. It will also be extremely different to apply to aggregates, such as species, or community, such as ecosystems". With no hierarchy he is looking at things individualistic which means something is going to lose out.
Another problem with Taylor's that he can be applied to animal ethics as well as environmental ethics in order to make a stranger argument he should stick to either one or the other.
One way we can avoid this individualism outlook is to look at things holistically such as Leapold. He believes that we should see ourselves not as conquerers of the Land but as members of the community. He proposes we can do this by having a land ethic. The Land Ethic states "the land ethic simply enlarges the boundaries of the community to include soils, waters, plants, and animals a collectively; the land". This is like an animal ethic but expanded to include the environmental ethics. He also proposes we have a land pyramid which consists of "1) That land that is not merely soil. 2) That the native plants and other animals kept the energy circuit open; others may or may not. 3) That man made changes are of a different order than evolutionary changes, and have effects more comprehensive than is intended or foreseen". The land pyramid states that changes must be made to the whole ecosystm and everything in it. It looks at things collectively. But lie everything it has its faults.
When we are looking at things holistically we are leaving some things out. And for whose to say that the land pyramid is correct, and will work? Who is Leapold to decide how and what is more important than other things.
Another philosopher who views the world collectively is Westra. Westra is concerned with the principle of integrity. She states that " 'Integrity' thus includes the wholeness of a living system". Therefor she wants to look at the ecosystem as a whole. She protests that there are four sections of ecosystem integrity. They are first ecosytem health. The second is the capacity to withstand stress and regenerate itself afterward. The third is optimum capacity (for place and time, including biodiversity). The fourth is the ability to continue development and change. With these four features an environment has a good chance of survival.
Another reason why she has a holistic approach is because she says "It counsels respect for the basis of life as well as for all entities living within ecosystems, including animals, which would involve the abolition of agribusiness, factory farming, and all other wasteful, explosive practices". She believes everything should be looked at as equal. But her views are too controversial.
Westra sates that there should be an abolition of agribusiness, but she herself admits that she eats 'free-range' chicken. It to is an agribusiness so why does it make it OK for free-range? And if we are looking at things holistically who is she to say that one type of business is any better than factory farming or agribusiness. Sure they are taking advantage of animals, but if she is to look at things holistically any business that runs successfully involves expletive practices in some manner.
The last philosopher of environmental ethics in which I am going to look at is Arne Naess. He looks at the environment in terms of deep ecology. What this means is that 1) holistic perspective. 2) biospherical egalitarianism (everyone's valuable). 3) principles of diversity and symbiosis. 4) anticlass posture, no racism, no sexism. 5) fight against pollution and resource depletion. 6) complexity not completion, cutting up science. 7) local autonomy and decentralization. They are a matter of steps or hierarchy and you have to start from the bottom and start fixing till you make it to the top. Or should I say if you make it to the top because if you can not fix each level you can not continue to the next level until its fixed. But this way of looking at things can cause problems.
Viewing the world like this could leave us right were we started from because if we can not fix it we can not move on. Another problem is when you get near the top of the steps you hit a point where you should look at things threw an egalitarian point of view. Which can bring you back to where you started from because you are supposed to respect everything which intern you end up respecting nothing.
In conclusion do to the arguments I have shown, we can conclude the existence of animal ethics depends on the existence of environmental ethics. I have shown this by demonstrating the individualistic ways in which Singer, Regan and Taylor look at this world will only save the rights of animals , and the world can not survive with just animals. I have also shown that by demonstrating the holistic views of Leapold, Westra, and Naess will preserve the rights of the environmental as a whole.
An overview of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
ABSTRACT
In March of 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground on Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. An eighteen foot wide hole was ripped into the hull, and 10.9 million gallons of crude oil spilled into the ocean. In the following weeks, many things transpired. This paper will discuss the cleanup, the damage, and the results of the biggest oil spill in United States history.
On March 24, 1989, in Prince William Sound Alaska, the Exxon Valdez was moving South West after leaving Port Valdez. The ship was carrying over fifty million gallons of crude oil. When the Valdez was only twenty-eight miles from the port, it ran aground on Bligh reef. The bottom was ripped open, and 10.9 million gallons of North Slope Crude Oil spilled into the frozen Alaskan waters at a rate of two hundred thousand gallons per minute. The remaining forty-two million gallons were off loaded. In the ensuing days, more than 1,200 miles of shoreline were hit with oil. This area included four National Wildlife Refugees, three National Parks, and Chugach National Forest.
Within hours, smaller tanker vessels arrived in order to off load the remaining oil. Unfortunately, the cleanup effort was hindered by an inadequate cleanup plan that had been created during the 1970's. These plans outlined how an oil spill would be handled, including provisions for maintaining equipment such as containment booms and "skimmer boats." The plans also called for a response team to be on twenty-four hour notice. Unfortunately, the plans were good on paper only. A spill of this size had not been anticipated. Therefore, the response teams had been demobilized, and the equipment that was supposed to be ready at all times was either too far away or nonexistent.. Precious hours were also wasted as Corporations, the Alaskan State Government, and the National government argued over who should take control of the situation. The arguments ensued after debates over who would pay for what, who was responsible for what, and who would do the best job.
The local fishermen were a big help with the cleanup effort. They battled with the oil in order to protect their industry. Many fisherman were seen in row-boats in the small coastal inlets. The fishermen worked by hand to clean up the oil, using buckets to scoop up the oil, which was several inches thick on top of the water in some places. Fishermen would leave in the morning and return when their boat was filled with oil. The oil that they scooped out was then deposited at special collection sites. The fishermen also used their boats to help with the deployment of containment booms. The booms would be fastened behind the boats and then dragged into place. However, the booms were not always helpful do to choppy seas. Many fishermen also became temporary employees of Exxon, receiving excellent pay on an hourly basis.
The cleanup was a long and tiring process which was plagued by many difficulties. Inexperience was a major problem. Coast Guard Vice Admiral Clyde Robbins explained in disgust that, "It was almost as if that spill was the first one that they had ever had." The equipment was not ready and not in perfect shape and the response teams were not equipped to deal with a spill of the magnitude that occurred. Other difficulties arose due to the format that was used by the executive committee in charge of the cleanup spill. They had set themselves up in such a way that every member of the committee had veto power. This was a result of the original conflicts that took place between corporations the state government and the National government. It was nearly impossible to get all of the members of the committee to agree on one particular plan of action.
The natural factors also made the cleanup a difficult process. The Alaskan wilderness is a rugged country. Rocky shorelines made beach work difficult, and the cold weather made working long hours very difficult. Another problem with the cold weather was that it prevented the oil from breaking down. Under normal weather conditions, the oil would have began to decompose, which would have made it easier to deal with. There were also problems with high winds, which were often in excess in of forty knots. Perhaps the most interesting problem that cleanup workers had to deal with was with the wildlife. There was actually one reported case of an Alaskan brown bear attacking a worker that was on the beach. All of these factors combined to make the cleanup more difficult then anticipated.
The cleanup process was probably the most expensive oil spill cleanup in history. However, the total cost is unknown and still growing. Exxon paid more than five billion dollars, including twenty million to study the spill. Part of the reason that the cleanup effort was so expensive was the amount of workers that were used in the effort. Exxon had approximately eleven thousand men and women on its payroll, including temporary workers. The average worker received $16.69 per hour. Although there was no set number of hours that the workers competed per week, one thousand eight hundred dollars was a normal paycheck for one week. Exxon was also in need of many small boats to help with the deployment of containment buoys, and to be used as floating observation stations. Local fisherman charged up to eight thousand a day for the usage of their boats. This combined with their hourly wages made cleaning up after the oil spill more profitable then fishing on a daily basis for many people. They could receive more money in a shorter amount of time, doing less strenuous work. Another expensive aspect of the cleanup effort was in dealing with oil soaked wildlife. It is estimated that the cost of saving one otter was $40,000. This is due to the amount of people required, transporting the animal to a cleanup site, and the rehabilitation process. As I said earlier, the total economic cost of the spill is still unknown and still growing. This is also true about the environmental cost. Millions of animals in the spill area were killed, as well as plants and microorganisms. Studies are still taking place to asses the damage that was caused by the spill. These studies will continue far into the future also.
In the end, the cleanup effort was relatively successful. Perhaps the most successful part of the cleanup involved an experimental technique. This technique involved the use of Inopol EAP22. Inopol22 is a nitrogen phosphorous fertilizer mix. The compound is sprayed on oil that has been washed up on beaches. The fertilizer then encourages the growth of "oil eating" bacteria which naturally exist in small numbers. The Inopol technique was very successful, but it was not widely used due to uncertainty as to the possible side effects. Later studies showed the side effects to be negligible. Other more standard techniques were used as well. The technique that was used to clean the beaches involved concentrating oil on the shoreline. This is done by using powerful pumps to move sea water up the beach. This water then flows through a perforated hose on high ground that runs parallel to the water front. This creates a continuos flow of water to push the oil downhill towards the shore line. High pressure hoses spray one hundred forty degree water to "blast" the oil of the rocks. This oil is also moved down hill towards the shore line. Cold water is used at the shore line to move the oil towards a central point, where it can be collected by skimmer vessels. Containment booms were also used to "corral" the oil. The booms, which are large pieces of rubber are dragged between two boats. The booms extend a foot or more under the surface in order to collect all of the oil. The oil is condensed, and then collected by skimmer boats. The cleanup effort after the Exxon Valdez spill was very intense. One worker exclaimed, "Everything from paper towels to kitchen utensils are being used."
The most publicized aspect of the Exxon Valdez spill was the damage to the wildlife in the surrounding area, especially the animals. Hundreds of birds, sea otters, fish, shell fish, and marine mammals were killed.
More than eighty-eight species of birds were affected by the spill. One hundred thousand birds are believed to been killed, including more than one hundred fifty bald eagles. The majority of these birds died due to hypothermia. After their feathers became soaked with oil, they lost their insulating ability, which then led to hypothermia. Another cause of death for the birds is anemia. When oil gets into the blood stream, it causes the red blood cells to "wrinkle" which causes anemia.
More than seven thousand sea otters were killed also. This is a significant proportion of the total sea otter population. The sea otters were killed by a variety of conditions including hypothermia. Many otters were killed as a result of oil getting into the blood stream. When the oil gets into the blood, it could cause a variety of things to happen. It could cause nose bleeds due to blood thinning, which then lead to infection. It could cause liver and kidney damage, because these are the organs which attempt to clean the oil out of the system. Damage to these organs would lead to death. It could also lead to emphysema which compromises the diving ability of the otters and eventually leads to death. Another cause of death is blindness. If oil were to get into an otter's eye it could cause blindness which would then cause starvation.
Fish were also effected by the oil spill, however, the extent of the casualties is unknown. Fishing is a huge industry in Alaska, so there has been much concern over the welfare of the fish. Many natives also live by subsistence fishing. Pink salmon and herring were the two species that people were most concerned about. Pink salmon is the biggest commercial fish in Alaskan waters, many people were afraid that the salmon population would need years to recover, however, studies have shown that the effect of the oil on spawning, eggs, and fry was negligible. Chromatography tests have also shown that there are no hydrocarbons in the flesh of most of the fish. Those that do have hydrocarbons in their flesh have a level that is so low as to be measured in the parts per billion range. Herring is also a huge commercial fish in Alaska. The 1988 catch yielded twelve point three million dollars. In 1989, after the spill, herring was declared "off limits" to fishermen. However, this was compensated by a salmon catch that was six times as big as it had been in 1988. In 1990, when herring fishing resumed, it returned to normal levels. The damage to the fishing industry was not nearly as bad as had been anticipated. Usha Varanasi, director of the NOAA's Environmental Conservation Division in S
In March of 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground on Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. An eighteen foot wide hole was ripped into the hull, and 10.9 million gallons of crude oil spilled into the ocean. In the following weeks, many things transpired. This paper will discuss the cleanup, the damage, and the results of the biggest oil spill in United States history.
On March 24, 1989, in Prince William Sound Alaska, the Exxon Valdez was moving South West after leaving Port Valdez. The ship was carrying over fifty million gallons of crude oil. When the Valdez was only twenty-eight miles from the port, it ran aground on Bligh reef. The bottom was ripped open, and 10.9 million gallons of North Slope Crude Oil spilled into the frozen Alaskan waters at a rate of two hundred thousand gallons per minute. The remaining forty-two million gallons were off loaded. In the ensuing days, more than 1,200 miles of shoreline were hit with oil. This area included four National Wildlife Refugees, three National Parks, and Chugach National Forest.
Within hours, smaller tanker vessels arrived in order to off load the remaining oil. Unfortunately, the cleanup effort was hindered by an inadequate cleanup plan that had been created during the 1970's. These plans outlined how an oil spill would be handled, including provisions for maintaining equipment such as containment booms and "skimmer boats." The plans also called for a response team to be on twenty-four hour notice. Unfortunately, the plans were good on paper only. A spill of this size had not been anticipated. Therefore, the response teams had been demobilized, and the equipment that was supposed to be ready at all times was either too far away or nonexistent.. Precious hours were also wasted as Corporations, the Alaskan State Government, and the National government argued over who should take control of the situation. The arguments ensued after debates over who would pay for what, who was responsible for what, and who would do the best job.
The local fishermen were a big help with the cleanup effort. They battled with the oil in order to protect their industry. Many fisherman were seen in row-boats in the small coastal inlets. The fishermen worked by hand to clean up the oil, using buckets to scoop up the oil, which was several inches thick on top of the water in some places. Fishermen would leave in the morning and return when their boat was filled with oil. The oil that they scooped out was then deposited at special collection sites. The fishermen also used their boats to help with the deployment of containment booms. The booms would be fastened behind the boats and then dragged into place. However, the booms were not always helpful do to choppy seas. Many fishermen also became temporary employees of Exxon, receiving excellent pay on an hourly basis.
The cleanup was a long and tiring process which was plagued by many difficulties. Inexperience was a major problem. Coast Guard Vice Admiral Clyde Robbins explained in disgust that, "It was almost as if that spill was the first one that they had ever had." The equipment was not ready and not in perfect shape and the response teams were not equipped to deal with a spill of the magnitude that occurred. Other difficulties arose due to the format that was used by the executive committee in charge of the cleanup spill. They had set themselves up in such a way that every member of the committee had veto power. This was a result of the original conflicts that took place between corporations the state government and the National government. It was nearly impossible to get all of the members of the committee to agree on one particular plan of action.
The natural factors also made the cleanup a difficult process. The Alaskan wilderness is a rugged country. Rocky shorelines made beach work difficult, and the cold weather made working long hours very difficult. Another problem with the cold weather was that it prevented the oil from breaking down. Under normal weather conditions, the oil would have began to decompose, which would have made it easier to deal with. There were also problems with high winds, which were often in excess in of forty knots. Perhaps the most interesting problem that cleanup workers had to deal with was with the wildlife. There was actually one reported case of an Alaskan brown bear attacking a worker that was on the beach. All of these factors combined to make the cleanup more difficult then anticipated.
The cleanup process was probably the most expensive oil spill cleanup in history. However, the total cost is unknown and still growing. Exxon paid more than five billion dollars, including twenty million to study the spill. Part of the reason that the cleanup effort was so expensive was the amount of workers that were used in the effort. Exxon had approximately eleven thousand men and women on its payroll, including temporary workers. The average worker received $16.69 per hour. Although there was no set number of hours that the workers competed per week, one thousand eight hundred dollars was a normal paycheck for one week. Exxon was also in need of many small boats to help with the deployment of containment buoys, and to be used as floating observation stations. Local fisherman charged up to eight thousand a day for the usage of their boats. This combined with their hourly wages made cleaning up after the oil spill more profitable then fishing on a daily basis for many people. They could receive more money in a shorter amount of time, doing less strenuous work. Another expensive aspect of the cleanup effort was in dealing with oil soaked wildlife. It is estimated that the cost of saving one otter was $40,000. This is due to the amount of people required, transporting the animal to a cleanup site, and the rehabilitation process. As I said earlier, the total economic cost of the spill is still unknown and still growing. This is also true about the environmental cost. Millions of animals in the spill area were killed, as well as plants and microorganisms. Studies are still taking place to asses the damage that was caused by the spill. These studies will continue far into the future also.
In the end, the cleanup effort was relatively successful. Perhaps the most successful part of the cleanup involved an experimental technique. This technique involved the use of Inopol EAP22. Inopol22 is a nitrogen phosphorous fertilizer mix. The compound is sprayed on oil that has been washed up on beaches. The fertilizer then encourages the growth of "oil eating" bacteria which naturally exist in small numbers. The Inopol technique was very successful, but it was not widely used due to uncertainty as to the possible side effects. Later studies showed the side effects to be negligible. Other more standard techniques were used as well. The technique that was used to clean the beaches involved concentrating oil on the shoreline. This is done by using powerful pumps to move sea water up the beach. This water then flows through a perforated hose on high ground that runs parallel to the water front. This creates a continuos flow of water to push the oil downhill towards the shore line. High pressure hoses spray one hundred forty degree water to "blast" the oil of the rocks. This oil is also moved down hill towards the shore line. Cold water is used at the shore line to move the oil towards a central point, where it can be collected by skimmer vessels. Containment booms were also used to "corral" the oil. The booms, which are large pieces of rubber are dragged between two boats. The booms extend a foot or more under the surface in order to collect all of the oil. The oil is condensed, and then collected by skimmer boats. The cleanup effort after the Exxon Valdez spill was very intense. One worker exclaimed, "Everything from paper towels to kitchen utensils are being used."
The most publicized aspect of the Exxon Valdez spill was the damage to the wildlife in the surrounding area, especially the animals. Hundreds of birds, sea otters, fish, shell fish, and marine mammals were killed.
More than eighty-eight species of birds were affected by the spill. One hundred thousand birds are believed to been killed, including more than one hundred fifty bald eagles. The majority of these birds died due to hypothermia. After their feathers became soaked with oil, they lost their insulating ability, which then led to hypothermia. Another cause of death for the birds is anemia. When oil gets into the blood stream, it causes the red blood cells to "wrinkle" which causes anemia.
More than seven thousand sea otters were killed also. This is a significant proportion of the total sea otter population. The sea otters were killed by a variety of conditions including hypothermia. Many otters were killed as a result of oil getting into the blood stream. When the oil gets into the blood, it could cause a variety of things to happen. It could cause nose bleeds due to blood thinning, which then lead to infection. It could cause liver and kidney damage, because these are the organs which attempt to clean the oil out of the system. Damage to these organs would lead to death. It could also lead to emphysema which compromises the diving ability of the otters and eventually leads to death. Another cause of death is blindness. If oil were to get into an otter's eye it could cause blindness which would then cause starvation.
Fish were also effected by the oil spill, however, the extent of the casualties is unknown. Fishing is a huge industry in Alaska, so there has been much concern over the welfare of the fish. Many natives also live by subsistence fishing. Pink salmon and herring were the two species that people were most concerned about. Pink salmon is the biggest commercial fish in Alaskan waters, many people were afraid that the salmon population would need years to recover, however, studies have shown that the effect of the oil on spawning, eggs, and fry was negligible. Chromatography tests have also shown that there are no hydrocarbons in the flesh of most of the fish. Those that do have hydrocarbons in their flesh have a level that is so low as to be measured in the parts per billion range. Herring is also a huge commercial fish in Alaska. The 1988 catch yielded twelve point three million dollars. In 1989, after the spill, herring was declared "off limits" to fishermen. However, this was compensated by a salmon catch that was six times as big as it had been in 1988. In 1990, when herring fishing resumed, it returned to normal levels. The damage to the fishing industry was not nearly as bad as had been anticipated. Usha Varanasi, director of the NOAA's Environmental Conservation Division in S
An incident
Tatyana Golbin
Essay
When you are happy, you never think that it can end in a second. Of course, if you
always had tried to imagine something bad, you would not have been so happy. After an
incident I had had once, I understood that happiness could be just one step away from
loosing it.
I was seventeen. Summer was in the air, but we could not enjoy it because it
was the time of our graduation and we had to study for our final exams. When exams
were over, we were relieved and decided that we deserved some rest.
Usually, people prefer resting on beaches, living in expensive hotels, eating at
exclusive restaurants, and enjoying other services provided by travel companies.
Although it really is careless relaxation, my friends and I always preferred to travel to
wild places. After the complicated life of the big city, with its intense traffic and polluted
air, with its endless problems, union with nature seemed to us the most worthwhile way
to relax.
Getting prepared for the trip already made me excited. It was very important not
to forget anything. Finally, when all preparations were made, and the cars loaded up, we,
following our chosen route, dreamed of our coming adventures. On that particular
vacation, we had chosen a place named Blue Lakes.
It was really a place of wildlife. In the summer, the forest was beautiful. It burst
into leaves and needles, and abounded with mushrooms and berries. The unbelievable
silence was sometimes interrupted only by birds and insects. The amazing lakes, which
were situated all over the wood, seemed to complete the picture. In addition, Mother
nature had given every lake some unique feature. Red Lake, for example, seemed to have
red water, because of the iodine in it. Cold Lake had a very low temperature, even on the
hottest days, so that when I touched it with my foot I shivered from its chilliness. But the
most impressive lake was Dead Lake, which seemed to boil because of its phosphorus.
Due to it, the lake was always under a fog. Besides, Dead Lake's bottom had several
levels. In other words, it was like a labyrinth under the water. It was untouchable and, at
the same time, mysterious.
We camped near a lake that was simply beautiful, without any of the
aforementioned extraordinary qualities. Soon, everybody found himself busy with
fishing, swimming, and playing games. Sometimes, leaving two people at the camp, we
went to see the other interesting places. During one of those trips, we had to cross a deep
and narrow river which had such a strong current that we could not swim across. As I
said above, the place was wild and, of course, there was no bridge. We solved that
problem by spanning the two banks with a log. Half of us crossed the river without fear,
but when my turn came, the fear thrilled through my veins. I am not a good swimmer;
therefore, it was a serious problem for me. I tried not to show my fear. I said to myself,
"You can do it," and started going. My legs were trembling, but I managed to hold my
balance. When I was watching my steps, I could see the strong current. Yet I kept saying
myself, "A few more steps and you are done". At the moment when I was half way across,
suddenly, the log turned and I lost my balance. I got wet instantly. Thousands of bubbles
pushed from my body. Unwillingly, I inhaled some water and felt that I was carried away
by the stream. I waved my hands desperately trying to swim, but the current forced me
straight ahead. Despite all the water around me, my throat was dry. I felt myself getting
tired and panicky. Eventually, I grabbed a branch of a tree that was growing almost in the
river. Then, my friends threw me an end of the rope and pulled me out. I was coughing
and felt dizzy, but it was good to feel the ground under my feet again.
After everything was over, we returned to our camp and, after a while, everybody
seemed to forget what happened to me, or when somebody brought it up, he just made
fun of it. It wasn't funny for me though. I could not help thinking that I had started
crossing the river just because I did not want to look like a coward in front of my friends.
Who knows what could have happened to me if I had not seized the branch. I could have
drown easily. One minute ago I was happy and another I did not know where I was going
to.
After this incident, I am afraid of not only water, but also loosing something
because of my thoughtlessness and impulsiveness. I became more careful and mature.
When I am happy now, I always say to myself, "Watch out!"
Essay
When you are happy, you never think that it can end in a second. Of course, if you
always had tried to imagine something bad, you would not have been so happy. After an
incident I had had once, I understood that happiness could be just one step away from
loosing it.
I was seventeen. Summer was in the air, but we could not enjoy it because it
was the time of our graduation and we had to study for our final exams. When exams
were over, we were relieved and decided that we deserved some rest.
Usually, people prefer resting on beaches, living in expensive hotels, eating at
exclusive restaurants, and enjoying other services provided by travel companies.
Although it really is careless relaxation, my friends and I always preferred to travel to
wild places. After the complicated life of the big city, with its intense traffic and polluted
air, with its endless problems, union with nature seemed to us the most worthwhile way
to relax.
Getting prepared for the trip already made me excited. It was very important not
to forget anything. Finally, when all preparations were made, and the cars loaded up, we,
following our chosen route, dreamed of our coming adventures. On that particular
vacation, we had chosen a place named Blue Lakes.
It was really a place of wildlife. In the summer, the forest was beautiful. It burst
into leaves and needles, and abounded with mushrooms and berries. The unbelievable
silence was sometimes interrupted only by birds and insects. The amazing lakes, which
were situated all over the wood, seemed to complete the picture. In addition, Mother
nature had given every lake some unique feature. Red Lake, for example, seemed to have
red water, because of the iodine in it. Cold Lake had a very low temperature, even on the
hottest days, so that when I touched it with my foot I shivered from its chilliness. But the
most impressive lake was Dead Lake, which seemed to boil because of its phosphorus.
Due to it, the lake was always under a fog. Besides, Dead Lake's bottom had several
levels. In other words, it was like a labyrinth under the water. It was untouchable and, at
the same time, mysterious.
We camped near a lake that was simply beautiful, without any of the
aforementioned extraordinary qualities. Soon, everybody found himself busy with
fishing, swimming, and playing games. Sometimes, leaving two people at the camp, we
went to see the other interesting places. During one of those trips, we had to cross a deep
and narrow river which had such a strong current that we could not swim across. As I
said above, the place was wild and, of course, there was no bridge. We solved that
problem by spanning the two banks with a log. Half of us crossed the river without fear,
but when my turn came, the fear thrilled through my veins. I am not a good swimmer;
therefore, it was a serious problem for me. I tried not to show my fear. I said to myself,
"You can do it," and started going. My legs were trembling, but I managed to hold my
balance. When I was watching my steps, I could see the strong current. Yet I kept saying
myself, "A few more steps and you are done". At the moment when I was half way across,
suddenly, the log turned and I lost my balance. I got wet instantly. Thousands of bubbles
pushed from my body. Unwillingly, I inhaled some water and felt that I was carried away
by the stream. I waved my hands desperately trying to swim, but the current forced me
straight ahead. Despite all the water around me, my throat was dry. I felt myself getting
tired and panicky. Eventually, I grabbed a branch of a tree that was growing almost in the
river. Then, my friends threw me an end of the rope and pulled me out. I was coughing
and felt dizzy, but it was good to feel the ground under my feet again.
After everything was over, we returned to our camp and, after a while, everybody
seemed to forget what happened to me, or when somebody brought it up, he just made
fun of it. It wasn't funny for me though. I could not help thinking that I had started
crossing the river just because I did not want to look like a coward in front of my friends.
Who knows what could have happened to me if I had not seized the branch. I could have
drown easily. One minute ago I was happy and another I did not know where I was going
to.
After this incident, I am afraid of not only water, but also loosing something
because of my thoughtlessness and impulsiveness. I became more careful and mature.
When I am happy now, I always say to myself, "Watch out!"
An autumn and the falling of leaves
The Autumn and the Fall of Leaves
It is not true that the close of a life which ends in a natural fashion---life which is permitted to put on the display of death and to go out in glory---inclines the mind to rest. It is not true of a day ending nor the passing of the year, nor of the fall of leaves. Whatever permanent, uneasy question is native to men, comes forward most insistent and most loud at such times. There are still places where one can feel and describe the spirit of the falling of leaves.
At Fall, the sky which is of so delicate and faint a blue as to contain something of gentle mockery, and certain more of tenderness, presides at the fall of leaves. There is no air, no breath at all. The leaves are so light that they sidle on their going downward, hesitating in that which is not void to them, and touching at last so intangible to the earth with which they are to merge, that the gesture is much gentler than a greeting, and even more discreet than a discreet touch. They make a little sound, less than the least of sounds. No bird at night in the marshes rustles so slightly, no men, though men are the most refined of living beings, put so passing a stress upon their sacred whispers or their prayers. The leaves are hardly heard, but they are heard just so much that men also, who are destined at the end to grow glorious and to die, look up and hear them falling.
There is an infinite amount of qualities of describing the leaves. The color is not a mere glory: it is intricate. If you take up one leaf, then you can see the sharp edge boundaries which are stained with a deep yellow-gold and are not defined. Nor do shape and definition ever begin to exhaust the list. For there are softness and hardness too. Beside boundaries you have hues and tints, shades also, varying thicknesses of stuff, and endless choice of surface, and that list also is infinite, and the divisions of each item in it are everywhere the depth and the meaning of so much creation are beyond our powers. All this happens to be true of but one dead leaf; and yet every dead leaf will differ from its fellow.
It is no wonder, then, that at this peculiar time, this week (or moment) of the year, the desires which if they do not prove at least demand---perhaps remember--- our destiny, come strongest. They are proper to the time of autumn, and all men feel them. The air is at once new and old; the morning (if one rises early enough to welcome its leisurely advance) contains something in it of profound remembrance. The evenings hardly yet suggest (as they soon will) friends and security, and the fires of home. The thoughts awakened in us by their bands of light fading along the downs are thoughts which go with loneliness and prepare us for the isolation of the soul. It is on this account that tradition has set, at the entering of autumn, for a watch at the gate of the season and at its close of day and the night of on which the dead return.
It is not true that the close of a life which ends in a natural fashion---life which is permitted to put on the display of death and to go out in glory---inclines the mind to rest. It is not true of a day ending nor the passing of the year, nor of the fall of leaves. Whatever permanent, uneasy question is native to men, comes forward most insistent and most loud at such times. There are still places where one can feel and describe the spirit of the falling of leaves.
At Fall, the sky which is of so delicate and faint a blue as to contain something of gentle mockery, and certain more of tenderness, presides at the fall of leaves. There is no air, no breath at all. The leaves are so light that they sidle on their going downward, hesitating in that which is not void to them, and touching at last so intangible to the earth with which they are to merge, that the gesture is much gentler than a greeting, and even more discreet than a discreet touch. They make a little sound, less than the least of sounds. No bird at night in the marshes rustles so slightly, no men, though men are the most refined of living beings, put so passing a stress upon their sacred whispers or their prayers. The leaves are hardly heard, but they are heard just so much that men also, who are destined at the end to grow glorious and to die, look up and hear them falling.
There is an infinite amount of qualities of describing the leaves. The color is not a mere glory: it is intricate. If you take up one leaf, then you can see the sharp edge boundaries which are stained with a deep yellow-gold and are not defined. Nor do shape and definition ever begin to exhaust the list. For there are softness and hardness too. Beside boundaries you have hues and tints, shades also, varying thicknesses of stuff, and endless choice of surface, and that list also is infinite, and the divisions of each item in it are everywhere the depth and the meaning of so much creation are beyond our powers. All this happens to be true of but one dead leaf; and yet every dead leaf will differ from its fellow.
It is no wonder, then, that at this peculiar time, this week (or moment) of the year, the desires which if they do not prove at least demand---perhaps remember--- our destiny, come strongest. They are proper to the time of autumn, and all men feel them. The air is at once new and old; the morning (if one rises early enough to welcome its leisurely advance) contains something in it of profound remembrance. The evenings hardly yet suggest (as they soon will) friends and security, and the fires of home. The thoughts awakened in us by their bands of light fading along the downs are thoughts which go with loneliness and prepare us for the isolation of the soul. It is on this account that tradition has set, at the entering of autumn, for a watch at the gate of the season and at its close of day and the night of on which the dead return.
Aluminium
Aluminium
The history of Aluminium use
Aluminium is now one of the most widely used metals, but one of the hardest to refine due to it's reactivity with other elements. Even as late as the turn of the century, Aluminium was considered very valuable and in turn expensive, even more expensive than gold. In some cultures, when a function was held (for example, a party) by wealthy people, only the most honored guests would be given Aluminium cutlery, the others had to make do with gold or silver cutlery.
A Description of the Aluminium ore, including a list of it's contents
Pure Aluminium oxide is known as alumina (Al2O3). This is found as corundum, a crystalline. Aluminium can also occur as cryolite (Na3AlF6). Traces of other metal oxides in Aluminium oxide tint it to make it form stones (often precious) for example: chronium gives a red colour to rubies, and cobalt makes the blue in sapphires.
How Aluminium deposits are formed
Aluminium (like many other metals) is not found in it's pure form, but associated with other elements in rocks and minerals. An aluminosilicate such as felspar
(KAlSi3O8) is the main constituent of many rocks such as granite, which is quartz and mica cemented together with felspar. These rocks are gradually weathered and broken down by the action of carbon-dioxide from the air dissolved in rainwater forming 'kaolin'. This is further broken down to form other substances, ultimately resulting in the formation of Aluminium deposits.
Where and how Aluminium is mined?
Aluminium is never found in it's pure state until it has been refined. Aluminium is made when refining alumina, which is in turn found from the ore 'bauxite'. Bauxite is often mined in the opencast method.
Aluminium deposits are found in many countries, but the countries with significant deposits include: Guinea, Jamaica, Surinam, Australia and Russia.
How is Aluminium refined?
One method is the 'electrolytic process'. This is performed when a low voltage current is passes through a bath containing alumina in the molten form. The alumina is broken down into Aluminium metal which collects at the bottom of the bath at one electrical pole, the cathode, and the oxygen which reacts at the other pole, the anode, to give carbon-dioxide and some carbon-monoxide.
The uses and properties of Aluminium
Aluminium is now the second most widely used metal, after iron. Aluminium and it's alloys, such as 'duralumin', are used as structural metals for a wide variety of products from aircraft to cooking utensils. Aluminium foil is used to wrap food and is also being used to replace copper wire in electrical windings. Aluminium mirrors are used in some large astronomical telescopes. Some Aluminium ores are found in the form of gems and precious stones. Aluminium is also used in the making of vehicles such as aircraft due to it's strength and light weight, but is not used so much in cars due to it's cost.
The history of Aluminium use
Aluminium is now one of the most widely used metals, but one of the hardest to refine due to it's reactivity with other elements. Even as late as the turn of the century, Aluminium was considered very valuable and in turn expensive, even more expensive than gold. In some cultures, when a function was held (for example, a party) by wealthy people, only the most honored guests would be given Aluminium cutlery, the others had to make do with gold or silver cutlery.
A Description of the Aluminium ore, including a list of it's contents
Pure Aluminium oxide is known as alumina (Al2O3). This is found as corundum, a crystalline. Aluminium can also occur as cryolite (Na3AlF6). Traces of other metal oxides in Aluminium oxide tint it to make it form stones (often precious) for example: chronium gives a red colour to rubies, and cobalt makes the blue in sapphires.
How Aluminium deposits are formed
Aluminium (like many other metals) is not found in it's pure form, but associated with other elements in rocks and minerals. An aluminosilicate such as felspar
(KAlSi3O8) is the main constituent of many rocks such as granite, which is quartz and mica cemented together with felspar. These rocks are gradually weathered and broken down by the action of carbon-dioxide from the air dissolved in rainwater forming 'kaolin'. This is further broken down to form other substances, ultimately resulting in the formation of Aluminium deposits.
Where and how Aluminium is mined?
Aluminium is never found in it's pure state until it has been refined. Aluminium is made when refining alumina, which is in turn found from the ore 'bauxite'. Bauxite is often mined in the opencast method.
Aluminium deposits are found in many countries, but the countries with significant deposits include: Guinea, Jamaica, Surinam, Australia and Russia.
How is Aluminium refined?
One method is the 'electrolytic process'. This is performed when a low voltage current is passes through a bath containing alumina in the molten form. The alumina is broken down into Aluminium metal which collects at the bottom of the bath at one electrical pole, the cathode, and the oxygen which reacts at the other pole, the anode, to give carbon-dioxide and some carbon-monoxide.
The uses and properties of Aluminium
Aluminium is now the second most widely used metal, after iron. Aluminium and it's alloys, such as 'duralumin', are used as structural metals for a wide variety of products from aircraft to cooking utensils. Aluminium foil is used to wrap food and is also being used to replace copper wire in electrical windings. Aluminium mirrors are used in some large astronomical telescopes. Some Aluminium ores are found in the form of gems and precious stones. Aluminium is also used in the making of vehicles such as aircraft due to it's strength and light weight, but is not used so much in cars due to it's cost.
Air Polution
AIR POLUTION
Problem
The first thing people see, in the morning, when they walk outside is the sky or the colored sun. Is this world giving us the privilege of seeing the natural colors of the sun through all the layers of pollution within the air (Dinanike 31)? Not only are beautiful sights such as this hidden behind the pollution this world causes everyday, but an increase in diseases, infections and death occurs. What causes pollution? What can we do to prevent it, and get rid of it? Is it fair to the children of the future to have to suffer the consequences that pollution causes? Why not take care of the problem now? Factory and business owners have the ability to prevent air pollution.
Air pollution is the presence in the atmosphere of harmful gases, liquids, or solids. Air pollution, known as smoke pollution for many years, resulted from coal combustion (Hodges 526). Smog has been a problem in coal-burning areas for several centuries. Smog finally decreased when coal combustion was replaced by oil and gas combustion. Air pollution is caused by a number of different types of pollutants.
The first type, particulate matter, consists of solid and liquid aerosols suspended in the atmosphere. These arise from the burning of coal and from industrial processes. Atmospheric particles can scatter and absorb sunlight which reduces visibility. Particles also reduce visibility by attenuating the light from objects and illuminating the air causing the contrast between the objects and their backgrounds to reduce. Not only does it effect visibility, but it hastens the erosion of building materials and the corrosion of metals, interferes with the human respiratory system, and brings toxic materials into the body. The small particles cause chronic bronchitis, bronchial asthma, emphysema and lung cancer (Hodges 59).
The second type is sulfur oxides which come from the burning of coal and industrial processes. Damage to materials, to vegetation, and to the human respiratory system are caused by the acid nature of oxides. Small quantities of sulfur oxides can increase illness and mortality (Hodges 59).
The third type of pollutant is carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas against which humans have no protection. Carbon monoxide comes from the exhaust of gasoline-powered vehicles and secondarily from industrial processes (Hamer 45). Hemoglobin, which is in the blood, combines with carbon monoxide and carries less oxygen to body tissues causing health and heart effects. Some health problems come from the exhaust fumes leaking into the interior of the automobile. "Several hundred Americans die from CO poisoning each year. Sodium oxide levels below .25 ppm have been associated with increased morbidity in New York as measured by hospital admissions. In all cases in which adverse health effects have been noted the elderly patients have been affected severely" (Hodges 60).
The fourth type is hydrocarbons which are chemical compounds containing only carbon and hydrogen. Hydrocarbons also arise from gasoline-powered vehicles and from industrial processes. Hydrocarbons are an important part of the production of photochemical smog (Hodges 61).
The last type is nitrogen oxides that come from high-temperature combustion, such as that occurring in motor vehicle engines, electric power plants and other fuel usage. Nitrogen oxide contributes to acidity in precipitation and production of photochemical smog. Nitrogen oxide is also dangerous it causes serious illness and deaths even if the exposure to NO2 is short. "The gas was responsible for 124 deaths in a fire at Cleveland's Crile Children Hospital on May 15, 1929, when x-ray film containing nitrocellulose accidentally caught fire and produced NO2" (Hodges 63).
Solution
As one can surely see these types of air pollutants are harmful to our atmosphere, environment and personal health. Factory owners can help prevent all of these effects. Researchers have found different ways to remove these pollutants from the air. One device designed to remove hydrocarbons from the atmosphere "is an improved low pollution invisible flare burner which comprises a tall stack lined with ceramic. Primary air is introduced under pressure in a tube below and coaxial with the stack. The top of the tube contains a burner for the vented hydrocarbon gases" (Sittig 227). Within this device different air mixtures provide means for complete combustion of the vented gases with low emission of smoke and light. Another method wherein gases contaminate with vapors from volatile organic liquids are recovered by containing the vapor- containing gas in an absorbed tower with a sponge oil which absorbs the vapors. Both methods can successfully remove hydrocarbon (Sittig 348).
A method has been discovered for removing nitrogen oxides from gases. An ionizing radiation allows the noxious gas pollutants to enable a collection of the particles or mist electrostatic precipitators (Sittig 409).
In the book, How to Remove Pollutants and Toxic Materials from Air and Water, it reports:
to remove sulfur oxides and particulate matter from waste gases comprises crosscurrent contacting of the waste gas stream with a moving bed or supported, copper-containing acceptor in a first zone removing in subsequent separate zones the particulate matter and the sulfur oxides from the acceptor in a subsequent zone before introducing it back into the first zone for further removal of sulfur oxides and particulate matter. Sittig 565 Another air pollutant which is able to be reduced is carbon monoxide. Factories simply have to change their coal or oil combustions to natural gas combustion. Afterburners can cause the combustion of CO. This combustion is a source of heat as in blast furnaces (Sittig 415).
Action
The government should take action passing a restriction on equipment within factories and businesses. The inspection should consist of requiring four different conditions or devices: a flare burner, an ionizing radiation, crosscurrents contacting of the waste gas stream with an acceptor, and change all combustions to natural gas combustions. Like most laws, if one device or condition is not present then the company should be fined a large sum of money. In order for the company to continue staying open the missing devices or conditions should be present within the following two weeks. Many restrictions are made for businesses and factories, but what is more important than the health of our people. Action should be taken right away.
Important advantages to passing extra restrictions on factories and businesses are involved within this action. Not only will the factories realize how much pollution they have caused without these conditions, but they will prevent hurting the health of others. Each of these devices are exactly what we need in order to stop air pollution. Save the children of tomorrow and the environment of today by doing something to prevent air pollution.
Justification
Each method mentioned above can be used in factories all over the world. The question is does it cost a lot of money? Yes, it does. In order to apply all of the above methods it can cost the factory and businesses millions. The estimated costs are $800,000,000 alone from public sectors. For private sectors it can cost up to $17,000,000,000. Reducing pollution might cut salaries for many workers due to the cost of expenses which would rise (Hodges 582).
The estimations of the cost of devices to reduce pollution are accurate, but what about the money it takes to repair the damages caused by air pollution? The annual total for air pollution is $16 billion in the U.S. The amount spent dealing with air pollution leaves less money for our government to give to researchers to find cures for diseases, military expenses, or for government debt. It is like throwing away money just because factory and business owners do not want to take the time and money and invest in new methods and devices to prevent air pollution. $240 million goes to cleaning equipment dirtied by air pollution each year. For livestock and agricultural crops 500 million is used for damages. Millions are used a year for medical costs, cost of fuels wasted in incomplete combustion, and maintenance of cleanliness in production of foods and beverages. $18.6 billion worth of damages are done due to motor vehicle pollution (Hodges 568). It might seem to cost a lot of money to prevent air pollution, but as one can see it may cost more to repair the damages from air pollution.
WORKS CITED
Dinanike, George. "Sunset in the Comfort of a Laboratory." New Scientist 19 October 1991: 31.
Hamer, Mick. "Pollution Leaves a Cloud over Life in the City." New Scientist 13 May 1989: 45.
Hodges, Laurent. Environmental Pollution Second Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977.
Sittig, Marshall. How to Remove Pollutants and Toxic Materials from Air and Water. Parkridge, New Jersey: Noyes Data Corporation, 1977.
World Wide Web Site.
URL: http://www.cyberstore.ca/greenpeace/ozone/ozonehome.html "Greenpeace." November 2,1994.
Problem
The first thing people see, in the morning, when they walk outside is the sky or the colored sun. Is this world giving us the privilege of seeing the natural colors of the sun through all the layers of pollution within the air (Dinanike 31)? Not only are beautiful sights such as this hidden behind the pollution this world causes everyday, but an increase in diseases, infections and death occurs. What causes pollution? What can we do to prevent it, and get rid of it? Is it fair to the children of the future to have to suffer the consequences that pollution causes? Why not take care of the problem now? Factory and business owners have the ability to prevent air pollution.
Air pollution is the presence in the atmosphere of harmful gases, liquids, or solids. Air pollution, known as smoke pollution for many years, resulted from coal combustion (Hodges 526). Smog has been a problem in coal-burning areas for several centuries. Smog finally decreased when coal combustion was replaced by oil and gas combustion. Air pollution is caused by a number of different types of pollutants.
The first type, particulate matter, consists of solid and liquid aerosols suspended in the atmosphere. These arise from the burning of coal and from industrial processes. Atmospheric particles can scatter and absorb sunlight which reduces visibility. Particles also reduce visibility by attenuating the light from objects and illuminating the air causing the contrast between the objects and their backgrounds to reduce. Not only does it effect visibility, but it hastens the erosion of building materials and the corrosion of metals, interferes with the human respiratory system, and brings toxic materials into the body. The small particles cause chronic bronchitis, bronchial asthma, emphysema and lung cancer (Hodges 59).
The second type is sulfur oxides which come from the burning of coal and industrial processes. Damage to materials, to vegetation, and to the human respiratory system are caused by the acid nature of oxides. Small quantities of sulfur oxides can increase illness and mortality (Hodges 59).
The third type of pollutant is carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas against which humans have no protection. Carbon monoxide comes from the exhaust of gasoline-powered vehicles and secondarily from industrial processes (Hamer 45). Hemoglobin, which is in the blood, combines with carbon monoxide and carries less oxygen to body tissues causing health and heart effects. Some health problems come from the exhaust fumes leaking into the interior of the automobile. "Several hundred Americans die from CO poisoning each year. Sodium oxide levels below .25 ppm have been associated with increased morbidity in New York as measured by hospital admissions. In all cases in which adverse health effects have been noted the elderly patients have been affected severely" (Hodges 60).
The fourth type is hydrocarbons which are chemical compounds containing only carbon and hydrogen. Hydrocarbons also arise from gasoline-powered vehicles and from industrial processes. Hydrocarbons are an important part of the production of photochemical smog (Hodges 61).
The last type is nitrogen oxides that come from high-temperature combustion, such as that occurring in motor vehicle engines, electric power plants and other fuel usage. Nitrogen oxide contributes to acidity in precipitation and production of photochemical smog. Nitrogen oxide is also dangerous it causes serious illness and deaths even if the exposure to NO2 is short. "The gas was responsible for 124 deaths in a fire at Cleveland's Crile Children Hospital on May 15, 1929, when x-ray film containing nitrocellulose accidentally caught fire and produced NO2" (Hodges 63).
Solution
As one can surely see these types of air pollutants are harmful to our atmosphere, environment and personal health. Factory owners can help prevent all of these effects. Researchers have found different ways to remove these pollutants from the air. One device designed to remove hydrocarbons from the atmosphere "is an improved low pollution invisible flare burner which comprises a tall stack lined with ceramic. Primary air is introduced under pressure in a tube below and coaxial with the stack. The top of the tube contains a burner for the vented hydrocarbon gases" (Sittig 227). Within this device different air mixtures provide means for complete combustion of the vented gases with low emission of smoke and light. Another method wherein gases contaminate with vapors from volatile organic liquids are recovered by containing the vapor- containing gas in an absorbed tower with a sponge oil which absorbs the vapors. Both methods can successfully remove hydrocarbon (Sittig 348).
A method has been discovered for removing nitrogen oxides from gases. An ionizing radiation allows the noxious gas pollutants to enable a collection of the particles or mist electrostatic precipitators (Sittig 409).
In the book, How to Remove Pollutants and Toxic Materials from Air and Water, it reports:
to remove sulfur oxides and particulate matter from waste gases comprises crosscurrent contacting of the waste gas stream with a moving bed or supported, copper-containing acceptor in a first zone removing in subsequent separate zones the particulate matter and the sulfur oxides from the acceptor in a subsequent zone before introducing it back into the first zone for further removal of sulfur oxides and particulate matter. Sittig 565 Another air pollutant which is able to be reduced is carbon monoxide. Factories simply have to change their coal or oil combustions to natural gas combustion. Afterburners can cause the combustion of CO. This combustion is a source of heat as in blast furnaces (Sittig 415).
Action
The government should take action passing a restriction on equipment within factories and businesses. The inspection should consist of requiring four different conditions or devices: a flare burner, an ionizing radiation, crosscurrents contacting of the waste gas stream with an acceptor, and change all combustions to natural gas combustions. Like most laws, if one device or condition is not present then the company should be fined a large sum of money. In order for the company to continue staying open the missing devices or conditions should be present within the following two weeks. Many restrictions are made for businesses and factories, but what is more important than the health of our people. Action should be taken right away.
Important advantages to passing extra restrictions on factories and businesses are involved within this action. Not only will the factories realize how much pollution they have caused without these conditions, but they will prevent hurting the health of others. Each of these devices are exactly what we need in order to stop air pollution. Save the children of tomorrow and the environment of today by doing something to prevent air pollution.
Justification
Each method mentioned above can be used in factories all over the world. The question is does it cost a lot of money? Yes, it does. In order to apply all of the above methods it can cost the factory and businesses millions. The estimated costs are $800,000,000 alone from public sectors. For private sectors it can cost up to $17,000,000,000. Reducing pollution might cut salaries for many workers due to the cost of expenses which would rise (Hodges 582).
The estimations of the cost of devices to reduce pollution are accurate, but what about the money it takes to repair the damages caused by air pollution? The annual total for air pollution is $16 billion in the U.S. The amount spent dealing with air pollution leaves less money for our government to give to researchers to find cures for diseases, military expenses, or for government debt. It is like throwing away money just because factory and business owners do not want to take the time and money and invest in new methods and devices to prevent air pollution. $240 million goes to cleaning equipment dirtied by air pollution each year. For livestock and agricultural crops 500 million is used for damages. Millions are used a year for medical costs, cost of fuels wasted in incomplete combustion, and maintenance of cleanliness in production of foods and beverages. $18.6 billion worth of damages are done due to motor vehicle pollution (Hodges 568). It might seem to cost a lot of money to prevent air pollution, but as one can see it may cost more to repair the damages from air pollution.
WORKS CITED
Dinanike, George. "Sunset in the Comfort of a Laboratory." New Scientist 19 October 1991: 31.
Hamer, Mick. "Pollution Leaves a Cloud over Life in the City." New Scientist 13 May 1989: 45.
Hodges, Laurent. Environmental Pollution Second Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977.
Sittig, Marshall. How to Remove Pollutants and Toxic Materials from Air and Water. Parkridge, New Jersey: Noyes Data Corporation, 1977.
World Wide Web Site.
URL: http://www.cyberstore.ca/greenpeace/ozone/ozonehome.html "Greenpeace." November 2,1994.
Air Pollution
Problems Caused By Air Pollution
Some people think that air pollution is not harming the earth or the people, but it is doing worse, by killing the earth and getting people sick. "Air pollutants," according to Gay, "are known to cause respiratory diseases, cancer, and other serious illnesses" (12). Air pollution not only threatens the health and life of humans but also causes damage to the environment (Gay 13).
First, air pollution causes a great deal of health problems. Wanting clean air is a good reason because air that is polluted can damage human health (Edelson 25). In the United States many health problems have occurred because of air pollution. According to Sproull, "For more than a decade, local residents in the tri-state valley bounded by Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia have claimed to suffer from health problems, including rashes, respiratory problems and even cancers" (D4). In 1948, in the industrial town of Donora, Pennsylvania, which sits in a valley, had twenty deaths, and nearly 6,000 residents, or 40% of the population, suffered respiratory problems (Edelson 25, 26). New York experienced several killer smogs, which in a later analysis attributed, from the usually severe pollution, 58 deaths (Edelson 26). Not only in the United States are health problems caused by air pollution showing up, but they are also showing up in other parts of the world, like Europe. In 1930, in Belgium's Meuse River valley, a major industrial region, where the primary fuel was coal reported sixty deaths, and about 6,000 residents of the valley became ill with breathing problems and respiratory infections (Edelson 25). In December 1952, the toll was huge in London from the infamous smog, which caused up to 4,000 deaths, when levels of sulfur oxides and particulates rose above normal (Edelson 26). Air pollution also increased deaths from chronic lung disease in the United States. "Although statistics on the physical effects of air pollution are not easily calculated," according to Edelson, "an alarming related statistic is that between 1970 and 1986, deaths in the United States from chronic lung disease rose 36%" (35). Air pollution has cost a great deal of money on health care in the United States. In terms of health care and lost productivity, the costs of air pollution in the United States alone have been estimated at more than $100 billion (Edelson 35). Another cost air pollution has caused is human life, which is incalculable (Edelson 35). Air pollution causes many health problems that lead to death.
Also, air pollution causes a great deal of damage to the environment and property. Lot of air pollution creates acid rain, which deteriorates things. Acid rain began to emerge as a serious problem in the late 1960's, when a decline in fish population was noticed by scientists in Scandinavia (Edelson 37). In the 1970's, a number of studies related the declining of fish stocks and forest damage to acid rain from industrialized and urban areas, often hundreds of miles away (Edelson 37-8). Thousands of lakes and streams, across the northeastern part of the United States and the mid-Atlantic states, in Canadian provinces, in Scandinavian countries and in other parts of Europe, have acid concentrations so high that aquatic food chains are destroyed, and fish die off (Gay 26). Land is also destroyed by acid rain. In North American and European forests, and tropical rainforests in Mexico and Central America, vast numbers of red spruce, pine, fur, and other trees wither and die (Gay 26). Acid rain also destroys world-famous structures such as the Taj Mahal, the Statue of Liberty, the Parthenon, and ancient Mayan ruins (Gay 26). Fresh paint on buildings and new cars fades quickly due to acid rain (Gay 26). Acid rain may also be damaging crops (Edelson 42). Dust settling, from nearby dust sources, also cause damage to crops (Sproull 111). Visible damage is cause by such heavy dustfall to pine trees, alfalfa, cherry trees, beans, oats, and citrus trees (Sproull 111). Concentrations as low as only a few micrograms per cubic meter of "fluorides" injure various plants (Sproull 112). Dusts of aluminum fluoride, cryolite, calcium fluoride, and apatite, and such gases as hydrogen fluoride, silicon tetrafluoride, carbon tetrafluoride, and fluorine are all included as fluorides (Sproull 112). Trees are dying because of air pollution. The German Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Forestry say that the primary cause of damage to more than half of forested regions of West Germany in 1988 was air pollution (Edelson 37). Ponderosa pine forests have been severely damaged by air pollution (Sproull 111). Artwork and history is being erased as air pollution causes them to deteriorate (Edelson 45). The Mellon Institute had study of economic losses in Pittsburgh in 1912-13 due to air pollution, indicated annual losses about $10 or $20 million per person (Sproull 46-7). Air pollution is killing the environment and property.
In conclusion, air pollution is killing the earth and its people. In order to stop the killing of the earth and its people by air pollution, the people must become involved. A recent strategy that has been suggested for individual action is "green consuming" or buying "green" products (Gay 120-21). Green consuming is buying or using goods and services that do not harm the air, water, or land (Gay 121). Even though a large majority of Americans refuse to buy products or pay for services that contribute to environmental problems, people should still get involved (Gay 121). In order to save energy to save the earth, people should do the following:
· When the lights are not in use, turn them off.
· Instead of normal light bulbs, use compact fluorescent light bulbs.
· On a short trip, walk or ride a bike.
· Whenever possible, use public transportation.
· To conserve heat or air conditioning, close off unused rooms.
· To save fuel, adjust thermostat a few degrees lower for heating and higher for cooling.
· For better efficiency, clean furnace and air condition filters.
· Only when full, run the dishwasher, washer, and dryer. (Gay 115)
There is no excuse, for not becoming involved to stop air pollution. Many scientists predict that the temperature of the earth will rise because of global warming (Edelson 87). Some scientists already believe that the earth is already warming (Edelson 87). If people do not become involved the earth will not be suitable enough to live on in the future, and there might not be anybody left for the future.
Some people think that air pollution is not harming the earth or the people, but it is doing worse, by killing the earth and getting people sick. "Air pollutants," according to Gay, "are known to cause respiratory diseases, cancer, and other serious illnesses" (12). Air pollution not only threatens the health and life of humans but also causes damage to the environment (Gay 13).
First, air pollution causes a great deal of health problems. Wanting clean air is a good reason because air that is polluted can damage human health (Edelson 25). In the United States many health problems have occurred because of air pollution. According to Sproull, "For more than a decade, local residents in the tri-state valley bounded by Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia have claimed to suffer from health problems, including rashes, respiratory problems and even cancers" (D4). In 1948, in the industrial town of Donora, Pennsylvania, which sits in a valley, had twenty deaths, and nearly 6,000 residents, or 40% of the population, suffered respiratory problems (Edelson 25, 26). New York experienced several killer smogs, which in a later analysis attributed, from the usually severe pollution, 58 deaths (Edelson 26). Not only in the United States are health problems caused by air pollution showing up, but they are also showing up in other parts of the world, like Europe. In 1930, in Belgium's Meuse River valley, a major industrial region, where the primary fuel was coal reported sixty deaths, and about 6,000 residents of the valley became ill with breathing problems and respiratory infections (Edelson 25). In December 1952, the toll was huge in London from the infamous smog, which caused up to 4,000 deaths, when levels of sulfur oxides and particulates rose above normal (Edelson 26). Air pollution also increased deaths from chronic lung disease in the United States. "Although statistics on the physical effects of air pollution are not easily calculated," according to Edelson, "an alarming related statistic is that between 1970 and 1986, deaths in the United States from chronic lung disease rose 36%" (35). Air pollution has cost a great deal of money on health care in the United States. In terms of health care and lost productivity, the costs of air pollution in the United States alone have been estimated at more than $100 billion (Edelson 35). Another cost air pollution has caused is human life, which is incalculable (Edelson 35). Air pollution causes many health problems that lead to death.
Also, air pollution causes a great deal of damage to the environment and property. Lot of air pollution creates acid rain, which deteriorates things. Acid rain began to emerge as a serious problem in the late 1960's, when a decline in fish population was noticed by scientists in Scandinavia (Edelson 37). In the 1970's, a number of studies related the declining of fish stocks and forest damage to acid rain from industrialized and urban areas, often hundreds of miles away (Edelson 37-8). Thousands of lakes and streams, across the northeastern part of the United States and the mid-Atlantic states, in Canadian provinces, in Scandinavian countries and in other parts of Europe, have acid concentrations so high that aquatic food chains are destroyed, and fish die off (Gay 26). Land is also destroyed by acid rain. In North American and European forests, and tropical rainforests in Mexico and Central America, vast numbers of red spruce, pine, fur, and other trees wither and die (Gay 26). Acid rain also destroys world-famous structures such as the Taj Mahal, the Statue of Liberty, the Parthenon, and ancient Mayan ruins (Gay 26). Fresh paint on buildings and new cars fades quickly due to acid rain (Gay 26). Acid rain may also be damaging crops (Edelson 42). Dust settling, from nearby dust sources, also cause damage to crops (Sproull 111). Visible damage is cause by such heavy dustfall to pine trees, alfalfa, cherry trees, beans, oats, and citrus trees (Sproull 111). Concentrations as low as only a few micrograms per cubic meter of "fluorides" injure various plants (Sproull 112). Dusts of aluminum fluoride, cryolite, calcium fluoride, and apatite, and such gases as hydrogen fluoride, silicon tetrafluoride, carbon tetrafluoride, and fluorine are all included as fluorides (Sproull 112). Trees are dying because of air pollution. The German Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Forestry say that the primary cause of damage to more than half of forested regions of West Germany in 1988 was air pollution (Edelson 37). Ponderosa pine forests have been severely damaged by air pollution (Sproull 111). Artwork and history is being erased as air pollution causes them to deteriorate (Edelson 45). The Mellon Institute had study of economic losses in Pittsburgh in 1912-13 due to air pollution, indicated annual losses about $10 or $20 million per person (Sproull 46-7). Air pollution is killing the environment and property.
In conclusion, air pollution is killing the earth and its people. In order to stop the killing of the earth and its people by air pollution, the people must become involved. A recent strategy that has been suggested for individual action is "green consuming" or buying "green" products (Gay 120-21). Green consuming is buying or using goods and services that do not harm the air, water, or land (Gay 121). Even though a large majority of Americans refuse to buy products or pay for services that contribute to environmental problems, people should still get involved (Gay 121). In order to save energy to save the earth, people should do the following:
· When the lights are not in use, turn them off.
· Instead of normal light bulbs, use compact fluorescent light bulbs.
· On a short trip, walk or ride a bike.
· Whenever possible, use public transportation.
· To conserve heat or air conditioning, close off unused rooms.
· To save fuel, adjust thermostat a few degrees lower for heating and higher for cooling.
· For better efficiency, clean furnace and air condition filters.
· Only when full, run the dishwasher, washer, and dryer. (Gay 115)
There is no excuse, for not becoming involved to stop air pollution. Many scientists predict that the temperature of the earth will rise because of global warming (Edelson 87). Some scientists already believe that the earth is already warming (Edelson 87). If people do not become involved the earth will not be suitable enough to live on in the future, and there might not be anybody left for the future.
Air pollution 2
Air Pollution
Then the sky turned red,
toxins over head,
everybodies dead,
everybodies dead.
(GutterMouth; Nitro Records; 1995)
In 1948, the industrial town of Donora, Pennsylvania
suffered 28 deaths because of the thick smog. Air pollution is
an ecological problem having to do with toxins in the air.
There are a few things the human race has done to try to
prevent air pollution from taking such a serious toll. Two of
these are the Clean Air Acts and the increased use of solar
power over coal power. By creating electric cars, the pollution
caused by gasoline powered cars will be lessened. If the
pollution is not stopped, it will cause life on earth as we know
it to cease.
Air pollution causes a number of health and ecological
problems. It causes health problems like cancer, emphysema,
and asthma. It also causes the depletion of the ozone layer
which results in global warming and melting of the ice caps.
Up until the industrial era, the air was fairly clean. The use of
smokestacks and the burning of fuels put many pollutants in
the air during this period of time. The increased use of fossil
fuels today also builds on this.
There have been many attempts at stopping air pollution.
The Clean Air Acts were effective for a little while. They made
using some polluting substances illegal. This did not work
because people simply did not listen. Solar Energy is another
attempted solution. This type of energy is good because it is
an alternative energy source to coal and other polluting fossil
fuels. The problem with solar energy is that it is extremely
expensive, but it has been used extensively throughout the
world.
One of the more effective ways of eliminating air pollution
is the making of electric cars. The use of these electric cars
would completely reduce the amount of pollution in the air
caused by gasoline powered cars. These cars are run on
batteries instead of gasoline or other fuel. Though the use of
solar cars seems more realistic, it would also be very expensive
and unreliable. The difference primarily between solar and
electrical power is the fact that solar cars would be much more
expensive to make. The possibilities of making a cost efficient
electric car are much more realistic than making a cost
efficient solar car.
By making the ecologically safe and inexpensive electric
car, the pollution caused by gasoline powered cars would go
down. Without making these changes, the globe will continue
to heat up at an annual rate of .2 degrees a year which will
result in the melting of the ice caps. If this were to happen,
the water would rise 200 feet, flooding most of the earth.
The Earth's ecosystem is a little bit like a web. It is very
fragile and depends on all of its strands to maintain
stableness. If the air is polluted it disrupts this web creating a
total imbalance. This "total imbalance" would also occur if the
water was polluted. In effect, when one part falls they all do.
Believe me, "total imbalance" is not cool.
Then the sky turned red,
toxins over head,
everybodies dead,
everybodies dead.
(GutterMouth; Nitro Records; 1995)
In 1948, the industrial town of Donora, Pennsylvania
suffered 28 deaths because of the thick smog. Air pollution is
an ecological problem having to do with toxins in the air.
There are a few things the human race has done to try to
prevent air pollution from taking such a serious toll. Two of
these are the Clean Air Acts and the increased use of solar
power over coal power. By creating electric cars, the pollution
caused by gasoline powered cars will be lessened. If the
pollution is not stopped, it will cause life on earth as we know
it to cease.
Air pollution causes a number of health and ecological
problems. It causes health problems like cancer, emphysema,
and asthma. It also causes the depletion of the ozone layer
which results in global warming and melting of the ice caps.
Up until the industrial era, the air was fairly clean. The use of
smokestacks and the burning of fuels put many pollutants in
the air during this period of time. The increased use of fossil
fuels today also builds on this.
There have been many attempts at stopping air pollution.
The Clean Air Acts were effective for a little while. They made
using some polluting substances illegal. This did not work
because people simply did not listen. Solar Energy is another
attempted solution. This type of energy is good because it is
an alternative energy source to coal and other polluting fossil
fuels. The problem with solar energy is that it is extremely
expensive, but it has been used extensively throughout the
world.
One of the more effective ways of eliminating air pollution
is the making of electric cars. The use of these electric cars
would completely reduce the amount of pollution in the air
caused by gasoline powered cars. These cars are run on
batteries instead of gasoline or other fuel. Though the use of
solar cars seems more realistic, it would also be very expensive
and unreliable. The difference primarily between solar and
electrical power is the fact that solar cars would be much more
expensive to make. The possibilities of making a cost efficient
electric car are much more realistic than making a cost
efficient solar car.
By making the ecologically safe and inexpensive electric
car, the pollution caused by gasoline powered cars would go
down. Without making these changes, the globe will continue
to heat up at an annual rate of .2 degrees a year which will
result in the melting of the ice caps. If this were to happen,
the water would rise 200 feet, flooding most of the earth.
The Earth's ecosystem is a little bit like a web. It is very
fragile and depends on all of its strands to maintain
stableness. If the air is polluted it disrupts this web creating a
total imbalance. This "total imbalance" would also occur if the
water was polluted. In effect, when one part falls they all do.
Believe me, "total imbalance" is not cool.
Advantages of Using Hydroponics Over Traditional Methods
Advantages of Producing Crops Through
Use of Hydroponics
HYDROPONICS derives its name from the Greek HYDRO-PONOS meaning water/labor. Literally, "Hydroponics" means "Water Work." There is no soil in a hydroponic garden. No organic matter is present so nourishment (Nutrient) is not available to the plants in the same was as it is in a soil garden. Instead, nutrients are added to the water. So, as plants are watered, they are also fed. There are many ways to feed and water plants. The method chosen becomes a "Hydroponic System." Common systems are: Hand watered, recirculating system (With a submersible water pump), gravity fed from a nutrient tank into pots or trays, or a wick system.
A common question is, "What can be grown in hydroponics?" Surprisingly to some, anything that can be grown in soil can be grown in a hydroponic system! Flowers, herbs, vegetables, fruit trees, vines, and ornamental shrubs. Everything from Aloe Vera to Zucchinis can be grown in this unique system.
There are many advantages to using a hydroponic system for growing plants. The most obvious being that it is easier to control the plant growing environment. Some others are restricted supply of suitable water, lack of suitable soil, high labor cost of traditional cultivation, high cost of sterilizing soil, and there is a greater reliability and predictability of plant production. In addition, It's easy!
Depending on what is being grown, most of the time hydroponic plants require less attention than soil-grown crops. Because of this, it can relieve some people of the added responsibility that soil-grown plants require.
As one can see, there are many advantages to this system of growing plants. Since its origination, thousands of companies have sprung up dealing solely with hydroponics and hydroponic equipment. Maybe someday, when man inhabits outer-space, this method will be the main protocol for growing consumable items.
Use of Hydroponics
HYDROPONICS derives its name from the Greek HYDRO-PONOS meaning water/labor. Literally, "Hydroponics" means "Water Work." There is no soil in a hydroponic garden. No organic matter is present so nourishment (Nutrient) is not available to the plants in the same was as it is in a soil garden. Instead, nutrients are added to the water. So, as plants are watered, they are also fed. There are many ways to feed and water plants. The method chosen becomes a "Hydroponic System." Common systems are: Hand watered, recirculating system (With a submersible water pump), gravity fed from a nutrient tank into pots or trays, or a wick system.
A common question is, "What can be grown in hydroponics?" Surprisingly to some, anything that can be grown in soil can be grown in a hydroponic system! Flowers, herbs, vegetables, fruit trees, vines, and ornamental shrubs. Everything from Aloe Vera to Zucchinis can be grown in this unique system.
There are many advantages to using a hydroponic system for growing plants. The most obvious being that it is easier to control the plant growing environment. Some others are restricted supply of suitable water, lack of suitable soil, high labor cost of traditional cultivation, high cost of sterilizing soil, and there is a greater reliability and predictability of plant production. In addition, It's easy!
Depending on what is being grown, most of the time hydroponic plants require less attention than soil-grown crops. Because of this, it can relieve some people of the added responsibility that soil-grown plants require.
As one can see, there are many advantages to this system of growing plants. Since its origination, thousands of companies have sprung up dealing solely with hydroponics and hydroponic equipment. Maybe someday, when man inhabits outer-space, this method will be the main protocol for growing consumable items.
Acid Rain
Acid rain forms when sulfur and nitrogen dioxides combine with moisture in the
atmosphere to produce rain, snow, or another kind of precipitation. This kind of pollution may also
be suspended in fog or deposited in a dry form. Acid rain is most common in North America and
Europe. Acid rain has also been detected in other areas of the world such as tropical rain forests
of Africa. Canada has placed limitations on the sulfur emissions. The United States has not, so
the emissions may still drift into Canada.
The acid rain cycle begins with hundreds of power plants burning millions of tons of coal.
Burning coal produces electricity for us. Coal is made of carbon, but the coal that we mine is not
pure carbon. It is mixed with other minerals. Two of these are sulfur and nitrogen. Then the coal
is burned some of the sulfur changes into sulfur dioxide and nitrogen changes into nitrogen oxide.
These escape in to the air as poisonous gases. Some smokestacks release chemicals like
mercury, arsenic, and aluminum. Some of these minerals are changed in to gases and others
become tiny specks of ash. As these chemicals drift, they may change again. They may react
with other chemicals in the air. When sulfur dioxide combines with water, the result is sulfuric acid.
When nitrogen oxide gas combines with water, the result is also another acid. When the clouds
releases rain or other precipitation, the acid goes with it. This is called acid rain.
The level of acid is measured in pH levels. The pH scale begins at 0 and ends with 14. A
reading lower than 7 is called acidic, and a reading higher than 7 is called basic. Seven is neutral.
Normal rain is slightly acidic with a pH level of about 6.5. Rain with a pH of 5.5 is then times more
acidic than normal rain and rain with pH of 4.5 is a hundred times more acidic than normal rain.
In parts of the country, rain with pH levels of 4.5 to 5.0 is common.
An English scientist named Robert Angus Smith discovered acid rain in 1872, but no
other scientist continued this study. Then in 1961 the Sweden wanted to know why the fish in their
lakes were dying. Svante Odén discovered that the reason was acid rain. After Odén's discovery,
other scientist began to study acid rain too.
Acid rain has destroyed plant and animal life in lakes, damaged forests and crops. It has
also endangered marine life in coastal waters, eroded structures, and contaminated drinking water.
It can kill fish, frogs, and insects in lakes. Acid rain can also be harmful to humans. It can hurt
their lungs and make it harder for them to breath. Acid fog can be particularly harmful to people
with respiratory problems. Acid rain can corrode stones and some metals. Higher acid levels can
be dangerous to our drinking water. Some water pipes are made of lead, and when the water is
acidic, it can dissolve the metal. Then the metals end up in the water we drink.
atmosphere to produce rain, snow, or another kind of precipitation. This kind of pollution may also
be suspended in fog or deposited in a dry form. Acid rain is most common in North America and
Europe. Acid rain has also been detected in other areas of the world such as tropical rain forests
of Africa. Canada has placed limitations on the sulfur emissions. The United States has not, so
the emissions may still drift into Canada.
The acid rain cycle begins with hundreds of power plants burning millions of tons of coal.
Burning coal produces electricity for us. Coal is made of carbon, but the coal that we mine is not
pure carbon. It is mixed with other minerals. Two of these are sulfur and nitrogen. Then the coal
is burned some of the sulfur changes into sulfur dioxide and nitrogen changes into nitrogen oxide.
These escape in to the air as poisonous gases. Some smokestacks release chemicals like
mercury, arsenic, and aluminum. Some of these minerals are changed in to gases and others
become tiny specks of ash. As these chemicals drift, they may change again. They may react
with other chemicals in the air. When sulfur dioxide combines with water, the result is sulfuric acid.
When nitrogen oxide gas combines with water, the result is also another acid. When the clouds
releases rain or other precipitation, the acid goes with it. This is called acid rain.
The level of acid is measured in pH levels. The pH scale begins at 0 and ends with 14. A
reading lower than 7 is called acidic, and a reading higher than 7 is called basic. Seven is neutral.
Normal rain is slightly acidic with a pH level of about 6.5. Rain with a pH of 5.5 is then times more
acidic than normal rain and rain with pH of 4.5 is a hundred times more acidic than normal rain.
In parts of the country, rain with pH levels of 4.5 to 5.0 is common.
An English scientist named Robert Angus Smith discovered acid rain in 1872, but no
other scientist continued this study. Then in 1961 the Sweden wanted to know why the fish in their
lakes were dying. Svante Odén discovered that the reason was acid rain. After Odén's discovery,
other scientist began to study acid rain too.
Acid rain has destroyed plant and animal life in lakes, damaged forests and crops. It has
also endangered marine life in coastal waters, eroded structures, and contaminated drinking water.
It can kill fish, frogs, and insects in lakes. Acid rain can also be harmful to humans. It can hurt
their lungs and make it harder for them to breath. Acid fog can be particularly harmful to people
with respiratory problems. Acid rain can corrode stones and some metals. Higher acid levels can
be dangerous to our drinking water. Some water pipes are made of lead, and when the water is
acidic, it can dissolve the metal. Then the metals end up in the water we drink.
Acid Rain Legislation
Acid Rain Legislation
Acid rain is a destructive force as a result of nature and man colliding. It is formed through harmful industrial emissions combining with contents of the earth's atmosphere; a dangerous combination. This prompted governments throughout North America to take action. Many laws and regulations have been implemented, yet the question still remains, "Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industries to reduce acid rain emissions?"
To decide whether tougher legislation should be implemented, one must first understand the details of what exactly acid rain is. Acid rain is a result of mankind's carelessness. It travels a long one of the most efficient biogeochemical cycles on earth, the Hydrologic Cycle. This allows acid rain to distribute itself further away from it's source causing more than local problems. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is released by fossil fuels when they undergo combustion. Power plants and other fossil fuel burning industrial areas release various forms of nitrous oxides (Nox). These two chemical compounds combine with the water in the atmosphere to form what is known as acid rain.
The main reason that has prompted legislation of industrial emissions from governments is because of the negative effects they can have on the environment. Acid rain is harmful to the environment because of it's low pH. It can harm the biotic components of earth, and also the abiotic components. It's high acidity degrades soil to the point where it cannot support any type of plant life. Trees in forests are killed over long-term exposure. When these trees are killed, an imbalance in the hydrologic cycle can occur. Without living trees to consume the precipitate, it must be consumed by the earth or any other plants. These will receive an excess of water, causing other problems in the hydrologic cycle. This in turn causes a chain reaction of death among our forests. Some regions are more susceptible to acid rain because they don't have enough Alkaline soil to "neutralize" the acid before it is able to destroy the rest of the soil or before it can run off into lakes or rivers. Aquatic environments can be greatly affected by soil runoff. Acidic soil may runoff into lakes and rivers due to erosion, causing acid
rain to destroy more environment. Acid rain aquatic animals as well as aquatic plant life. When acid rain combines with water in major bodies of water, it not only destroys wildlife habitat, it destroys our drinking water. An aquatic ecosystem is very dependent on each and every aspect within itself. Once one species dies off, others that depend on it, will eventually begin to die off also. This systematic chain continues until the entire body of water is completely abiotic. The reason acid rain is so effective in destroying ecosystems is because it harms everything in that particular ecosystem. Being distributed through the hydrologic cycle, acid rain is capable of destroying everything in it's path.
Many laws and agreements have been implemented by governments in North America to reduce acid rain emissions. The question governments are asking is: "Are these regulations enough?". One of the more famous laws/organizations implemented by North American governments was the "Clean Air Act" which was signed in 1991. Also in 1991, Canada signed an agreement with the United states concerning air quality. Media explains that the agreement has enough framework to address all transboundary air pollution issues. It is a very broad/general agreement that should highly reduce air pollution between these two major countries of the world. This agreement contains other specific commitments for emissions reductions relating to acid rain precursors and research as well as a commitment to review the Agreement in it's fifth year. This allows for expansion of the agreement in the near future. Research and studies forced by this agreement is also an intelligent decision among these countries; education is the basis of all knowledge. Besides agreements and legislations of sorts, technology is an awesome force in the reduction of acid rain emissions. The only down side to this technology is that it is extremely expensive. Scrubbers have been placed in the smokestacks to remove harmful emissions. Lime is used in lakes to "neutralize" the low pH levels. Without studies being conducted and research being taken out on acid rain, these technologies would not be here today. This is why education may be the ultimate technology in the reduction of acid rain emissions.
Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industry to reduce acid rain emissions? From an environmental point of view...yes, anything that can be done, should be done. Whether it be through studies, research, new technologies, anything for our environment. From an economical point of view...no, technology is very expensive and hardly affordable in terms of most industries. Technology can reduce the dangers of acid rain, but at what cost? Tougher legislation should be implemented to preserve our environments, to preserve our lifestyle, and life on earth.
Acid rain is a destructive force as a result of nature and man colliding. It is formed through harmful industrial emissions combining with contents of the earth's atmosphere; a dangerous combination. This prompted governments throughout North America to take action. Many laws and regulations have been implemented, yet the question still remains, "Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industries to reduce acid rain emissions?"
To decide whether tougher legislation should be implemented, one must first understand the details of what exactly acid rain is. Acid rain is a result of mankind's carelessness. It travels a long one of the most efficient biogeochemical cycles on earth, the Hydrologic Cycle. This allows acid rain to distribute itself further away from it's source causing more than local problems. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is released by fossil fuels when they undergo combustion. Power plants and other fossil fuel burning industrial areas release various forms of nitrous oxides (Nox). These two chemical compounds combine with the water in the atmosphere to form what is known as acid rain.
The main reason that has prompted legislation of industrial emissions from governments is because of the negative effects they can have on the environment. Acid rain is harmful to the environment because of it's low pH. It can harm the biotic components of earth, and also the abiotic components. It's high acidity degrades soil to the point where it cannot support any type of plant life. Trees in forests are killed over long-term exposure. When these trees are killed, an imbalance in the hydrologic cycle can occur. Without living trees to consume the precipitate, it must be consumed by the earth or any other plants. These will receive an excess of water, causing other problems in the hydrologic cycle. This in turn causes a chain reaction of death among our forests. Some regions are more susceptible to acid rain because they don't have enough Alkaline soil to "neutralize" the acid before it is able to destroy the rest of the soil or before it can run off into lakes or rivers. Aquatic environments can be greatly affected by soil runoff. Acidic soil may runoff into lakes and rivers due to erosion, causing acid
rain to destroy more environment. Acid rain aquatic animals as well as aquatic plant life. When acid rain combines with water in major bodies of water, it not only destroys wildlife habitat, it destroys our drinking water. An aquatic ecosystem is very dependent on each and every aspect within itself. Once one species dies off, others that depend on it, will eventually begin to die off also. This systematic chain continues until the entire body of water is completely abiotic. The reason acid rain is so effective in destroying ecosystems is because it harms everything in that particular ecosystem. Being distributed through the hydrologic cycle, acid rain is capable of destroying everything in it's path.
Many laws and agreements have been implemented by governments in North America to reduce acid rain emissions. The question governments are asking is: "Are these regulations enough?". One of the more famous laws/organizations implemented by North American governments was the "Clean Air Act" which was signed in 1991. Also in 1991, Canada signed an agreement with the United states concerning air quality. Media explains that the agreement has enough framework to address all transboundary air pollution issues. It is a very broad/general agreement that should highly reduce air pollution between these two major countries of the world. This agreement contains other specific commitments for emissions reductions relating to acid rain precursors and research as well as a commitment to review the Agreement in it's fifth year. This allows for expansion of the agreement in the near future. Research and studies forced by this agreement is also an intelligent decision among these countries; education is the basis of all knowledge. Besides agreements and legislations of sorts, technology is an awesome force in the reduction of acid rain emissions. The only down side to this technology is that it is extremely expensive. Scrubbers have been placed in the smokestacks to remove harmful emissions. Lime is used in lakes to "neutralize" the low pH levels. Without studies being conducted and research being taken out on acid rain, these technologies would not be here today. This is why education may be the ultimate technology in the reduction of acid rain emissions.
Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industry to reduce acid rain emissions? From an environmental point of view...yes, anything that can be done, should be done. Whether it be through studies, research, new technologies, anything for our environment. From an economical point of view...no, technology is very expensive and hardly affordable in terms of most industries. Technology can reduce the dangers of acid rain, but at what cost? Tougher legislation should be implemented to preserve our environments, to preserve our lifestyle, and life on earth.
acid rain 5
As the century past, the industrial society kept advancing. However, many advantages of the industrial society brings us also has a down side. One of the adverse effects of industrialization is acid deposition due to power plant, fossil fuel and automobile emissions. Acid rain is the popular term but the scientists prefer the term acid deposition. Acid rain can have adverse effects on the environment by damaging forests or by lowering the pH of the lakes and making the water too acidic for many aquatic plants and animals to live.
The father of acid rain research is an Englishman named Charles Angus Smith who suggested in, 1852, that sulfuric acid in Manchester, English, was causing metal to rust and dyed goods to fade. One source that causes acid rain are fossil fuel. Fossil fuel has many usage in our society. Such as to power electric power plants, industrial boilers, smelters, businesses, schools, homes and vehicles of all sort. These various energy sources contribute 23.1 million tons of sulfur dioxide and 20.5 million tons of nitrogen oxides to our atmosphere worldwide. When fossil fuels are ignited like oil and coal, they release carbon dioxide, a so-called greenhouse gas that traps heat within the earth's atmosphere which causes global warming that is taking place right now. Also, it releases sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and various metals (mercury, aluminum) that are released into the atmosphere that reacts with other airborne chemicals (water vapor and sunlight) to produce sulfuric and nitric acid which later can be carried long distance from their source and be deposited as rain (acid rain) but acid doesn't just came from rain but also in the forms of snow, hail, fog, and mist.
Forests are a complex ecosystems that involves trees, soil, water, the air, climate and other living organisms that support the community of wildlife: animals, birds, insects and plants and also a major economic resource. The countries hardest effected by acid rain is in the European countries, yet central Europe face a much greater threat since it has a large amount of forest area and about 8% of German's forest face the lethal effect of Waldsterben or forest death of acid rain. Acid rain kill about 50 million hectares of forest that have been damaged in Europe and in Central and Eastern Europe's thousands of tons of pollution each year that 14,000 lakes are unable to support sensitive aquatic life. Acid rain does not kill trees outright but weakens them to the point where they become susceptible to extremes of heat or cold, attacks from blight-causing or from inserts such as the gypsy moth, and other environmental stresses. The problem of acid rain is caused by burning of fossil fuel that emits SO2 and industrial factories from the North America that emits pollution that travels to Europe. Acid rain is now becoming a growing problem in Third World countries such as China and India due to rapidly expanding populations where energy demands are increasing. Thus, the rate of fossil fuel consumption have greatly increased and where pollution controls are all non-existent have greatly to their problems with acid rain. Yet, most emissions are primarily located in eastern North America, Europe, and China. That is why acid rain is so threatening because it is concentrated and it has a devastating effect on soil because most of the trees get their nutrients from soil, which lakes, ponds, streams, and other waterways, which receives runoffs from soils uphill which humans.
When acid rain gets into the lakes and river it destroy all living things and declines in populations of fish, aquatic plant life and micro-organisms. Fish just goes extinct because they simply fail to reproduce and become less and less abundant, and older and older, until they die out. Changes in the biology of the provided one of the first clues to the problem of acid pollution is linked between the acidly of lakes and fish production. In the Ontario Ministry of the Environment reported that 140 acidified lakes in the province has no fish at all, and a further 48,000 lakes would not be able to tolerate extended acid inputs. There are three stages in the acidification of surface water. The first stage, is bicarbonate ions neutralize acids by reacting with hydrogen to produce carbon dioxide and water. If the bicarbonate content is maintained at a critical minimum level, the pH value of the water will remain stable, and plants, animals and micro-organisms will be unaffected. The second stage, is when the bicarbonate content drops below the critical level, and large influxes of hydrogen ions can no longer be neutralized. The pH value begins to go down faster then before this will disrupted the organisms and young fish. The third stage comes when the pH value stabilizes around 4.5. Almost all the original life is eliminated for example snails, many insects and fish disappear. The water becomes abnormally clear but some lakes can be neutralize the acids with limestone.
Destruction of forests and lakes are not the only the cause of acid rain but corrosion of buildings and monuments are also affected by the acid rain. Almost every buildings of a major urban or industrial centre may be at risk from the corrosive effects of acid deposition and the rate of corrosion has increased dramatically in many urban area. The Athenian monuments is get worst in the past 20-25 years result of pollution.
Most of the corrosion of the city buildings and monuments is the result of the dry deposition of SO2 and sulphate particles, mainly cause by urban concentrations of pollutants. When the sulphur pollutants fall on the surface of limestone or sandstone, they can react with the calcium carbonate in the stone to form calcium sulphate (gypsum), which sticks to the stone. This will causes flaking that can be washed away by rainwater, exposing more stone to corrosion and also gypsum and soot particles cause black crusts on buildings surface. Acid attack can also lead to stone decay through the creation of salt, which can crystallize and force apart mineral grains, causing the stone to disintegrate, salt can expand and contract thereby weather the surface. Mainly this is cause by the release of sulfur and nitrogen oxides by cars and industrial.
As our society get more advance there is also the effect of pollution that rises, to stop the effect we need to find alternatives way to stop car emission with new fuels and slowly removing fossil fuel that causing most of the nitrogen oxides. The government need to put stricter laws on the industrial that pollinated and removing harmful chemical from the earth. People should find a efficiency and alternatives way to stop the pollution that is happening around the world because the effect can be seen all round us starting with the forest, lakes and in the heart of are city where the buildings and monuments are being eating away by pollution.
The father of acid rain research is an Englishman named Charles Angus Smith who suggested in, 1852, that sulfuric acid in Manchester, English, was causing metal to rust and dyed goods to fade. One source that causes acid rain are fossil fuel. Fossil fuel has many usage in our society. Such as to power electric power plants, industrial boilers, smelters, businesses, schools, homes and vehicles of all sort. These various energy sources contribute 23.1 million tons of sulfur dioxide and 20.5 million tons of nitrogen oxides to our atmosphere worldwide. When fossil fuels are ignited like oil and coal, they release carbon dioxide, a so-called greenhouse gas that traps heat within the earth's atmosphere which causes global warming that is taking place right now. Also, it releases sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and various metals (mercury, aluminum) that are released into the atmosphere that reacts with other airborne chemicals (water vapor and sunlight) to produce sulfuric and nitric acid which later can be carried long distance from their source and be deposited as rain (acid rain) but acid doesn't just came from rain but also in the forms of snow, hail, fog, and mist.
Forests are a complex ecosystems that involves trees, soil, water, the air, climate and other living organisms that support the community of wildlife: animals, birds, insects and plants and also a major economic resource. The countries hardest effected by acid rain is in the European countries, yet central Europe face a much greater threat since it has a large amount of forest area and about 8% of German's forest face the lethal effect of Waldsterben or forest death of acid rain. Acid rain kill about 50 million hectares of forest that have been damaged in Europe and in Central and Eastern Europe's thousands of tons of pollution each year that 14,000 lakes are unable to support sensitive aquatic life. Acid rain does not kill trees outright but weakens them to the point where they become susceptible to extremes of heat or cold, attacks from blight-causing or from inserts such as the gypsy moth, and other environmental stresses. The problem of acid rain is caused by burning of fossil fuel that emits SO2 and industrial factories from the North America that emits pollution that travels to Europe. Acid rain is now becoming a growing problem in Third World countries such as China and India due to rapidly expanding populations where energy demands are increasing. Thus, the rate of fossil fuel consumption have greatly increased and where pollution controls are all non-existent have greatly to their problems with acid rain. Yet, most emissions are primarily located in eastern North America, Europe, and China. That is why acid rain is so threatening because it is concentrated and it has a devastating effect on soil because most of the trees get their nutrients from soil, which lakes, ponds, streams, and other waterways, which receives runoffs from soils uphill which humans.
When acid rain gets into the lakes and river it destroy all living things and declines in populations of fish, aquatic plant life and micro-organisms. Fish just goes extinct because they simply fail to reproduce and become less and less abundant, and older and older, until they die out. Changes in the biology of the provided one of the first clues to the problem of acid pollution is linked between the acidly of lakes and fish production. In the Ontario Ministry of the Environment reported that 140 acidified lakes in the province has no fish at all, and a further 48,000 lakes would not be able to tolerate extended acid inputs. There are three stages in the acidification of surface water. The first stage, is bicarbonate ions neutralize acids by reacting with hydrogen to produce carbon dioxide and water. If the bicarbonate content is maintained at a critical minimum level, the pH value of the water will remain stable, and plants, animals and micro-organisms will be unaffected. The second stage, is when the bicarbonate content drops below the critical level, and large influxes of hydrogen ions can no longer be neutralized. The pH value begins to go down faster then before this will disrupted the organisms and young fish. The third stage comes when the pH value stabilizes around 4.5. Almost all the original life is eliminated for example snails, many insects and fish disappear. The water becomes abnormally clear but some lakes can be neutralize the acids with limestone.
Destruction of forests and lakes are not the only the cause of acid rain but corrosion of buildings and monuments are also affected by the acid rain. Almost every buildings of a major urban or industrial centre may be at risk from the corrosive effects of acid deposition and the rate of corrosion has increased dramatically in many urban area. The Athenian monuments is get worst in the past 20-25 years result of pollution.
Most of the corrosion of the city buildings and monuments is the result of the dry deposition of SO2 and sulphate particles, mainly cause by urban concentrations of pollutants. When the sulphur pollutants fall on the surface of limestone or sandstone, they can react with the calcium carbonate in the stone to form calcium sulphate (gypsum), which sticks to the stone. This will causes flaking that can be washed away by rainwater, exposing more stone to corrosion and also gypsum and soot particles cause black crusts on buildings surface. Acid attack can also lead to stone decay through the creation of salt, which can crystallize and force apart mineral grains, causing the stone to disintegrate, salt can expand and contract thereby weather the surface. Mainly this is cause by the release of sulfur and nitrogen oxides by cars and industrial.
As our society get more advance there is also the effect of pollution that rises, to stop the effect we need to find alternatives way to stop car emission with new fuels and slowly removing fossil fuel that causing most of the nitrogen oxides. The government need to put stricter laws on the industrial that pollinated and removing harmful chemical from the earth. People should find a efficiency and alternatives way to stop the pollution that is happening around the world because the effect can be seen all round us starting with the forest, lakes and in the heart of are city where the buildings and monuments are being eating away by pollution.
Acid Rain 3
Acid rain is pollueted rain. The pollutants go up to the atmosphere and when it
rains it brings the pollution down with it. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are the
gases that form the acid rain. When these gases mix with moisture it can make
rain, snow, hail, or even fog. The scientific term for acid rain is acid deposition
which means when the acid is taken from the air and is deposited on the earth.
Major industries, coal burning factories, power plants and automoble engines are
the main sources of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide which caues acid rain.
Volcaneoes and forest fires also causes sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. Some
of the many problems that come from acid rain is the killing of of many plants and
underwater life in thousands of lakes and streams around the world. It strips
forest soils of nutrients and damages farm crops. Acid rain can also corrode
stone buildings, bridges, and priceless monuments. Acid rain can also be harmful
to humans because acid rain kills the crops and fish we eat, ruins homes, and the
acid can release lead in the pipes and the lead could go into our drinking water.
It is hard to determine where acid rain may fall next, because the wind from a
pollueted area could carry pollution to another area and the acid rain could fall
there. The regions effected more by acid rain is large parts of eastern North
America, Scandinavia, and central Europe. In alot of places acid rain isn't a
probelm because some soils can neutralize the acid and it doesn't effect the
crops. Areas more sensitive to acid rain is in the western United States most of
Washington all of Oregon, sectons of California and most of Idaho. Maine, New
Hampshire, Vermont and a large section of north east Canada. The soil in these
places can not neutralize acid rain deposits, then the nutrients are stripped which
means the crops in those places may not survive. The Black forest is a
2
mountainous region in Baden-Wurttemberg, in southwestern Germany. The
valleys are fertile and make good pasture land as well as providing good soil
vineyards. No forest region is showing serious effects of acid rain. Many trees
are dying, the forest lost masses of needles, leaving them with sparse, scruffing
crowns. Their major industries are Lumbering wood, manufacturing toys and
cuckoo clocks. Winter sports and mineral springs attract tourists.
Acid rain can damage and ruin soils by stripping the soils nutrients. But
some soils can neutralize and weaken acid deposits that fall from the sky. These
soils are called alkaline soil, also called a base. In 1838 the German chemist
Justus von Liebig offered the first really useful definition of an acid, namely, a
compound containing hydrogen that can react with a metal to produce hydrogen
gas.
Soil is formed when rocks are broken up by the weather and erosion and
mixed with organic matter from plants and animals. The term soil generally refers
to the loose surface of the Earth, made from solid rock. To the farmer, soil is the
natural medium for growth of all land plants. The rocks that make up soil could
be acid, neutral, or alkaline, another name for a base. Limestone and chalk are
rocks that are formed from tiny shells that are rich in calcium. Alkaline is made
up of calcium. When acid rain falls on alkaine soil the calcium makes the acid
become weaker or neutralize. Farmers put lime (a very strong alkaine
substance) and special fertilzers in there soil netralize the acid in the soil on a
regular daily basis.
In general, soil structure is classified as sandy, clay, or loam, although
most garden soils are mixtures of the three in varying proportions. A sandy soil is
3
very loose and will not hold water. A clay soil is dense and heavy, sticky when
wet, and almost brickhard when dry. Loam is a mixture of sand and clay soils,
but it also contains large quantities of humus, or decayed organic material, which
loosens and aerates clay soil and binds sandy soil particles together. In addition,
humus supplies plant nutrients. Then, soil structure can be improved by digging
in compost, manure, peat moss, and other organic matter.
Parts of western United States, Minneapolis, northeastern North America
and east and north Canada are places in North America where the is more
sensitive to acid deposits then any other places. Many factors, including the soil
chemistry and the type of rock determine the enviroments ablity to neutralize the
acid deposits from the rain.
Soils naturally contain small amounts of poisonous minerals such as
mercury, aluminum, and cadmium. Normally, these minerals do not cause
serious problems, but as the acidity of the soil increases, chemical reactions allow
the minerals to be absorbed by the plants. The plants are damaged and any
animals that eat the plants will aborb the poisons, which will remain in the animals
body and can hurt them or even kill them. The harmful minerals can also leach
out of the soil into streams and lakes where they can kill fish and other types of
living creatures. The problem gets even bigger and bigger when pollution dumps
more minerals in the soil. For example, in some parts of Poland vegetable crops
have been found to contain ten times more lead than is considered safe.
Some plants need and require soil, and the farmers do not want lime to be
put in there soil. If acid requiring plants, such as some types of shurbs, are put in
alkaline soil those plants are very likely to start to look yellow and very sicklly very
soon. Even if the water you give to the plants came from limestone strata it could
4
neutralize the soil. Continued use of some types of fertilzer may be cause the
loss of acidity, too. If the soil does not have enough acid in it, it may be made
more acidic by the application of alum, sulfur, or by adding gypsum to the soil. To
add more acid to the soil you can also lift the plants and replacing the whole bed
to a depth of nine inches with acid soil. It is not easy to make neutral soils acid.
Sulfur is the most commonly used to increase the soils acidity, but it acts very
slowly. So acid rain is good for some plants in some places with alkaline soil
because some of the plants want acid. Some acid requiring plants are several
popular shurbs, including azalea, camelia, gardenias, blueberries, and
rhododendron. Soils can be acid, alkaline, or neutral. The amounts of alkaline
and acid in the soil influence the biological and chemical processes that take
place in the soil. Highly alkaline or acid soils can harm many plants. Neutral soils
can support most of the processes.
Florida's sandy soils are naturally acidic, but the soil is easily changed from
acid to neutral or even a base ( base is alkaline soil ) by the small amounts of
lime and calcium that come from tiny shells often found in the Florida's sandy
beaches.
When acid rain falls from the sky it gets into the soil. The plants only have
time to absorb and store the water when the soil is wet. Then the leftover water
in the soil evaporates back into the sky where it becomes water vapor, forms into
clouds, and gets ready to rain again. It is the same thing with acid rain. The acid
doesn't stay in the soil. The acid evaporates back into the sky.
Pedologists are scientists who study the soil. They classify the soils
according to the characteristics of a polypedon. There are ten groups of soils,
they are Alfisols, Aridisols, Entisols, Histosols, Inceptisols, Mollisols, Oxisols,
5
Spodosols, Ultisols, and Vertisols. Alfisols develop under forests and grasslands
in humid climates. Aridisols occure in dry regions and contain small amounts of
organic matter. Entisols show little development. Histosols are organic soils.
They form water satuated enviornments, including swamps and bogs. Inceptisols
are only slightly developed. Mollisols develop in praire regions. They have thick
organically rich topsoils. Oxisols are the most chemically weathered soils. They
have a reddish color and occure in the tropical parts of the world. Spodosols
contains iron, aluminum, and organic matter in there B horizons. They form in
humid climates. They are moist, well-developed, acid soils. Vertisols form in
subhumid and arid warm climates. They make wide, deep cracks during the dry
season.
Other soil groups are the tundra, podzol, chernozem. Tundra soils have
dark brown surfaces and darker subsoils than in arctic regions that are underlain
by permafrost. The soils can be farmed if they are well drained and permafrost is
absent or deep-lying. Podzol soils are moderately to strongly leached soils in
forests and in humid regions. They are not naturally very productive for
agriculture. Chernozem soils (from Russian for "black earth") have a dark
surface layer underlain by more lightly colored soil. They typically develop under
grasses while the temperate is cool. Subhumid climates are highly productive,
although they require fertilizers after a long use.
rains it brings the pollution down with it. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are the
gases that form the acid rain. When these gases mix with moisture it can make
rain, snow, hail, or even fog. The scientific term for acid rain is acid deposition
which means when the acid is taken from the air and is deposited on the earth.
Major industries, coal burning factories, power plants and automoble engines are
the main sources of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide which caues acid rain.
Volcaneoes and forest fires also causes sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. Some
of the many problems that come from acid rain is the killing of of many plants and
underwater life in thousands of lakes and streams around the world. It strips
forest soils of nutrients and damages farm crops. Acid rain can also corrode
stone buildings, bridges, and priceless monuments. Acid rain can also be harmful
to humans because acid rain kills the crops and fish we eat, ruins homes, and the
acid can release lead in the pipes and the lead could go into our drinking water.
It is hard to determine where acid rain may fall next, because the wind from a
pollueted area could carry pollution to another area and the acid rain could fall
there. The regions effected more by acid rain is large parts of eastern North
America, Scandinavia, and central Europe. In alot of places acid rain isn't a
probelm because some soils can neutralize the acid and it doesn't effect the
crops. Areas more sensitive to acid rain is in the western United States most of
Washington all of Oregon, sectons of California and most of Idaho. Maine, New
Hampshire, Vermont and a large section of north east Canada. The soil in these
places can not neutralize acid rain deposits, then the nutrients are stripped which
means the crops in those places may not survive. The Black forest is a
2
mountainous region in Baden-Wurttemberg, in southwestern Germany. The
valleys are fertile and make good pasture land as well as providing good soil
vineyards. No forest region is showing serious effects of acid rain. Many trees
are dying, the forest lost masses of needles, leaving them with sparse, scruffing
crowns. Their major industries are Lumbering wood, manufacturing toys and
cuckoo clocks. Winter sports and mineral springs attract tourists.
Acid rain can damage and ruin soils by stripping the soils nutrients. But
some soils can neutralize and weaken acid deposits that fall from the sky. These
soils are called alkaline soil, also called a base. In 1838 the German chemist
Justus von Liebig offered the first really useful definition of an acid, namely, a
compound containing hydrogen that can react with a metal to produce hydrogen
gas.
Soil is formed when rocks are broken up by the weather and erosion and
mixed with organic matter from plants and animals. The term soil generally refers
to the loose surface of the Earth, made from solid rock. To the farmer, soil is the
natural medium for growth of all land plants. The rocks that make up soil could
be acid, neutral, or alkaline, another name for a base. Limestone and chalk are
rocks that are formed from tiny shells that are rich in calcium. Alkaline is made
up of calcium. When acid rain falls on alkaine soil the calcium makes the acid
become weaker or neutralize. Farmers put lime (a very strong alkaine
substance) and special fertilzers in there soil netralize the acid in the soil on a
regular daily basis.
In general, soil structure is classified as sandy, clay, or loam, although
most garden soils are mixtures of the three in varying proportions. A sandy soil is
3
very loose and will not hold water. A clay soil is dense and heavy, sticky when
wet, and almost brickhard when dry. Loam is a mixture of sand and clay soils,
but it also contains large quantities of humus, or decayed organic material, which
loosens and aerates clay soil and binds sandy soil particles together. In addition,
humus supplies plant nutrients. Then, soil structure can be improved by digging
in compost, manure, peat moss, and other organic matter.
Parts of western United States, Minneapolis, northeastern North America
and east and north Canada are places in North America where the is more
sensitive to acid deposits then any other places. Many factors, including the soil
chemistry and the type of rock determine the enviroments ablity to neutralize the
acid deposits from the rain.
Soils naturally contain small amounts of poisonous minerals such as
mercury, aluminum, and cadmium. Normally, these minerals do not cause
serious problems, but as the acidity of the soil increases, chemical reactions allow
the minerals to be absorbed by the plants. The plants are damaged and any
animals that eat the plants will aborb the poisons, which will remain in the animals
body and can hurt them or even kill them. The harmful minerals can also leach
out of the soil into streams and lakes where they can kill fish and other types of
living creatures. The problem gets even bigger and bigger when pollution dumps
more minerals in the soil. For example, in some parts of Poland vegetable crops
have been found to contain ten times more lead than is considered safe.
Some plants need and require soil, and the farmers do not want lime to be
put in there soil. If acid requiring plants, such as some types of shurbs, are put in
alkaline soil those plants are very likely to start to look yellow and very sicklly very
soon. Even if the water you give to the plants came from limestone strata it could
4
neutralize the soil. Continued use of some types of fertilzer may be cause the
loss of acidity, too. If the soil does not have enough acid in it, it may be made
more acidic by the application of alum, sulfur, or by adding gypsum to the soil. To
add more acid to the soil you can also lift the plants and replacing the whole bed
to a depth of nine inches with acid soil. It is not easy to make neutral soils acid.
Sulfur is the most commonly used to increase the soils acidity, but it acts very
slowly. So acid rain is good for some plants in some places with alkaline soil
because some of the plants want acid. Some acid requiring plants are several
popular shurbs, including azalea, camelia, gardenias, blueberries, and
rhododendron. Soils can be acid, alkaline, or neutral. The amounts of alkaline
and acid in the soil influence the biological and chemical processes that take
place in the soil. Highly alkaline or acid soils can harm many plants. Neutral soils
can support most of the processes.
Florida's sandy soils are naturally acidic, but the soil is easily changed from
acid to neutral or even a base ( base is alkaline soil ) by the small amounts of
lime and calcium that come from tiny shells often found in the Florida's sandy
beaches.
When acid rain falls from the sky it gets into the soil. The plants only have
time to absorb and store the water when the soil is wet. Then the leftover water
in the soil evaporates back into the sky where it becomes water vapor, forms into
clouds, and gets ready to rain again. It is the same thing with acid rain. The acid
doesn't stay in the soil. The acid evaporates back into the sky.
Pedologists are scientists who study the soil. They classify the soils
according to the characteristics of a polypedon. There are ten groups of soils,
they are Alfisols, Aridisols, Entisols, Histosols, Inceptisols, Mollisols, Oxisols,
5
Spodosols, Ultisols, and Vertisols. Alfisols develop under forests and grasslands
in humid climates. Aridisols occure in dry regions and contain small amounts of
organic matter. Entisols show little development. Histosols are organic soils.
They form water satuated enviornments, including swamps and bogs. Inceptisols
are only slightly developed. Mollisols develop in praire regions. They have thick
organically rich topsoils. Oxisols are the most chemically weathered soils. They
have a reddish color and occure in the tropical parts of the world. Spodosols
contains iron, aluminum, and organic matter in there B horizons. They form in
humid climates. They are moist, well-developed, acid soils. Vertisols form in
subhumid and arid warm climates. They make wide, deep cracks during the dry
season.
Other soil groups are the tundra, podzol, chernozem. Tundra soils have
dark brown surfaces and darker subsoils than in arctic regions that are underlain
by permafrost. The soils can be farmed if they are well drained and permafrost is
absent or deep-lying. Podzol soils are moderately to strongly leached soils in
forests and in humid regions. They are not naturally very productive for
agriculture. Chernozem soils (from Russian for "black earth") have a dark
surface layer underlain by more lightly colored soil. They typically develop under
grasses while the temperate is cool. Subhumid climates are highly productive,
although they require fertilizers after a long use.
Acid Rain 2
ACID RAIN. When fossil fuels such as coal, gasoline, and fuel oils are
burned, they emit oxides of sulfur, carbon, and nitrogen into the air.
These oxides combine with moisture in the air to form sulfuric acid,
carbonic acid, and nitric acid. When it rains or snows, these acids are
brought to Earth in what is called acid rain.
During the course of the 20th century, the acidity of the air and acid
rain have come to be recognized as a leading threat to the stability and
quality of the Earth's environment. Most of this acidity is produced in the
industrialized nations of the Northern Hemisphere--the United States, Canada,
Japan, and most of the countries of Eastern and Western Europe.
The effects of acid rain can be devastating to many forms of life,
including human life. Its effects can be most vividly seen, however, in
lakes, rivers, and streams and on vegetation. Acidity in water kills
virtually all life forms. By the early 1990s tens of thousands of lakes had
been destroyed by acid rain. The problem has been most severe in Norway,
Sweden, and Canada.
The threat posed by acid rain is not limited by geographic boundaries, for
prevailing winds carry the pollutants around the globe. For example, much
research supports the conclusion that pollution from coal-powered electric
generating stations in the midwestern United States is the ultimate cause of
the severe acid-rain problem in eastern Canada and the northeastern United
States. Nor are the destructive effects of acid rain limited to the natural
environment. Structures made of stone, metal, and cement have also been
damaged or destroyed. Some of the world's great monuments, including the
cathedrals of Europe and the Colosseum in Rome, have shown signs of
deterioration caused by acid rain.
Scientists use what is called the pH factor to measure the acidity or
alkalinity of liquid solutions. On a scale from 0 to
14, the number 0 represents the highest level of acid and 14 the most basic
or alkaline. A solution of distilled water containing neither acids nor
alkalies, or bases, is designated 7, or neutral. If the pH level of rain
falls below 5.5, the rain is considered acidic. Rainfalls in the eastern
United States and in Western Europe often range from 4.5 to 4.0.
Although the cost of such antipollution equipment as burners, filters, and
chemical and washing devices is great, the cost in damage to the environment
and human life is estimated to be much greater because the damage may be
irreversible. Although preventative measures are being taken, up to 500,000
lakes in North America and more than 4 billion cubic feet (118 million cubic
meters) of timber in Europe may be destroyed before the end of the 20th
century.
Sebastian Kovacs Copyright@1997
burned, they emit oxides of sulfur, carbon, and nitrogen into the air.
These oxides combine with moisture in the air to form sulfuric acid,
carbonic acid, and nitric acid. When it rains or snows, these acids are
brought to Earth in what is called acid rain.
During the course of the 20th century, the acidity of the air and acid
rain have come to be recognized as a leading threat to the stability and
quality of the Earth's environment. Most of this acidity is produced in the
industrialized nations of the Northern Hemisphere--the United States, Canada,
Japan, and most of the countries of Eastern and Western Europe.
The effects of acid rain can be devastating to many forms of life,
including human life. Its effects can be most vividly seen, however, in
lakes, rivers, and streams and on vegetation. Acidity in water kills
virtually all life forms. By the early 1990s tens of thousands of lakes had
been destroyed by acid rain. The problem has been most severe in Norway,
Sweden, and Canada.
The threat posed by acid rain is not limited by geographic boundaries, for
prevailing winds carry the pollutants around the globe. For example, much
research supports the conclusion that pollution from coal-powered electric
generating stations in the midwestern United States is the ultimate cause of
the severe acid-rain problem in eastern Canada and the northeastern United
States. Nor are the destructive effects of acid rain limited to the natural
environment. Structures made of stone, metal, and cement have also been
damaged or destroyed. Some of the world's great monuments, including the
cathedrals of Europe and the Colosseum in Rome, have shown signs of
deterioration caused by acid rain.
Scientists use what is called the pH factor to measure the acidity or
alkalinity of liquid solutions. On a scale from 0 to
14, the number 0 represents the highest level of acid and 14 the most basic
or alkaline. A solution of distilled water containing neither acids nor
alkalies, or bases, is designated 7, or neutral. If the pH level of rain
falls below 5.5, the rain is considered acidic. Rainfalls in the eastern
United States and in Western Europe often range from 4.5 to 4.0.
Although the cost of such antipollution equipment as burners, filters, and
chemical and washing devices is great, the cost in damage to the environment
and human life is estimated to be much greater because the damage may be
irreversible. Although preventative measures are being taken, up to 500,000
lakes in North America and more than 4 billion cubic feet (118 million cubic
meters) of timber in Europe may be destroyed before the end of the 20th
century.
Sebastian Kovacs Copyright@1997
acid rain
INTRODUCTION: Acid rain is a great problem in our world. It causes fish
and plants to die in our waters. As well it causes harm to our own race as
well, because we eat these fish, drink this water and eat these plants. It
is a problem that we must all face together and try to get rid of. However
acid rain on it's own is not the biggest problem. It cause many other
problems such as aluminum poisoning. Acid Rain is deadly.
WHAT IS ACID RAIN?
Acid rain is all the rain, snow, mist etc that falls from the sky onto
our planet that contains an unnatural acidic. It is not to be confused with
uncontaminated rain that falls, for that rain is naturally slightly acidic.
It is caused by today's industry. When products are manufactured many
chemicals are used to create it. However because of the difficulty and cost
of properly disposing of these products they are often emitted into the
atmosphere with little or no treatment.
The term was first considered to be important about 20 years ago when
scientists in Sweden and Norway first believed that acidic rain may be
causing great ecological damage to the planet. The problem was that by the
time that the scientist found the problem it was already very large.
Detecting an acid lake is often quite difficult. A lake does not become
acid over night. It happens over a period of many years, some times
decades. The changes are usually to gradual for them to be noticed early.
At the beginning of the 20th century most rivers/lakes like the river
Tovdal in Norway had not yet begun to die. However by 1926 local inspectors
were noticing that many of the lakes were beginning to show signs of death.
Fish were found dead along the banks of many rivers. As the winters ice
began to melt off more and more hundreds upon hundreds more dead fish
(trout in particular) were being found. It was at this time that scientist
began to search for the reason. As the scientists continued to work they
found many piles of dead fish, up to 5000 in one pile, further up the
river. Divers were sent in to examine the bottom of the rivers. What they
found were many more dead fish. Many live and dead specimens were taken
back to labs across Norway. When the live specimens were examined they were
found to have very little sodium in their blood. This is typical a typical
symptom of acid poisoning. The acid had entered the gills of the fish and
poisoned them so that they were unable to extract salt from the water to
maintain their bodies sodium levels.
Many scientist said that this acid poising was due to the fact that it
was just after the winter and that all the snow and ice was running down
into the streams and lakes. They believed that the snow had been exposed to
many natural phenomena that gave the snow it's high acid content. Other
scientists were not sure that this theory was correct because at the time
that the snow was added to the lakes and streams the Ph levels would change
from around 5.2 to 4.6. They believed that such a high jump could not be
attributed to natural causes. They believed that it was due to air
pollution. They were right. Since the beginning of the Industrial
revolution in England pollution had been affecting all the trees,soil and
rivers in Europe and North America.
However until recently the loses of fish was contained to the southern
parts of Europe. Because of the constant onslaught of acid rain lakes and
rivers began to lose their ability to counter act their affects. Much of
the alkaline elements; such as calcium and limestone; in the soil had been
washed away. It is these lakes that we must be worried about for they will
soon become extinct.
A fact that may please fishermen is that in lakes/rivers they tend to
catch older and larger fish. This may please them in the short run however
they will soon have to change lakes for the fish supply will die quickly in
these lakes. The problem is that acid causes difficulties the fish's
reproductive system. Often fish born in acid lakes do not survive for they
are born with birth defects such as twisted and deformed spinal columns.
This is a sign that they are unable to extract enough calcium from the
water to fully develop their bone. These young soon die. With no
competition the older,stronger can grow easily. However there food is
contaminated as well by the acid in the water. Soon they have not enough
food for themselves and turn to cannibalism. With only an older population
left there is no one left to regenerate themselves. Soon the lake dies.
By the late 1970s many Norwegian scientists began to suspect that it
was not only the acid in the water that was causing the deaths. They had
proved that most fish could survive in a stream that had up to a 1 unit
difference in PH. After many experiments and research they found that their
missing link was aluminum.
Aluminum is one of the most common metals on earth. It is stored in a
combined form with other elements in the earth. When it is combined it
cannot dissolve into the water and harm the fish and plants. However the
acid from acid rain can easily dissolve the bond between these elements.
The Aluminum is then dissolved into a more soluble state by the acid. Other
metals such as Copper (Cu), iron (Fe) etc can cause such effects upon the
fish as well however it is the aluminum that is the most common. For
example: CuO + H2SO4 ----------> CuSO4 + H2O
In this form it is easily absorbed into the water. When it comes in
contact with fish it causes irritation to the gills. In response the fish
creates a film of mucus in the gills to stop this irritation until the
irritant is gone. However the aluminum does not go always and the fish
continues to build up more and more mucus to counteract it. Eventually
there is so much mucus that it clogs the gills. When this happens the fish
can no longer breath. It dies and then sinks to the bottom of the lake.
Scientists now see acid, aluminum and shortages of calcium as the three
determining factors in the extinction of fish.
As well there is the problem of chlorine. In many parts of the world
it is commonly found in the soil. If it enters the fish's environment it
can be deadly. It affects many of the fish's organisms and causes it to
die. As well it interferes in the photosynthesis process in plants.
NaOH + HCl ----> NaCl + H2O
The carbon in the water can become very dangerous for fish and plants
in the water if the following reaction happens:
CaCO3 + 2HCl ---> CaCl2 + H2CO3 then
H2CO3 ---> H2O + CO2
The salt created by this reaction can kill. It interferes directly with
the fish's nervous system.
Acid lakes are deceivingly beautiful. The are crystal clear and have a
luscious carpet of green algae on the bottom. The reason that these lakes
are so clear is because many of the decomposers are dead. They cannot break
down that material such as leaves and dead animals. These materials
eventually sink to the bottom instead of going through the natural process
of decomposition. In acid lakes decomposition is very slow. "The whole
metabolism of the lake is slowed down."
During this same period of time the Canadian department of fisheries
spent eight years dumping sulfuric acid (H2SO4) into an Ontario lake to see
the effects of the decrease in the PH over a number of years. At the PH of
5.9 the first organisms began to disappear. They were shrimps. They started
out at a population of about seven million, but at the pH of 5.9 they were
totally wiped out. Within a year the minnow died because it could no longer
reproduce it's self.
At this time the pH was of 5.8. New trout were failing to be produced
because many smaller organisms that served as food to it had been wiped out
earlier. With not enough food the older fish did not have the energy to
reproduce. Upon reaching the pH of 5.1 it was noted that the trout became
cannibals. It is believed this is due to the fact that the minnow was
nearly extinct.
At a pH of 5.6 the external skeletons of crayfish softened and they
were soon infected with parasites, and there eggs were destroyed by fungi.
When the pH went down to 5.1 they were almost gone. By the end of the
experiment none of the major species had survived the trials of the acid.
The next experiment conducted by the scientists was to try and bring the
lake back to life. They cut in half the amount of acid that they dumped to
simulate a large scale cleanup. Soon again the cuckers and minnows began to
reproduce again. The lake eventually did come back; to a certain extent;
back to life. THE NEW THEORY:
A scientist in Norway had a problem believing that it was the acid
rain on it's own that was affecting the lakes in such a deadly way. This
scientist was Dr Rosenqvist.
"Why is it that during heavy rain, the swollen rivers can be up to
fifteen times more acid than the rain? It cannot be the rain alone that is
doing it, can it?" Many scientist shunned him for this however they could
not come up with a better answer. Soon the scientists were forced to accept
this theory.
Sulfuric acid is composed of two parts, know as ions. The hydrogen ion
is what make a substance acid. The other ion is sulphate. When there are
more hydrogen ions then a substance is acid. It is this sulphate ion that
we are interested in. When the rain causes rivers to overboard onto the
banks the river water passes through the soil. Since the industrial
revolution in britain there has been an increasing amount of sulphur in the
soil. In the river there is not enough sulphur for the acid to react in
great quantities. However in the soil there is a great collection of
sulphur to aid the reaction. When it joins the water the pH becomes much
lower. This is the most deadly effect of acid rain on our water!!! The
water itself does not contain enough sulphur to kill off it's population of
fish and plants. But with the sulphur in the soil it does.
CONCLUSION:
Acid rain is a big problem. It causes the death of our lakes, our rivers,
our wild life and most importantly us. As well it causes other problems
that are very serious as well such as the release of aluminium and lead
into our water supplies. We are suffering because of it. In Scotland there
are many birth defects being attributed to it. We must cut down the
releases of chemicals that cause it. But it will take time, even if we were
to stop today we would have the problem for years to come because of the
build up in the soil. Let's hope we can do something.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Penguin Publishing House, 1987 , Pearce Fred Acid Rain. What is it and
what is it doing to us?
and plants to die in our waters. As well it causes harm to our own race as
well, because we eat these fish, drink this water and eat these plants. It
is a problem that we must all face together and try to get rid of. However
acid rain on it's own is not the biggest problem. It cause many other
problems such as aluminum poisoning. Acid Rain is deadly.
WHAT IS ACID RAIN?
Acid rain is all the rain, snow, mist etc that falls from the sky onto
our planet that contains an unnatural acidic. It is not to be confused with
uncontaminated rain that falls, for that rain is naturally slightly acidic.
It is caused by today's industry. When products are manufactured many
chemicals are used to create it. However because of the difficulty and cost
of properly disposing of these products they are often emitted into the
atmosphere with little or no treatment.
The term was first considered to be important about 20 years ago when
scientists in Sweden and Norway first believed that acidic rain may be
causing great ecological damage to the planet. The problem was that by the
time that the scientist found the problem it was already very large.
Detecting an acid lake is often quite difficult. A lake does not become
acid over night. It happens over a period of many years, some times
decades. The changes are usually to gradual for them to be noticed early.
At the beginning of the 20th century most rivers/lakes like the river
Tovdal in Norway had not yet begun to die. However by 1926 local inspectors
were noticing that many of the lakes were beginning to show signs of death.
Fish were found dead along the banks of many rivers. As the winters ice
began to melt off more and more hundreds upon hundreds more dead fish
(trout in particular) were being found. It was at this time that scientist
began to search for the reason. As the scientists continued to work they
found many piles of dead fish, up to 5000 in one pile, further up the
river. Divers were sent in to examine the bottom of the rivers. What they
found were many more dead fish. Many live and dead specimens were taken
back to labs across Norway. When the live specimens were examined they were
found to have very little sodium in their blood. This is typical a typical
symptom of acid poisoning. The acid had entered the gills of the fish and
poisoned them so that they were unable to extract salt from the water to
maintain their bodies sodium levels.
Many scientist said that this acid poising was due to the fact that it
was just after the winter and that all the snow and ice was running down
into the streams and lakes. They believed that the snow had been exposed to
many natural phenomena that gave the snow it's high acid content. Other
scientists were not sure that this theory was correct because at the time
that the snow was added to the lakes and streams the Ph levels would change
from around 5.2 to 4.6. They believed that such a high jump could not be
attributed to natural causes. They believed that it was due to air
pollution. They were right. Since the beginning of the Industrial
revolution in England pollution had been affecting all the trees,soil and
rivers in Europe and North America.
However until recently the loses of fish was contained to the southern
parts of Europe. Because of the constant onslaught of acid rain lakes and
rivers began to lose their ability to counter act their affects. Much of
the alkaline elements; such as calcium and limestone; in the soil had been
washed away. It is these lakes that we must be worried about for they will
soon become extinct.
A fact that may please fishermen is that in lakes/rivers they tend to
catch older and larger fish. This may please them in the short run however
they will soon have to change lakes for the fish supply will die quickly in
these lakes. The problem is that acid causes difficulties the fish's
reproductive system. Often fish born in acid lakes do not survive for they
are born with birth defects such as twisted and deformed spinal columns.
This is a sign that they are unable to extract enough calcium from the
water to fully develop their bone. These young soon die. With no
competition the older,stronger can grow easily. However there food is
contaminated as well by the acid in the water. Soon they have not enough
food for themselves and turn to cannibalism. With only an older population
left there is no one left to regenerate themselves. Soon the lake dies.
By the late 1970s many Norwegian scientists began to suspect that it
was not only the acid in the water that was causing the deaths. They had
proved that most fish could survive in a stream that had up to a 1 unit
difference in PH. After many experiments and research they found that their
missing link was aluminum.
Aluminum is one of the most common metals on earth. It is stored in a
combined form with other elements in the earth. When it is combined it
cannot dissolve into the water and harm the fish and plants. However the
acid from acid rain can easily dissolve the bond between these elements.
The Aluminum is then dissolved into a more soluble state by the acid. Other
metals such as Copper (Cu), iron (Fe) etc can cause such effects upon the
fish as well however it is the aluminum that is the most common. For
example: CuO + H2SO4 ----------> CuSO4 + H2O
In this form it is easily absorbed into the water. When it comes in
contact with fish it causes irritation to the gills. In response the fish
creates a film of mucus in the gills to stop this irritation until the
irritant is gone. However the aluminum does not go always and the fish
continues to build up more and more mucus to counteract it. Eventually
there is so much mucus that it clogs the gills. When this happens the fish
can no longer breath. It dies and then sinks to the bottom of the lake.
Scientists now see acid, aluminum and shortages of calcium as the three
determining factors in the extinction of fish.
As well there is the problem of chlorine. In many parts of the world
it is commonly found in the soil. If it enters the fish's environment it
can be deadly. It affects many of the fish's organisms and causes it to
die. As well it interferes in the photosynthesis process in plants.
NaOH + HCl ----> NaCl + H2O
The carbon in the water can become very dangerous for fish and plants
in the water if the following reaction happens:
CaCO3 + 2HCl ---> CaCl2 + H2CO3 then
H2CO3 ---> H2O + CO2
The salt created by this reaction can kill. It interferes directly with
the fish's nervous system.
Acid lakes are deceivingly beautiful. The are crystal clear and have a
luscious carpet of green algae on the bottom. The reason that these lakes
are so clear is because many of the decomposers are dead. They cannot break
down that material such as leaves and dead animals. These materials
eventually sink to the bottom instead of going through the natural process
of decomposition. In acid lakes decomposition is very slow. "The whole
metabolism of the lake is slowed down."
During this same period of time the Canadian department of fisheries
spent eight years dumping sulfuric acid (H2SO4) into an Ontario lake to see
the effects of the decrease in the PH over a number of years. At the PH of
5.9 the first organisms began to disappear. They were shrimps. They started
out at a population of about seven million, but at the pH of 5.9 they were
totally wiped out. Within a year the minnow died because it could no longer
reproduce it's self.
At this time the pH was of 5.8. New trout were failing to be produced
because many smaller organisms that served as food to it had been wiped out
earlier. With not enough food the older fish did not have the energy to
reproduce. Upon reaching the pH of 5.1 it was noted that the trout became
cannibals. It is believed this is due to the fact that the minnow was
nearly extinct.
At a pH of 5.6 the external skeletons of crayfish softened and they
were soon infected with parasites, and there eggs were destroyed by fungi.
When the pH went down to 5.1 they were almost gone. By the end of the
experiment none of the major species had survived the trials of the acid.
The next experiment conducted by the scientists was to try and bring the
lake back to life. They cut in half the amount of acid that they dumped to
simulate a large scale cleanup. Soon again the cuckers and minnows began to
reproduce again. The lake eventually did come back; to a certain extent;
back to life. THE NEW THEORY:
A scientist in Norway had a problem believing that it was the acid
rain on it's own that was affecting the lakes in such a deadly way. This
scientist was Dr Rosenqvist.
"Why is it that during heavy rain, the swollen rivers can be up to
fifteen times more acid than the rain? It cannot be the rain alone that is
doing it, can it?" Many scientist shunned him for this however they could
not come up with a better answer. Soon the scientists were forced to accept
this theory.
Sulfuric acid is composed of two parts, know as ions. The hydrogen ion
is what make a substance acid. The other ion is sulphate. When there are
more hydrogen ions then a substance is acid. It is this sulphate ion that
we are interested in. When the rain causes rivers to overboard onto the
banks the river water passes through the soil. Since the industrial
revolution in britain there has been an increasing amount of sulphur in the
soil. In the river there is not enough sulphur for the acid to react in
great quantities. However in the soil there is a great collection of
sulphur to aid the reaction. When it joins the water the pH becomes much
lower. This is the most deadly effect of acid rain on our water!!! The
water itself does not contain enough sulphur to kill off it's population of
fish and plants. But with the sulphur in the soil it does.
CONCLUSION:
Acid rain is a big problem. It causes the death of our lakes, our rivers,
our wild life and most importantly us. As well it causes other problems
that are very serious as well such as the release of aluminium and lead
into our water supplies. We are suffering because of it. In Scotland there
are many birth defects being attributed to it. We must cut down the
releases of chemicals that cause it. But it will take time, even if we were
to stop today we would have the problem for years to come because of the
build up in the soil. Let's hope we can do something.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Penguin Publishing House, 1987 , Pearce Fred Acid Rain. What is it and
what is it doing to us?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)