Month: February 2022

by

U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Bounced Back Sharply in 2021

Plumer, B. (2022, January 10). U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Bounced Back Sharply in 2021. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/climate/emissions-pandemic-rebound.html

 

This article explores the pandemic’s effect on transportation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions and how we are seeing a sharp increase in carbon as we return to our normal state of affairs. The article states that transportation saw a 10 percent increase in emissions in 2021 after a 15 percent decline in 2020, which can be attributed to a rise in diesel-fueled trucks carrying goods to consumers and higher levels of freight traffic. Passenger travel in cars and airplanes has been slower to recover. The uncertainty around new variants disrupted travel plans and kept many people at home, so we are not completely back to previous levels. The article also discusses Biden’s auspicious carbon emission goal and discerns whether his supporting policies are enough to get us to net zero emissions by 2050. 

The article’s emphasis on sustainability and the general premise of weighing options based on scientific fact to determine the most sustainable policies associates it with environmental science. I believe the article did a good job of succinctly describing the pandemic’s effect on greenhouse gas emissions and explaining why it was unsustainable. I also enjoyed their fiscal and social analysis of Biden’s Build Back Better bill, as they did not solely focus on the environmental effect but proffered a holistic analysis of all its ramifications. 

by

Reducing Your Transportation Footprint

Reducing Your Transportation Footprint. (2021, October 27). Retrieved from https://www.c2es.org/content/reducing-your-transportation-footprint/

 

This article delineated the most common transportation methods, their impact on the environment, and ways to improve them. It begins with passenger cars which contribute half of the carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S. transportation sector, and the average vehicle creates roughly 6 to 9 tons of CO2 each year. However, a 30-mpg car will save approximately $3,000 in fuel costs compared with a 20-mpg car per year. This study shows many cost-effective, eco-friendly petroleum options, whereas electric vehicles are traditionally more expensive. Thus, there are feasible ways to reduce your footprint without massive lifestyle changes quickly. Furthermore, optimal driving techniques can also help you cut emissions and save money in a gasoline-powered car. The article also stipulates that individuals can save more than $9,738 per year by taking public transportation instead of driving. Moreover, this mode can lead to substantial environmental benefits. If your commute is a 20-mile round trip, the switch to public transit could lower your carbon footprint by 4,800 pounds annually. By taking direct flights and packing lightly, you can significantly reduce your carbon footprint for aviation. The article states, “if all passengers packed one less pair of shoes or roughly two lbs/1kg, the aircraft’s fuel savings would be the same as taking 10,500 cars off the road for an entire year. “

 

This article relates to environmental science because it explores environmentally friendly transportation methods. It describes the emissions levels for different modes of transportation and strategies to reduce them. I enjoyed this article because of the preponderance of evidence provided throughout the piece. It continually provided statistics and numbers to substantiate its claims on costs and carbon emissions. I also like how they broke down the major transportation components and analyzed them separately so as to not get too muddled.

by

The transportation of tomorrow will address climate change

Person, & Ella Foley Gannon, L. M. (2022, January 05). The transportation of tomorrow will address climate change. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/transportation-tomorrow-will-address-climate-change-2022-01-05/

 

This article explores transportation impact on climate change and some domestic legislation being drafted to mitigate its implications. In November, President Biden released his administration’s long-term climate-change strategy, which presents a vision of achieving the United States’ goal of net-zero emissions by no later than 2050, emphasizing the role of electric vehicles in attaining that goal. This summer, President Biden signed an executive order stipulating that 50% of all new passenger cars and light trucks must be zero emissions by 2030. Furthermore, the Build Back Better bill earmarks $7.5 billion to build a national network for electric-charging stations to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles to reduce transportation emissions, facilitate long-distance travel, and make charging more convenient for consumers. The article also asserts that aviation contributes 11% of transportation-related emissions in the United States. To address that figure, the Biden administration has set the target year of 2050 for the aviation industry to reach net-zero emissions. 

 

The article is directly related to environmental science because it refers to E.S’s place within public policy and legislation. Since the emergence of climate change as a significant political issue, policymakers are constantly attempting to create legislation that addresses the changing climate. Furthermore, the article explains how some of the policies would adequately address emission levels and clearly describes the scientific causal linkage relating to climate change. The report did an excellent job of explaining some of the policies introduced, and I was fascinated by some of the statistics. Notably, I was surprised that the deadline for aviation to reach net-zero emissions was markedly later than other forms of transportation, and I’m interested to learn more about why that may be. 

 

by

Transportation and Climate Change

National Geographic Society. (2021, August 11). Transportation and Climate Change. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/transportation-and-climate-change/

 

In many ways, climate change and modern transportation go hand in hand. This article articulates transportation’s impact on climate change in the United States and explores factors that individuals and corporations can alter behaviors to diminish their transportation footprint. The report asserts that “in 2017, the U.S. transportation sector generated the largest percentage of greenhouse gasses emitted at 29 percent.” Motor vehicles are the leading cause of air pollution in the United States, though other modes of travel, such as planes and cruise ships, create more significant emissions per voyage per person. Some solutions the article proffers include the switch to electric vehicles and increased R&D in alternative fuels like hydrogen fuel cells. For individuals, the article mentions researching the travel options available and investigating one’s relative carbon footprint as primary methods to ensure everyone is doing their part. Public transportation like buses, subways, and trolleys are generally more environmentally friendly than driving a car because the more people traveling in a vehicle, the smaller each person’s carbon footprint. 

 

The article is linked to environmental science because it describes the relationship between transportation and climate change, highlighting the greenhouse effect and potential solutions. The direct analysis of transportation’s impact and the speculation of mitigation efforts are critical components of environmental science. The article is an excellent introductory source to a complex subject, and it generalizes the main issues with transportation offering scientific reasoning to substantiate their claims. I also enjoyed how the article included precedent of some solutions succeeding from other countries. I believe the United States can use the framework provided by other nations and continue our climate mitigation efforts. It was also nice to see how the individual solutions were fairly easy to execute and could make a legitimate difference if performed by large numbers of people. 

 

by

Recreational Ocean Salmon Fishery Season Curtailed

Cdfw. “Recreational Ocean Salmon Fishery Season Curtailed on Much of the California Coast.” CDFW News, 14 June 2021, https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2021/03/11/recreational-ocean-salmon-fishery-season-curtailed-on-much-of-the-california-coast/.

Recreational ocean salmon fishery season has been curtailed and a large part of the California coast, ocean waters will open on April 3 from pigeon point to the US Mexico border, and fish must be at least 24 inches long the northernmost areas of the California coast will remain closed until further notice. These fission management strategies were put in place as a result of the California drought in 2021 salmon fishery representatives, and the Pacific fishery management council PFMC, decided to delay these dates due to poor stock forecasts. These final dates will be decided later in the season for other areas.

This article is fairly similar to the first article I researched, except it was last year and more focused on the ocean rather than coastal rivers, although the article is nearly outdated, it is important to compare last year‘s management to this year‘s management, as we can compare the different stock levels and different management practices. Additionally we can take into account the environmental effects that that year had on the management and the fish levels. 2021 and especially early 2021 was yelling somewhat little rain and very little rain storms. Therefore many species struggle to maintain population levels as coastal rivers struggle to maintain water flow. That is a likely result of these curtailed fishing seasons in 2021. Although we saw similar effects in 2022 and coastal rivers and the ocean, the dates were not pushed back as far and the areas restricted were much smaller and limited to certain rivers rather than nearly half of the California coast north of pigeon point. California is clearly doing the right thing when it comes to management in some of my articles and never seems like California is putting fishing before the health of fish species. Reading articles from the California Department of Fish and wildlife itself to articles that were posted on fishing logs information seems rather similar even fishermen seem to accept the health of their fish species.

by

Innovative Management for Central Valley Native Fish

“Innovative Management for Central Valley Native Fish.” California Trout, 13 Dec. 2021, https://caltrout.org/news/innovative-management-for-central-valley-native-fish

Innovative management for central valley native fish has been studied in late 2021 into 2022, only 5% of central valley for flood plains remain intact and three or four native chinook salmon runs are endangered or threatened. In the past starving salmon and smelt populations of today were thriving in the central valley where every part of the central valley was essentially a floodplain. The studies done this year we’re on chinook salmon that were placed in floodplains canals and rivers. After two weeks The floodplain salmon is twice the size or even three times the size as the canal and river salmon. Therefore it is clear that the flood plains are a much healthier environment than the canal or rivers. Therefore the habitat restoration and the Sacramento Valley is very necessary. Strategies include providing access to foraging and rearing habitat on the floodplains. And exporting the productivity to inundated floodplains on the dry side. projects such as the Nguri project are doing just that with success.

It is incredible that the entire central valley used to be a floodplain, and rather depressing that so much of it is lost 95% essentially. I wonder how efficient these strategies are in terms of saving water, and if it’s really worth it for the species to be saved, and it is not necessarily saving the species either but rather helping their species become more healthy and growing efficiently. I think there needs to be more done in order to study the floodplains and the possibility of this management for central valley fish. At the end of the day restoring habitats to the way they used to be, when the fish were thriving in the first place is one of the best strategies in my opinion, I think altering the habitats and trying to create new habitats is a dangerous game to play and therefore restoring floodplain saw they were 100 years ago is not a bad idea at all.

by

Kelp Is the Fastest Growing Aquaculture Sector in California

Commentary, Guest. “Kelp Is the Fastest Growing Aquaculture Sector in California.” CalMatters, 4 Feb. 2022, https://calmatters.org/commentary/reader-reactions/2022/02/kelp-is-the-fastest-growing-aquaculture-sector-in-california/.

Although not necessarily a fish species, kelp is a critical Californian fish ecosystem, and kelp forest can be found from as far south as the Mexican border and as far north as the Mexican border Oregon border, also being found on coastal islands like Catalina Island or the Channel Islands. The California coastal commission has approved for seven seaweed farms to be started as aqua culture grows as a farming possibility.  These leases of California waters are called “bottom leases “and they’re not giving out easily, there are 10 sites available that cover 16,000 acres of offshore Californian waters for aquaculture specifically.

Some believe aquaculture practices are detrimental to ocean ecosystems, it is in fact true that aquaculture and seaweed production could be driving forces in reversal of climate change or at least the stop of it. It is possible that we can create biofuel with seaweed, feed livestock with seaweed, and use it for other things that could be preventions of climate change. For example feeding seaweed to livestock reduces their carbon dioxide outputs significantly. And livestock carbon dioxide production is one of the greatest factors and greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere. Additionally it is already clear that these permits or bottom permits are not being given out easily, in fact the coastal act has prevented more than 10 from ever being given out since 1982. Now aquaculture is a “priority use, “and therefore it is clear that more permits will be given out. Try to tie this into the rest of my articles so far is interesting, as it deals with the ocean and not coastal rivers, however all the articles connect and that associations seem to be smart about handing out restrictions or prohibitions, and since earlier in the year when I read articles it seems that these associations are doing a much better job.

by

Caltrout’s North Coast Projects/ Funding from CDFW

“Caltrout’s North Coast Projects Receive Funding Awards from CDFW.” California Trout, 19 Jan. 2022, https://caltrout.org/news/caltrout-north-coast-projects-receive-funding-awards-from-cdfw.

 On the northern coast of California, the nonprofit Cal trout has received nearly $1 million from the California Department of Fish and wildlife. This funding is for the research of different fish species including salmon and steelhead trout. This portion of the coast is less developed than any other part of California. Therefore they are strongholds when it comes to fish species that we are losing in central and southern California. Watershed health will be improved as a result of these studies being done by professors at UC Berkeley and other private scientific study companies. Multiple plans have already been put in place and rivers such as the eel River Hill river basin Cedar Creek and other creeks and rivers along the north coast some coastal some central.

It is nice to see the connection between this article and the article about the restrictions being placed for the same river such as the Eel river. These rivers are so crucial to the survival of California’s fish species, and placing restrictions on fishing when needed, and doing studies to further understand the species and how we can help them is crucial. Seeing both of these strategies work simultaneously is something we have never seen before, and it is important that they continue as we see more and more droughts, pollution and overfishing. Another connection between this article in the previous article is the CDFW California Department of Fish and wildlife, and both instances the CDFW is the reason for the protection happening, and it is nice to see that we have an association doing its job whether it’s emergency drought funds projects or prolonged fishing restrictions. Although there has been backlash from fishermen, and their industries, at the end of the day these things are being done for them because in the long term there won’t be any native fish left if we don’t make a change. It is also interesting to look at each individual plan or restoration progress report, the amount of funding needed is rather significant adding up to millions of dollars, however it seems their studies are worth it and their connections to tribal and nonprofit associations or rather interesting. It seems many of the restorations are either removal of dams or barriers or re-restoration or redirecting rivers and creeks.

 

 

by

Emergency Regulations/ Extended Angling Restrictions

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. “Emergency Regulations Allow CDFW to Extend Angling Restrictions in Coastal Waters Experiencing Prolonged, Low-Flow Conditions from Drought.” Lake County News, 5 Feb. 2022, https://www.lakeconews.com/news/recreation/71657-emergency-regulations-allow-cdfw-to-extend-angling-restrictions-in-coastal-waters-experiencing-prolonged-low-flow-conditions-from-drought.

 In Clear Lake, California, The California Fish and Game Commission decided to adopt regulations to allow the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to further restrict fishing regulations into the season. These restrictions have been put in place as a result of an extended drought relating to low flow river conditions. The slow flow is occurring in the Russian, Eel, and Smith Rivers particularly, but is not limited to just those three as there are several other river rivers with similar conditions. The restriction is currently in place until April 30, however could possibly be extended. Salmon and steelhead are the fish that the restrictions have been put in place to protect. Particularly breeds such as the coho salmon or steelhead trout. These restrictions were put in place on January 31.

Although frustrating for many Californian anglers this restriction that was put in place is well worth it in terms of the overall health of the ecosystem, and the possibility for these fishes continued survival in years to come. If these fishermen think in the bigger picture they might realize that if they over fish in a year like 2022 where we have seen limited rainfall and even drought, it would be clear that they could lead to the extinction of the species as a whole, destroying their possibilities of catching these fish in the future. Therefore, although Frustrating for fishermen, the new regulation is proper. It is interesting to me that these regulations are called emergencies, however in the future maybe they will become so frequent that they are no longer emergencies and this is the beginning of a trend we might see in the future. Although unfortunate for fishermen it is clear that this restriction is necessary as many of the fish species that the restriction is letting me to protect are already struggling to continue their previous reproduction rates as they swim up coastal rivers.

by

Wisconsin legislature backs wetlands restoration

Wisconsin legislature backs wetlands restoration. Leader. (2021, August 12). https://www.leadertelegram.com/country-today/outdoors/wisconsin-legislature-backs-wetlands-restoration/article_38636d5b-8cf5-5f3c-9ac4-3d4126199476.html. 

The state of Wisconsin has recently passed new legislation that will aid in the restoration of wetlands. About 5 million acres of wetlands in Wisconsin have been lost, so the legislation is much needed and will hopefully allow major state-wide restoration. The legislation gives permits and financial help to restore the wetlands of Wisconsin. Two years ago, legislation passed giving funding to Ashland County. This funding allowed for demonstration of the restoration and helped in the process of passing the newer legislation. 

The article described new legislation that was passed in Wisconsin that will directly benefit the restoration of wetlands. This legislation will allow more restoration that is much needed in a state that has lost almost 50% of it’s natural wetlands. My reaction to the article was surprising, because I did not expect large government to focus on the needs of the environment. Overall I was definitely pleased with the new legislation.