A post about shark conservation in honor of "Shark Week"

As most of you probably already know, this week is Discovery Channel's 24th annual "Shark Week." This week tends to draw a variety of viewers and seems to be becoming more popular with every passing year. Every summer when Shark Week is going on people tend to be reminded of their fear of sharks that they may have forgotten about for a little while. During this week some may think twice before going for a leisurely swim in the ocean, or they might keep nervously looking around them for the sight of a shark fin. We've all probably heard the statements that we're more likely to get struck by lightning, or even be killed by bees, than we are of being attacked by a shark. These statements do, in fact, hold some truth, as the likelihood of getting attacked by a shark is extremely slim, especially once you take into consideration that there are only on average 30 to 50 attacks worldwide per year, and 5 to 10 of those attacks being fatal ones. People have a much greater chance of being attacked by other animals than they do by sharks, or even drowning in the ocean or another body of water. If you really think about it, you are probably putting yourself in more danger when you get into a car to drive, considering car accidents are far more likely to occur than shark attacks are. The fact of the matter is that humans are a far greater threat to sharks than sharks are to humans. Our actions are putting the shark population as a whole in serious danger. According to the Discovery Channel website, it is estimated that 73 million sharks are killed every year alone by humans, and this is mainly from fishing. The website lists the chilling fact that this translates into 8,333 sharks being killed every minute! The population of various shark species are on a downward decline, such as the hammerhead, bull, and dusky shark species, whose populations have decreased by 99 percent just on the East Coast alone. Overfishing is a tremendous threat to shark populations, especially since some since the majority of shark species need to be fairly old old before they can reproduce. Since overfishing is occurring at such a rapid pace, it often does not give these shark species enough time to reproduce so that the shark population is able to grow and replenish itself. Shark finning is a major reason why there is currently a high demand for sharks. Shark finning is a practice where sharks are caught and fisherman cut off their fins and then usually throw the remaining shark body overboard. The shark fins are typically used in making the Asian delicacy shark fin soup, and it is wildly popular in China, specifically Hong Kong, who is the largest consumer of the soup. 87 countries worldwide export shark fins to Hong Kong, including the U.S. and Canada. The environmental nonprfit organization, The Pew Charitable Trusts, points out that 30 percent of shark species are threatened with extinction or either very close to being threatened with extinction, and shark finning has a great deal to do with it. There are some positives coming out of the shark finning situation, as the U.S. passed a Shark Conservation Act last December that will end shark finning in our waters. Chile also has just recently passed a law that bans all shark finning in their waters. Another hopeful note for sharks is that the the countries of Honduras, the Maldives, Palau, and the Bahamas have all recently put a ban on the catching of sharks in their waters. Hopefully more countries can follow in their paths and do the same so that sharks can actually have a chance to survive. Hawaii has taken some steps in the right direction as well, as it passed a bill in January of 2010 that now bans the sale, possession, and distribution of shark fins in the state. Sharks really can be considered prehistoric creatures, as they have been around since the dinosaurs roamed the earth, or for around 34,000,000 years! So, the next time you go swimming in the ocean and become frightened that you may get attacked by a shark, just think about the minuscule threat that they pose to us and the enormous threat that we pose to them.

Peace and love,

The Green Chick

shark conservation sites:
-http://na.oceana.org/en/our-work/protect-marine-wildlife/sharks/overview
-http://dsc.discovery.com/sharks/shark-facts.html
-http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_detail.aspx?id=140
-http://dsc.discovery.com/sharks/top-10-shark-conservation-projects.html
sources:
-http://dsc.discovery.com/sharks/conservation-infographic.html
-http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_detail.aspx?id=140

Update on my last post regarding Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant

In my previous blog post where I discussed the power outage at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant in Lacey, NJ I stated that there were 300 fish kills due to the power outage that occurred there last Friday evening. I want to clarify that sadly number has now been dramatically increased to 1800 fish kills. If new fish kill numbers come out I will post them on here, or if I hear of any other news regarding Oyster Creek as well.

Peace and Love,

The Green Chick

Is nuclear power safe or sustainable as a source of energy for our future?

 I read an article in my local newspaper, "The Asbury Park Press," that I want to touch on, as I feel the article articulates on the several downsides of nuclear power. The article is in the local section of the paper and is titled, "Power failure causes fish kill: Striped bass found floating in creek." To briefly summarize what was said in the article, there was a power outage sometime on Friday night that caused the dilution pumps at Oyster Creek power plant to stop operating. These dilution pumps are of particular importance because they are used by the power plant to cool the temperature of the water before the water is sent to the power plant's discharge canal and then sent back out into the adjacent waters. Since the dilution pumps were not functioning, the temperature of the water spiked, and instead of having cool waters discharged to the adjacent waterways warm water was discharged instead. This created thermal pollution due to the change in water temperatures and, in turn, killed hundreds of fish, 300 to be exact, that make their home near the creek that is by Oyster Creek power plant. This is where I felt the article started to give light to some of the downsides of nuclear power. Thermal pollution is not only a negative externality that is caused by Oyster Creek, but it is an issue that is found with a great majority of nuclear power plants. Thermal pollution is not the only problem when it comes to nuclear power. A big issue is how to dispose of the nuclear waste, since it is radioactive material. This radioactive material will remain hazardous for about ten times its half-life, or in the case of uranium, an abundant component used for nuclear power plants, approximately 7 billion years. Now this is an overwhelmingly long time, thus the issue becomes, "Where exactly are we going to store all of this radioactive waste?" There have been many ideas as to what to do with this waste, such as shooting in into space, burying it deep underneath the ocean floor, burying underground, etc. None of these solutions, however, are really safe or even feasible, especially since it is dangerous to transport nuclear waste. Nuclear waste can also travel through soil and contaminate waterways, groundwater supplies, and can even begin to affect our agricultural consumption. Another issue with nuclear power is that in the day and age that we live in with terroristic threats always a possibility, these nuclear power plants can be seen as a danger. There are 104 nuclear power plants in the U.S. alone, and if one of these power plants was to be blown up by terrorists or have a meltdown, there would be catastrophic consequences that could be as bad or even worse than the Chernobyl nuclear disaster that occurred in Russia in 1986. There are just too many things that can go wrong with nuclear power, whether it be from human error, technological error, etc. Look at the nuclear disaster that just happened back in January of this year at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. This became a national disaster for Japan and the country is still feeling the effects of it and will most likely continue to feel the effects of it for hundreds of years to come. If the U.S. has learned anything from the Fukushima Daiichi disaster I hope that it is that our country needs to start making a transition away from nuclear power and start relying more on alternative energy sources, whether it be solar power, wind power, geothermal energy, tidal power, etc. It is just completely and utterly foolish that organizations and people make claims that nuclear power is a "clean" or "green" source of energy when the nuclear waste alone is considered to be radioactive and takes billions of years before it is no longer hazardous for humans or the environment. Approximately 20 percent of our nation's electrical needs are being supplied by nuclear power, and we need to start making the transition to relying less on this power. 50 percent of the electricity in my state, New Jersey, alone is being generated by nuclear power, and the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, NJ is the oldest power plant in the country. Even though the nuclear disaster in Japan was awful for not only Japan but for the world, hopefully it can serve as an eyeopening experience that nuclear power is neither safe nor sustainable as a means of energy for the future.

Peace and love,

The Green Chick

Here we go...the first environmental blog post of many!!!

So, for my very 1st environmental blog post I felt the need to choose an article to review from scidev.net since it is one of my favorite websites for obtaining environmental news. They have wonderful sections on agricultural, environmental, as well as international development issues. The article I will be discussing is, "Environmental impact research urged for farm fishing", and I will post the link for you at the end. Farm fishing, or aquaculture as it also known as, is a hot topic lately since there is a growing concern about the struggling state that our fisheries are currently in. There are an enormous amount of articles and books that are out that state a chilling prediction that our world's fisheries will be completely erased by the year 2050. Now this is just scary, especially considering we are already in 2011! So, the real question becomes, "Do we have what it takes to turn this daunting situation around?" This is where the farm fishing comes into play. Many scientists and environmentalists feel that farm fishing offers a viable and sustainable alternative to commercial fishing, and overall I tend to agree with this notion. However, that does not mean that farm fishing is completely and 100% great for our environment, especially our oceans, and this is exactly why this article is calling for more environmental impact research to be conducted. Problems with farm fishing are still pretty prevalent. These can range from water pollution from the antibiotics that the fish are given, as well as water pollution from having too many species in a small contained area, to problems arising from the farmed fish often being non-indignous to that area and harming the native fish species by changing their habitats or competing for the natural resources. The farmed fish can also sometimes break out of their enclosed netted area and mate with wild fish or even transmit diseases to the wild fish, since disease outbreak among farmed fish tends to be fairly high since the fish are confined in such a small area, allowing the disease to spread more even more rapidly. So all-in-all, farm fishing does indeed have the potential to be a sustainable solution to commercial fishing, but there is still research that needs to be done before we can claim that it is truly a green alternative. Hope you enjoyed my 1st post and maybe even learned something new too! Stay tuned for some more eco-friendly posts! 

Peace and love,

The Green Chick

http://www.scidev.net/en/agriculture-and-environment/fisheries/news/environmental-impact-research-urged-for-fish-farming.html