Endangered Australasian Marsupials Are Ancient Survivors Of Climate Change
11/4/16
Summary:
An international team of researchers analyzed fossil fuels and DNA of living and recently extinct species. This was done to show that conservation sensitive Australian marsupials are older than what is believed. They used bandicoots as a model to examine the radiation of marsupials relative to climate change to help do this.
An international team of researchers analyzed fossil fuels and DNA of living and recently extinct species. This was done to show that conservation sensitive Australian marsupials are older than what is believed. They used bandicoots as a model to examine the radiation of marsupials relative to climate change to help do this.
List Of Interesting/Important Facts:
1. Bandicoots are the maruspial equivalents of rodents and rabbits.
2. The earliest bandicoot fossils are more than 25 million years old.
3. Their most ancietnt relatives seemingly inhabited rainforests some 20 million years ago.
My Opinion:
The way they constructed their experiment was interesting and the results let us kow that the Australian marsupials are much older than what we actually thought. I believe that if we do more experimenets and research, then we will also discover more information on other animals and how old they actually are as well.
Can We Meet Global Energy Demands With Nuclear Power?
11/11/16
Summary:
Nuclear power is needed in order to sustain our energy use and to avoid the worst possible greenhouse gases effects. The way we currently receive energy will drive global warming to catastrophic levels. If we resort to nuclear power, the international demand for electricity will fall short over time. Even though this is an ideal solution, developing and developed nations won't accept this scenario because they will need more and more power over the years. If the production of nuclear energy rapidly increases, this could possibly lead to an elimination of fossil fuels and decline the rate of global warming.
List Of Interesting/Important Facts:
1. If we renounce nuclear power as an option, then the international demand for electricity will fall short by about 40% over the period of 2020 to 2100.
2. The uptake of sustainable, non-carbon alternatives power sources such as wind, solar, and tidal will not keep up with needs and are limited by physical factors such.
3. The team reports that an accelerated development of nuclear electricity production, starting as soon as 2020, would significantly alleviate the constrants required to stabilize global temperatures before 2100.
4. It might even be said that nuclear energy is the most benign way of producing electicity in terms of biodiversity and environmental health.
My Opinion:
This is a could alternative to use to get a reliable amount of energy. At this point, we need to figure out something to reduce global warming and other negative effects, but still get energy. Nuclear energy, to me, is the best resort to do this. If it allievates the constraints required to stablize global warming, then why not use it? Yes, the electricity demand may decrease and it may take a while to get used to, but I believe the nuclear power is still worth trying.
Burying The Climate Change Problem
11/18/16
Summary:
Rising concetrations of carbon dioxide could lead to an uncontrollable rise in global average temperatures with negative effects on the planet's climate. Saying this, numerous proposals have been suggested, such as power stations the electricity-generating turbines within which are powered by fossil fuels, and vehicle exhaust. If the carbon dioxide can be held within geological formations, then there may be a way to control the runaway effect of climate change that would happen if global warming continues. There ar risks that are associated with storing the carbon dioxide, which is why this would have to be done with caution.
Rising concetrations of carbon dioxide could lead to an uncontrollable rise in global average temperatures with negative effects on the planet's climate. Saying this, numerous proposals have been suggested, such as power stations the electricity-generating turbines within which are powered by fossil fuels, and vehicle exhaust. If the carbon dioxide can be held within geological formations, then there may be a way to control the runaway effect of climate change that would happen if global warming continues. There ar risks that are associated with storing the carbon dioxide, which is why this would have to be done with caution.
List of Interesting/Important Facts:
1. Risks can be obtained from the 'combination of uncertainty', 'ratio between hazard and safeguard, and 'the combination of probability and consequence.
2. The risk of a leak from a large deposit might be enormous
My Opinion:
Storing huge amounts of carbon dioxide may be too dangerous because anything could happen that we do not know of. If scientists don't ahve enough knowledge on this, then they should not go through with it. There are other solutions to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are less risky and dangerous. It would be a great idea, but we don't have enough research and information on it.
Control Methane Now, Greenhouse Gas Expert Warns
11/25/16
Summary:
As the atmosphere receives more methane, this adds more to the greenhouse gas problems. Earth may reach a point of no return if average global temperatures rise by 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius in further decades, and methane is a huge contributor to this. It contributes over forty percent of current radiative forcing from all greenhouse gases. It is said that methane is just as damaging as carbon dioxide, and it needs to quickly be controlled. We may not be years away from the environmental 'tipping point'.
As the atmosphere receives more methane, this adds more to the greenhouse gas problems. Earth may reach a point of no return if average global temperatures rise by 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius in further decades, and methane is a huge contributor to this. It contributes over forty percent of current radiative forcing from all greenhouse gases. It is said that methane is just as damaging as carbon dioxide, and it needs to quickly be controlled. We may not be years away from the environmental 'tipping point'.
List of Interesting/Important Facts:
1. Earth may reach the point of no return if average global temperatures rise by 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius.
2. Natural gas is a major source of atmospheric methane.
3. The role of methane as a contributor to global warming is even more critical than the 40 percent value might indicate.
4. If society aggressively controlled carbon dioxide emissions, but ignored methane emissions, the planet would warm to the dangerous 1.5 to 2 degree Celsius point within 15 to 35 years.
My Opinion:
I did not know that methane was that big of a contibution to the greenhouse gas effect and climate change. From reading the article, it just tells us that it is time to control the levels of these gases, expecially methane and carbon dioxide. If we don't control it, the climate will be at a point of no return. The fact that this could happen in 15 to 35 years is devastating because it actually is not that far away. We need to do something about it now, before it becomes too late.