Rapid Biodiversity Loss Continues In Absence Of Political Action And Accurate Assessments of Ecosystem Values
Finding ways to value ecosystem health economically and to engage the world’s indigenous peoples in the process is key to saving biological diversity, a Worldwatch author suggests in the Institute’s most recent book. Such efforts are all the more urgent because the addition of more plant and animal species to lists of those threatened or endangered shows no signs of slowing down, despite rising public awareness of the importance of biodiversity
This World Biodiversity Day (May 22), Worldwatch Institute is raising awareness of biodiversity losses worldwide and what individuals and institutions can do to confront these trends. The current rate of species extinction is up to 1,000 times above the Earth’s normal extinction rate, a level of loss that has not occurred since the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. The Worldwatch Institute, in its recently released report State of the World 2012: Moving Toward Sustainable Prosperity, highlights the threats to biodiversity and methods for combating the exploitation and degradation of ecosystems and their services.
From 1980 to 2008, an average of 52 species per year moved one category closer to extinction on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Endangered Species—-a rate that shows no signs of slowing. Although mass extinctions have occurred on Earth throughout geologic time, the current loss of biodiversity is the first to be caused overwhelmingly by a single species: humans. The five principal pressures causing biodiversity loss are habitat change, overexploitation, pollution, invasive alien species, and climate change, all of which are almost exclusively human driven.
“The current model of consumer societies is destroying the planet and its resources,” said Bo Normander, Director of Worldwatch Institute Europe and a contributing author to State of the World 2012. “This must change in order for the planet to sustain future generations.”
At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, leaders made a commitment to preserve biological resources by signing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), but there remains a fundamental lack of political will to act on biodiversity threats. In 2002, the CBD promised “a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss” by 2010, yet within those eight years, most countries failed to meet their targets.
To combat the loss of Earth’s natural capital, scientists strive to assign concrete values to natural resources with the hope that an economic appreciation of ecosystem services may facilitate improved planning and management of Earth’s systems. Yet progress on developing accurate, straightforward, and widely accepted measures for assessing ecosystem values remains slow.
“Accurate valuation of ecosystem services is vital to create greater accountability and awareness of the ecological impact of our actions,” said Erik Assadourian, Worldwatch senior fellow and State of the World 2012 project co-director. “By understanding ecosystem services in monetary or physical terms, leaders can assess and improve the sustainability of their policies.”
Current international practices discount future generations by effectively valuing ecosystem services at zero. Such undervaluing is often a result of society’s ignorance of the full benefits that humans derive from an intact ecosystem. Thus, individuals make decisions based on the immediate financial gains of logging a forest, for example, instead of considering the “invisible” benefits of the forest, such as carbon sequestration, flood protection, and habitat for pollinators.
Valuing ecosystems and their services is difficult as knowledge is limited by the complexity of environmental systems. Many linkages between organisms are yet to be discovered, and slight perturbations may have dramatic, unforeseen consequences. Despite these challenges, scientists and politicians attempt to frame the benefits provided by ecosystems using relatable monetary or physical indices. The two most common methods are to create a common asset trust, which “propertizes” the public good without privatizing ecosystems; and to pay for ecosystem services, such as when farmers are paid to leave land fallow for improved soil health.
In State of the World 2012, Worldwatch provides several recommendations for enhancing ecosystem service valuation, including:
Manage ecosystem services on an appropriate scale: Ecosystem services must be evaluated on spatial and temporal scales, in order to determine which institution can effectively manage that ecosystem. Collaboration between scales of government and those managing the services is vital.
Include the global poor in valuation: The world’s poor and indigenous groups rely heavily on natural resources and common goods for sustenance and livelihood. Many attempts at valuing ecosystem services, such as designating a forest as a preserved trust, have excluded indigenous groups from their traditional sources of food and fuel—-an approach that not only is unjust, but will also undermine the long-term success of these efforts.
In addition to these approaches to valuation, Worldwatch champions initiatives that protect biodiversity, such as urban gardening and beekeeping, inclusive forest protection, and the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), or zones in the world’s oceans or coastal waters where activities like fishing and mining are strictly regulated. These added protections increase biodiversity within the MPA, which in turn enriches the surrounding waters and ecosystems. Despite the known advantages of MPAs, they protect only 0.8 percent of the world’s oceans.
Worldwatch applauds these efforts to combat the loss of global biodiversity. But to truly protect biodiversity and value ecosystem services effectively, multinational cooperation is required. Worldwatch’s State of the World 2012, released in April 2012, focuses on steps in biodiversity protection and other areas that can be taken at Rio+20, the 20-year follow-up to the historic 1992 Rio Earth Summit, to make progress toward sustainable development.
Add To Reddit
Making Green Choices – Benefits of Handmade Clothing
As general public is becoming acutely aware of many severe environmental issues associated with commercial production of clothing, more people are starting to look for Eco-friendly fashion options. As a result of this rising demand, handmade clothing is leading the way as a green alternative to commercial clothing. Handmade clothing can now be found in many local clothing boutiques, as well as online. Many fiber and textile artists, fashion designers, and small clothing labels are offering a wide variety of handmade clothing for women, men and children. While you may find that some handmade clothing is still more expensive than the kind of bargains you can get at Target or the Gap, it is a price worth paying, considering that you can look fabulous while making a positive contribution towards preserving our Earth.
Benefits to the Environment
The number one reason to switch to handmade clothing is that it helps reduce global warming, and does not waste and pollute precious natural resources like water. Different handmade clothing labels will use different types of environmentally friendly practices for their green clothing products.
Manufacturing Process
Since commercial clothing is mass produced in factories, it wastes enormous amounts of energy and produces a lot of green house gas emissions and toxic wastes, all of which are dumped into the air, ground and water. Handmade clothing companies avoid this process all together, by hand making the piece from start to finish.
Coloring
To achieve all the bright colors that are so attractive, commercial clothing production involves the use of highly toxic industrial dyes. These dyes are made of one of the most polluting, harmful chemicals, which are dumped into the rivers, lakes and other bodies of water during the manufacturing process. This renders the water undrinkable and harmful to health. On the contrary, handmade clothing is made either with natural dyes produced from plant extracts, or a different type of commercial grade dyes that are not as toxic and harmful to the environment.
Fabrics
Many handmade clothing companies will use fabrics that have been produced in Eco-friendly ways, such as cotton and silk that has been hand-loomed. The processing of natural fibers such as cotton into fabric is one of the most polluting industrial processes that wastes a lot of water, requires a lot of energy, and utilizes highly toxic chemicals. Production of synthetic fibers such as polyester is even more harmful to the environment. Many designers make their contribution to the environment by avoiding this process all together, and making upcycled handmade clothing. This means that they recycle old clothing and give it a brand new life, helping reduce both the amount of new clothing that is being produced as well as the amount of waste from its disposal.
Limited Quantities
No matter how you slice it, production of any type of clothing takes a toll on the environment. Handmade clothing companies mitigate this effect by producing clothing in very small quantities. Handmade clothing is intended to be worn for a long period of time, instead of prompting consumers to constantly buy more clothing, thus fueling the demand for mass production.
Labels and Packaging
Many handmade clothing companies ensure that their clothing is green all the way. The clothing tags, labels and packaging materials are often also handmade from recycled fabrics and papers, helping reduce waste and pollution.
Personal Benefits
Exclusive style and design
If you have, or would like to develop a distinct personal style, handmade clothing allows you a wide range of opportunities to do just that. Many handmade pieces are either one-of a kind, or produced in small, limited edition quantities. Long gone are the days when handmade clothing was the equivalent of hippie clothing. While hippie style is one of the trends in handmade fashion, there are plenty of other modern and classical styles that would satisfy a wide variety of tastes. Handmade clothing also does not have to look like it was made by your grandmother, unless that is something you like. Many handmade clothing brands offer high quality of craftsmanship that is indistinguishable from commercial manufacturing.
Durable and long lasting
Handmade clothing is made out of high quality materials, with a high level of personal attention, and quality control from the maker. It is made to last for years, rather than to be discarded after one or two seasons.
Health Benefits
A lot of handmade clothing is made out of premium textiles such organic cotton, Eco-friendly modal fabrics and silk. These fabrics will not only feel amazing to your skin, but will also be none-toxic and none-allergenic. Unlike commercial synthetic fabrics, these natural fabrics are also more breathable, and do not trap heat and moisture. This means that you will feel comfortable both in hot and cool temperatures, and sweat less.
Custom Made
One of the most attractive benefits of handmade clothing is that it can be custom made. Depending on the type of clothing and the company that makes it, pieces can be tailored to your measurements, you can choose your own colors and patterns, add writing, and do a variety of other things to make a piece truly your own. Moreover, handmade clothing and accessories such as scarves make excellent gifts for people who would like something special and more personal.
Why does handmade clothing cost more than many commercial brands?
Handmade clothing is more expensive primarily due to the labor intensive nature of the process. Taking automated processes out of the equation of clothing production, means that everything from design, to coloring to sawing is made by human hands. Therefore this process becomes much more difficult and time consuming. Also, many handmade, eco-friendly clothing brands choose to use fabrics produced in environmentally safe ways, which also cost more than commercial fabrics. If they choose to outsource part of their production, they pay higher prices for labor to make sure that there are no environmental, or human rights violations in the process. Finally, some handmade clothing, such as wearable art pieces, may cost more because of its unique and exclusive design.
About the Author
Aleksandr Biyevetskiy is an avid proponent of green building technology for residential and commercial construction, and a big fan of sensible sustainability for business, government, and society. Some of the topics that Alex likes to write about include (among other things) residential metal roofing, social and competitive ballroom dance, Eco-friendly and energy efficient Green LED lights, residential and commercial ground source heating and cooling for homes and businesses, and environmentally friendly PVC roofing systems for residential and commercial flat and lower slope roofs. Alex also maintains a personal blog, in which he covers a variety of concurrent/relevant topics at www.tampile.com/blog/.
Add To Reddit Climate Change Boosts Then Quickly Stunts Plants, Decade-long Study Shows
Global warming may initially make the grass greener, but not for long, according to new research results.
The findings, published this week in the journal Nature Climate Change, show that plants may thrive in the early stages of a warming environment but then begin to deteriorate quickly.
“We were really surprised by the pattern, where the initial boost in growth just went away,” said scientist Zhuoting Wu of Northern Arizona University (NAU), a lead author of the study. “As ecosystems adjusted, the responses changed.”
Ecologists subjected four grassland ecosystems to simulated climate change during a decade-long study.
Plants grew more the first year in the global warming treatment, but this effect progressively diminished over the next nine years and finally disappeared.
The research shows the long-term effects of global warming on plant growth, on the plant species that make up a community, and on changes in how plants use or retain essential resources like nitrogen.
“The plants and animals around us repeatedly serve up surprises,” said Saran Twombly, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.
“These results show that we miss these surprises because we don’t study natural communities over the right time scales. For plant communities in Arizona, it took researchers 10 years to find that responses of native plant communities to warmer temperatures were the opposite of those predicted.”
The team transplanted four grassland ecosystems from a higher to lower elevation to simulate a future warmer environment, and coupled the warming with the range of predicted changes in precipitation–more, the same, or less.
The grasslands studied were typical of those found in northern Arizona along elevation gradients from the San Francisco Peaks down to the Great Basin Desert.
The researchers found that long-term warming resulted in loss of native species and encroachment of species typical of warmer environments, ultimately pushing the plant community toward less productive species.
The warmed grasslands also cycled nitrogen more rapidly. This should make more nitrogen available to plants, scientists believed, helping plants grow more. But instead much of the nitrogen was lost, converted to nitrogen gases in the atmosphere or leached out by rainfall washing through the soil.
Bruce Hungate, senior author of the paper and an ecologist at NAU, said the study challenges the expectation that warming will increase nitrogen availability and cause a sustained increase in plant productivity.
“Faster nitrogen turnover stimulated nitrogen losses, likely reducing the effect of warming on plant growth,” Hungate said. “More generally, changes in species, changes in element cycles–these really make a difference. It’s classic systems ecology: the initial responses elicit knock-on effects, which here came back to bite the plants. These ecosystem feedbacks are critical–you can’t figure this out with plants grown in a greenhouse.”
The findings caution against extrapolating from short-term results, or from experiments with plants grown under artificial conditions, where researchers can’t measure the feedbacks from changes in the plant community and from nutrient cycles.
“The long-term perspective is key,” said Hungate. “We were surprised, and I’m guessing there are more such surprises in store.”
Co-authors of the paper include George Koch and Paul Dijkstra, both at NAU.
Add To Reddit Ocean Acidification Killing Farmed Oysters
Marine researchers have definitively linked the collapse of oyster seed production at a commercial oyster hatchery in Oregon to an increase in ocean acidification.
Larval growth at the hatchery declined to a level considered by the owners to be “non-economically viable.”
A study by the scientists found that increased seawater carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, resulting in more corrosive ocean water, inhibited the larval oysters from developing their shells and growing at a pace that would make commercial production cost-effective.
As atmospheric CO2 levels continue to rise, this may serve as the proverbial canary in the coal mine for other ocean acidification impacts on shellfish.
Results of the research are published this week in the journal Limnology and Oceanography, published by the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO).
The research was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) Ocean Acidification solicitation.
“Studies funded by NSF’s SEES Ocean Acidification solicitation are well-positioned to determine the specific mechanisms responsible for larval mortality in Pacific Northwest oyster hatcheries,” said David Garrison, program director in NSF’s Division of Ocean Sciences.
“This is one of the first times that we have been able to show how ocean acidification affects oyster larval development at a critical life stage,” said Burke Hales, an Oregon State University (OSU) chemical oceanographer and co-author of the paper.
“The predicted rise of atmospheric CO2 in the next two to three decades may push oyster larval growth past the break-even point in terms of production.”
The owners of Whiskey Creek Shellfish Hatchery at Oregon’s Netarts Bay experienced a decline in oyster seed production several years ago and looked at potential causes, including low oxygen and pathogenic bacteria.
Alan Barton, who works at the hatchery and is a co-author of the journal article, was able to eliminate those potential causes and shifted his focus to ocean acidification.
Barton sent samples to OSU and to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory for analysis.
The results clearly linked the production failures to the CO2 levels in the water in which the larval oysters were spawned and spent the first 24 hours of their lives. That first day is a critical time when the oysters develop from fertilized eggs to swimming larvae and build their initial shells.
“The early growth stage for oysters is particularly sensitive to the carbonate chemistry of the water,” said George Waldbusser, a benthic ecologist at OSU.
“As the water becomes more acidified, it affects the formation of calcium carbonate, the mineral in shells. As the CO2 goes up, the mineral stability goes down, ultimately leading to reduced growth or to mortality.”
Commercial oyster production on the West Coast of North America is a 273-million-dollar industry each year. It has depended since the 1970s on oyster hatcheries for a steady supply of the seed used by growers.
In recent years, the hatcheries that provide most of the seed for West Coast growers have suffered persistent production problems.
At the same time, non-hatchery wild stocks of these oysters also have shown low recruitment, putting additional strain on a limited seed supply.
Hales said that Netarts Bay, where the Whiskey Creek hatchery is located, experiences a wide range of chemistry fluctuations.
The researchers believe that hatchery operators may be able to adapt to take advantage of periods when water quality is at its highest.
“In addition to the impact of seasonal upwelling, the water chemistry changes with the tidal cycle and with the time of day,” Hales said. “Afternoon sunlight, for example, promotes photosynthesis in the bay. That production can absorb some of the carbon dioxide and lower the corrosiveness of the water.”
The researchers also found that larval oysters showed a delayed response to the water chemistry, which may cast new light on other experiments looking at the impacts of ocean acidification on shellfish.
In the study, they found that larval oysters raised in water that was acidic, but non-lethal, had significantly less growth in later stages of their life.
“The takeaway message here is that the response to poor water quality isn’t always immediate,” said Waldbusser.
“In some cases, it took until three weeks after fertilization for effects from the acidic water to become apparent. Short-term experiments of just a few days may not detect the damage.”
The research was also supported by NOAA and the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association.
Other authors of the journal article include Chris Langdon of OSU’s Hatfield Marine Science Center and Richard Feely of NOAA’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory.
Add To Reddit Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill’s Effects On Deep-Water Corals
Scientists are reporting new evidence that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has affected marine life in the Gulf of Mexico, this time species that live in dark ocean depths–deepwater corals.
The research used a range of underwater vehicles, including the submarine Alvin, to investigate the corals. The findings are published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
The scientists used a method known as comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography to determine the source of the petroleum hydrocarbons found.
The lead author of the paper, chemist Helen White of Haverford College in Pennsylvania, is part of a team of researchers led by Charles Fisher of Penn State University (PSU).
The group includes Erik Cordes from Temple University, and Timothy Shank and Christopher German from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), which operates the submersible Alvin.
Fisher, Cordes, Shank and German are co-authors of the paper, along with other scientists from WHOI, Penn State, Temple and the U.S. Geological Survey.
“The biological communities in the deep Gulf of Mexico are separated from human activity at the surface by 4,000 feet of water,” says White.
“We would not expect deep-water corals to be affected by a typical oil spill. But the sheer magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill makes it very different from a tanker running aground and spilling its contents.
Because of the unprecedented nature of the spill, its effects are more far-reaching than those from smaller spills on the surface.”
The study grew out of a research cruise in October 2010 that was part of a Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration project.
Using the remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) Jason II, the team initially looked at nine sites more than 20 kilometers from the Macondo well.
The researchers found deep-water coral communities unharmed there.
But when the ROV explored another area 11 kilometers to the southwest of the spill site, the team was surprised to find coral communities covered in a brown flocculent material and showing signs of tissue damage.
“We discovered the site during the last dive of the three-week cruise,” says Fisher.
“As soon as the ROV got close enough to the community for the corals to come into clear view, it was obvious that something was wrong. There was too much white and brown, and not enough color on the corals and brittle stars.”
Once the scientists were close enough to zoom in on a few coral colonies, “there was no doubt that this was something we had not seen anywhere else in the Gulf,” says Fisher. “This is what we had been on the lookout for, but were hoping not to see.”
The coral communities were at a depth of 4,300 feet in close proximity to the Macondo well, which had been capped three months earlier after spilling an estimated 160 million gallons of oil into the Gulf.
At the time the damaged corals were spotted, the effects could not be directly linked to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Then in December, 2010, the scientists set out on a second research cruise to the Gulf.
A National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID grant funded their return. NSF RAPID awards allow scientists to respond quickly to issues such as natural disasters–in this case, the oil spill.
“Through the RAPID award,” says Rodey Batiza of NSF’s Division of Ocean Sciences, “the researchers were able to analyze the oil spill’s effect on the area’s deep-sea corals, and compare changes in the corals’ condition over a relatively short time-period.”
It’s easy to see the effect of oil in surface waters, “but this was the first time we were diving to the seafloor to look at the effects on deep-sea ecosystems,” says White.
The team used the autonomous underwater vehicle Sentry to map and photograph the ocean floor, and the submersible Alvin to get a better look at the distressed corals.
Alvin holds a pilot and two passengers, and is equipped with viewports and cameras.
Alvin also has robotic arms that can manipulate instruments to collect samples. During six dives in Alvin, whose manipulator claws were modified with a cutting blade, the team collected sediments and samples of the corals and filtered material from the corals for analysis.
“Collecting samples from the deep ocean is incredibly challenging, and Alvin is crucial to this kind of work,” says White.
“The primary aim of the research was to determine the composition of the brown flocculent material covering the corals, and the source of any petroleum hydrocarbons present,” says White.
Because oil can naturally seep from cracks in the floor of the Gulf, pinpointing the source of petroleum hydrocarbons in Gulf samples can be challenging, especially since oil is made up of a complex mixture of chemical compounds.
However, there are slight differences in oils that can be used to trace their origin.
To identify the oil found in the coral communities, White worked with Christopher Reddy and Robert Nelson at WHOI using an advanced technique called comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography, pioneered by Reddy and Nelson for use in oil spill research.
The method, which separates oil compounds by molecular weight, allows scientists to “fingerprint” oil and determine its source.
This petroleum analysis, coupled with a review of 69 images from 43 corals at the site performed by Pen-Yuan Hsing of PSU, yielded evidence that the coral communities were affected by oil from the Macondo spill.
“These findings will have a significant effect on deep-water drilling, and on the monitoring of oil spills in the future,” White says.
“Ongoing research in the Gulf will improve our understanding of the resilience of these isolated coral communities and the extent to which they are affected by human activity.
“Oil had a visible effect on the corals, and it’s important to determine whether they can rebound.”
Add To Reddit 
RSS XML Feed
