The Plastic Plague is rampant on the planet

Part of the solution of plastic and other waste material is using (recycling) it. There are vast sums of money to be made by entrepreneurial people with a will and vision.

Australian recycling revolutionary Veena Sahajwalla. ‘Australian Story episode.’ A truly amazing woman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fkbQynfSyY. Leading the revolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB-_BBMCq1g. Bricks. girders and tiles are Made from plastic trash.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLs__NvVexY Similar to above, different place.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA0nGBSy6_I. Entrepreneur transforms plastic waste into construction materials.

Dangers of fracking.

Be encouraged to consult scientific studies, environmental reports, and academic articles for specific data and references.

Compiled by ChatGPT

  1. Water Contamination: The injection of fracking fluids, which contain chemicals, into the ground poses the risk of groundwater contamination. Faulty well casings, accidental spills, or the migration of fluids can potentially lead to the contamination of drinking water sources. A study published in the journal "Environmental Science & Technology" in 2014 found evidence of methane contamination in private water wells near fracking sites in Pennsylvania, USA.

  2. Methane Emissions and Climate Change: Methane leakage during fracking operations contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and its release during extraction, transportation, and production of natural gas can contribute to global warming. A study led by researchers from Cornell University estimated that methane leakage rates from fracking operations could be as high as 12%, which has significant climate implications.

  3. Air Pollution: Fracking operations can lead to the release of air pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter. These pollutants can result from equipment emissions, flaring, and the evaporation of chemicals used in the fracking process. A review published in the journal "Science of the Total Environment" in 2016 highlighted the potential risks of air pollution near fracking sites and its impact on human health.

  4. Habitat Destruction and Biodiversity Loss: The infrastructure development required for fracking, including well pads, pipelines, and access roads, can cause habitat disturbance and fragmentation. This can lead to habitat loss, displacement of wildlife, and negative impacts on biodiversity. A study published in the journal "Ecology Letters" in 2014 examined the effects of shale gas development on bird communities, revealing declines in bird abundance and species diversity in areas with intensive fracking activities.

  5. Health Impacts: Some studies have suggested potential health risks associated with proximity to fracking operations. These include respiratory issues, low birth weights, and increased hospitalization rates. However, the exact mechanisms and extent of these health impacts are still being investigated, and more research is needed to establish definitive conclusions.

It's important to note that the specific dangers and their severity can vary depending on factors such as local geology, regulations, and industry practices.

Stay informed by referring to peer-reviewed scientific literature, reports from reputable environmental organisations and health studies conducted by relevant institutions for more specific information and references.

Whales and an exciting scientific finding.

George Monbiot, Chris Bryan and Maggillivray Freeman of  Sustainable Human.

One of the most exciting scientific findings of the past half century has been the discovery of widespread trophic cascades. A trophic cascade is an ecological process which starts at the top of the food chain and tumbles all the way down to the bottom.

We all know that whales eat fish and krill, and some people – certain politicians in Japan for example - have argued that killing whales would be good for human beings, as it would boost the food available for us to eat. And so you would think.

But as the great whales declined, so did the numbers of fish and krill. It seems counter-intuitive: surely their numbers would rise as their major predators disappeared? But it now turns out that whales not only eat these animals; they also keep them alive. In fact they help to sustain the entire living system of the oceans.

whale-poop.jpg

Whales feed at depth, in waters that are often pitch dark. Then they return to the surface: to the photic zone, where there's enough light for photosynthesis to happen. There they release what biologists call fecal plumes: vast outpourings of poo; poonamis. These plumes are rich in iron and nitrogen, nutrients which are often very scarce in the surface waters.

And these nutrients fertilize the plant plankton that lives in the only place where plants can survive ..... the photic zone.

Fertilizing the surface waters is not the only thing the whales do. By plunging up and down through the water column, they also keep kicking the plankton back up into the photic zone, giving it more time to reproduce before it sinks into the abyss. Even today, though whale populations have been greatly reduced, the vertical mixing of water caused by movements of animals up and down through the column of the oceans is, astonishingly, roughly the same as the amount of mixing caused by all the world's wind and waves and tides.

More plant plankton means more animal plankton, on which larger creatures then feed. In other words, more whales means more fish and krill.

But the story doesn't end here, because plant plankton not only feeds the animals of the sea; it also absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

When, eventually, it sinks to the ocean floor, it takes this carbon out of circulation, down to a place where it remains for many thousands of years.

The more whales there are, the more plankton there is. The more plankton there is, the more carbon is drawn out of the air.

When whales were at their historic populations, before their numbers were reduced, it seems that whales might have been responsible for removing tens of millions of tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere every year. Whales change the climate.

The return of the great whales, if they are allowed to recover, could be seen as a benign form of geo-engineering. It could undo some of the damage we have done, both to the living systems of the sea, and to the atmosphere.