A variety of concerns are raised when wind farms are constructed for the human and nonhuman alike. It continues to be an ongoing debate in many locations as to whether the actual sound and vibrations from wind turbines are detrimental to human inhabitants nearby. Another common concern for wind turbines moving into areas is increased deaths of birds.

This is an especially prevalent concern for areas with bird species which are endangered. While environmental reviews often clear wind farms of harm for wildlife, concerns are still raised regarding the number of deaths caused by spinning turbines. However, wind energy advocates are attempting to assuage fears by pointing to the structures and beings already common to this world which are killing large numbers of birds, often forgotten or unknown by the public.

According to wind energy experts, wind turbines cause between ten and forty thousand bird deaths per year in the United States. While this number is significant, especially if the deaths are for endangered species, it only accounts for 0.1 percent of bird deaths estimated in the U.S. each year.

Domestic cats pose a greater risk to birds in the U.S. and globally currently than any other being or structure, according to experts. The exact figure is unknown, but domestic and feral cats are considered to cause the deaths of hundreds of millions of birds each year in the U.S. alone. Power lines and windows are the next biggest threats to birds as upwards of 174 million deaths and 100 million to 1 billion deaths are considered caused by them each year respectively. Pesticides are estimated to cause 70 million deaths per year, while automobiles are estimated to cause between 60 and 80 million.

According to Chinese officials, the country’s waterways are in serious trouble due to pollution of varying kinds, including heavy metals and hazardous waste. Of the 110,609 miles of rivers and lakes regularly tested in China, fifty-four percent are too polluted to meet environmental standards established by the government.

Waterways are not the only part of the environment suffering, air quality and farmland are also being degraded by pollution. Overall, the Chinese Academy for Environmental Planning estimates that the cost of environmental degradation in the country is $220 billion per year. This statistic is from 2009 and it is likely the figure has increased, just as it did between 2008 and 2009 by 9.2 percent.

China is also seeing a considerable increase in environmental accidents. In 2011, the Ministry of Environmental Protection determined there were 542 environmental accidents. Largely the accidents are due to hazardous waste spills during transporting the waste or during manufacturing. This figure has been consistently within the 100s with a significant increase between 2010 and 2011. In 2008 the ministry reported 135 accidents, with 171 and 156 in 2009 and 2010 respectively.

China has been working to improve their environmental record for air and waterways especially. China has a current goal to have eighty percent of their waterways meeting environmental standards by the year 2020. One hundred percent of waterways meeting these standards is the goal for 2030.

The events which transpired in Japan caused the United States to look closer at their nuclear program as well. Many plants are situated in areas capable of earthquakes and are older models. The U.S. has not built a new nuclear reactor since 1979. However, nuclear energy does currently contribute approximately twenty percent of the energy needs of the U.S..

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently granted licensing for two nuclear reactors to be built in the U.S., a major step for a country which has long avoided increasing nuclear energy generation. This is the first licensing in decades. The two nuclear reactors will be built by the Southern Company in Georgia at their Vogtle power plant. Despite concerns surrounding nuclear energy, the commission panel approved the licensing 4-1. If all goes as planned, one of the nuclear reactors will be operational by the year 2016.

Other states in the United States are also seeking approval for building new nuclear reactors. Florida, North Carolina and South Carolina are planning to be reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as well. The new Georgia additions will be added to the current list of more than sixty nuclear reactors currently being constructed globally. Most notably China, currently not a large nuclear energy user, is constructing more than two dozen nuclear reactors.

The Bad
Livestock for food production carries a high environmental cost. A study by the University of Michigan estimated that food production accounted for 10.5 percent of all energy used in the United States. In 2002, that figure jumped to 17 percent. Based on current trends, it is likely to increase each year by 0.9 percent each year. While there are concerns regarding energy use, satisfying dietary needs has a growing impact on the environment.

The Ugly
Livestock and specifically, manure, pose another environmental risk. A study by Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts found that atmospheric nitrous oxide concentrations account for about six percent of the anthropogenic radiative forcing. This is basically a measure of the human-caused surface air temperature change, including factors such as ozone and greenhouse gas emissions.

This problem is complicated by the fact that demand for livestock productions is likely to increase with rising populations and demands. The impact posed by manure then, is a threat that must be part of future farming practices.

The Good
While it may not be evident, there is a good side to manure and one that illustrates that a positive thing can come from something bad. The Cow Power program, part of Central Vermont Public Service, is the environmental equivalent of making lemonade when life gives you lemons.

It is the first program of its kind to use manure for energy on a large scale. It takes some lessons from biology to replicate the environment within a cow’s stomach to create energy that fuels a generator. Using it in this fashion prevents the release of methane into the atmosphere, while producing an alternative source of energy. It also represents a viable source of income for farmers.

The Cow Power program is one example of how technology can solve even the ugliest of problems. It represents an effective way to manage what might otherwise become a growing threat to the environment.

But the new satellite system GRACE, or Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, has allowed for more in-depth analysis of the world’s glaciers and their ice loss. Glacier study has largely focused on Antarctica and Greenland but there is estimated to be more than 160,000 glaciers globally. Most of the focus has been on a small fraction of these glaciers, around 120 specifically. But the GRACE satellite system allows for detailed data from lesser studied areas and often studied areas alike.

Researchers at the University of Colorado-Boulder used the GRACE system to analyze the melting of glaciers globally between 2003 and 2010. The study, which has been published in the journal Nature, determined that the average increase in sea levels was 1.48 millimeters each year between 2003 and 2010. Interestingly, the water lost from glaciers globally between these years would leave the entire United States under eighteen inches of water.

The majority of the melting did occur in Greenland and Antarctica with approximately twenty-eight percent happening outside these regions. 1.06 millimeters were contributed each year by Antarctica and Greenland, while other regions contributed 0.42 millimeters.

One of the researchers on the project, physics professor at University of Colorado-Boulder John Wahr, stated: The Earth is losing an incredible amount of ice to the oceans annually, and these new results will help us answer important questions in terms of both sea rise and how the planet’s cold regions are responding to global change.”

Energy Cost of Food Production
Part of the reason that beef is so environmentally costly is the amount of energy needed to bring it to market. There is the cost of raising livestock and finally, getting them to the marketplace. Over three-quarters of the environmental cost exists at the farm stage, according to a study by AgResearch on New Zealand lamb production.

Recent evidence suggests that feeding cattle a grass diet reduces the amount of acid-resistant bacteria produced, making for fewer virulent strains of foodborne illnesses. A move toward grass-fed beef means a lower environmental cost by removing the expenses associated with feeding grain.

Quantifying Energy Savings
The move toward more cost-effective farming benefits the farmer and the consumer. A study by Washington State University documented the reduction in costs that have occurred since the 1970s. Researchers found that the environment impact of beef has dropped considerably.

Compared to the earlier data, production in 2007 used one-third less land, nearly 19 percent less feed and almost ten percent less fossil fuel energy. While a meat-based diet contributes to your carbon footprint, the impact is less with modern farming practices.

The Downside of Energy Savings
The researchers point out one factor that has influenced the drop in the environmental cost that many consumers may be unaware of. Part of the savings comes from other aspects of raising livestock, namely, growth-enhancing technology.

Use of hormones treads on an area that may make some consumers uncomfortable. Like it or not, the use of this technology has benefited the consumer and the environment. Without it, researchers estimate that production would need to increase by over 14 million animals to meet demand. With the increase in livestock comes a rise in the environmental costs.

The sum of these findings shows that positive strides are possible to reduce the impact of farming. However, technology must explore other areas to balance the needs of the environment and the consumer. Every choice has consequences. The key is finding the right balance with the least amount of impact.

The data regarding the month of January was recently released by the National Climatic Data Center for the United States. The winter of 2011-2012 has been considered mild up to the month of January and the numbers in the recent report indicate as such. While the month of January 2012 is not the warmest on record, it did rank as fourth warmest for the contiguous U.S..

Overall the average temperature across the lower forty-eight states was 36.3 degrees Fahrenheit. This is the fourth warmest since 1895 for the month of January. The warmest on record remains 2006’s 39.7 degrees Fahrenheit. 37.2 degrees Fahrenheit was the average in both 1953 and 1990, rounding out the rankings above the year of 2012.

Despite being ranked fourth, the average of 36.3 degrees Fahrenheit is still 5.5 degrees Fahrenheit greater than the average between 1901 and 2000. As for snow, a main component as to why this winter is being considered mild, it ranks as the third lowest snow accumulation for the month of January in the last forty years.

Individual states were largely above normal as well, with nine states having average temperatures ranking in their individual state records of the ten warmest. These states include Arizona, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Wyoming. Two states had temperatures near their normal average but still above, Florida and Washington. However, no state experienced overall temperatures below average.

The Northeast as a whole experienced their 16th warmest month of January since records began. Some states saw temperatures drastically above average, although still not record breaking. Such is the case for the traditionally cold northern state of Minnesota, which had an average in January which was 10.1 degrees warmer.

Reasons for Lighting
The main reason a community or homeowner may opt for outdoor lighting is safety. The perception is that lighting deters crime. The fact is that it is not always the case. As a society, people have become so accustomed to security lighting that a light going on may not attract the same attention. There is also the logic to consider.

If you can’t see well in the dark, neither can a perpetrator. In an area that is normally dimly lit, the addition of street lights may provide a better setting—for the criminal to see what he is doing to break into a vehicle or home. The idea that lighting can always reduce crime is not a given in every situation.

Wasteful Lighting
Lighting is useful if it accomplishes a purpose. The New Jersey Astronomical Association estimates that more than 30 percent of outdoor lighting is misdirected at the sky. The association put this cost at $4.5 billion each year. Then, there are the environmental costs of energy that provides no clear benefit.

Another concern lies with wildlife. Many animals use photoperiod or the amount of daylight as triggers for seasonal events like mating. Artificial lighting can disrupt these patterns.

Lighting with a Purpose
For lighting to be beneficial, the first question to ask is what do you want to accomplish? A bad lighting design contributes to light pollution. If the purpose is to deter crime, illuminating a park and attracting foot traffic may deter criminals. However, lighting in a parking lot won’t do anything to reduce shoplifting in a convenience store.

Lighting should avoid conflicts with residents in the immediate area. It should not shine into residential homes and interfere with everyday life. Glare should also be minimized as it is a common trigger for migraines. The point is that pre-planning can make the most efficient use of lighting, without trespassing on the rights of others.

The mountain caribou once called large expanses of North America and subsequently the United States home. Since 1984 the mountain caribou have been designated as protected under the endangered species list due to population decline and habitat loss. Currently there is estimated to be less than fifty mountain caribou remaining in the U.S.. Where this small herd of caribou resides is in a section of land in Idaho and crossing to Washington state.

The U.S. previously decided against setting aside protected habitat for the species due to concerns that the habitat designation would lead poachers to their locale. However, critical habitat for endangered species is supposed to be set aside under the law. Now the U.S. government is attempting to set aside 600 square miles of habitat in Idaho and Washington for the mountain caribou, believing the species is in desperate need and unlikely to suffer from poaching.

375,000 acres will be set aside for the species in the Selkirk Mountains. Only 15,000 acres of the area is currently privately owned, the remaining 360,000 acres are already in the hands of the federal and state governments. However, designating the area as critical habitat will therefore require approval for activities and changes to the area as the species is not to be impacted.

The decline of the mountain caribou population has been determined to be the loss of habitat, or forests. Deforestation and wildfires are said to be main causes, alongside road building. Recreational trails, such as those for hiking, snowmobiling and the like, have also disturbed their remaining habitat.

For some of the very same reasons the mountain caribou are currently endangered are the reasons residents in the area are fighting the government’s decision. Fears have been raised regarding decreased snowmobiling, lack of access to the forest and decreased access for hunting. Snowmobiling is a major reason many are up in arms about the decision as it is a popular attraction for tourists to the area bringing in revenue for individuals and the area.

However, the government has indicated that no significant changes are likely, at least not immediately. However, if studies find that certain activities or access to certain areas are impacting the species, changes will be made. The public can comment on the proposal, which will not be finalized either way until fall of 2012.

A variety of species depend upon seagrasses for food, including manatees and dugongs-which is their primary source of food. In addition, seagrasses contribute to the food supply of sea turtles, sea horses and a variety of fish as well. Some of these same species call seagrasses their home, making seagrass also an important habitat.

Largely seagrass is no longer along the coast of countries with significant pollution, such as China. Pollution is the main reason for declining seagrass. In addition, sedimentation is an increasing problem due to runoff which has increased alongside deforestation. Sewage and agricultural pollution are also major factors in the decline in seagrass.

Of the seventy-two known seagrass species, fifteen of them are endangered, vulnerable or near threatened. Seagrasses are suffering from habitat loss, biodiversity loss and also potentially at the hands of global warming. A new study genetically tracing seagrasses in the Mediterranean reveals that the seagrasses are older than previously thought, meaning they have lived through various changes before.

The study, which was published in the journal Plos One, revealed that Posidonia oceanica seagrasses have survived for thousands of years in the Mediterranean. The team sampled seagrasses across 2,175 miles of Mediterranean waters, researching largely the result of their asexual and sexual reproduction. But the team also discovered the longevity of the seagrasses and a gained a grasp of what conditions the species has survived in the past.

Dr. Sophie Arnaud-Haond, co-author of the study, stated: “These findings show that Posidonia oceanica’s clones have been able to survive fluctuating environmental conditions, and meadows we observe nowadays are the outcome of millenia of evolution. On the other hand, changes are occurring nowadays at an unprecedented rate and the sharp decline of seagrass meadows in general- and Posidonia oceanica in particular- are raising concerns as to the ability of this slow growing species and its old, patiently selected clones, to face these new and rapidly occurring environmental challenges.”

The age of the seagrass lines mean that they have previously survived temperatures in the Mediterranean of 10 to 15 degrees Celsisus below what they are currently. Conditions 10,000 years ago also were such that water levels were lower, at least 300 feet lower than today. Whether the seagrasses will be able to survive a warming world is unknown.