Source: Koen Olthuis, Waterstudio.NL

“What is beautiful about this project, is that it doesn’t demand expensive urban areas, while the wildlife on the ”Tree Sea” will affect the areas around it on the distance of many kilometres”, says the architect.

Source: Koen Olthuis, Waterstudio.NL

“Tree Sea” can function at various  altitudes. Its layers – above water – will be a habitat for birds, bees, insects, bats and other small animals. Beneath water, various species of fish and others aqueous creatures will find a shelter. If the climate is suitable, even artificial coral reef might sustain and develop.

Source: Koen Olthuis, Waterstudio.NL

According to Waterstudio.NL  building of this structure would take only two years to complete.

photo by tatulund (Flickr CC)

The ‘Greenest government ever’ strikes again.

According to official figures pollution contributed to some 200,000 premature deaths in the UK in 2008, a number with disproportionate victims in poor, urban communities. Furthermore, health care costs total £20bn per year for pollution-related ailments.

And now the UK’s Conservative-led government wants to relax air quality standards and shift responsibility from national to local authorities. Standard Tory stuff, right?

From the Independent:

Poor air quality is caused by three main pollutants – nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and ozone. The UK is failing to meet EU limits for both nitrogen dioxide and PM.

A few middle class people buying hybrid or electric vehicles are not going to make much difference either.

The UK government’s environmental watchdog, the Environmental Audit Committee, claims that the David Cameron’s coalition government is avoiding following the pollution standards set by the European Union. The evidence shows that this (and lets not forget New Labour’s hand in this business) is killing people.

From BBC News:

It is estimated that around 4,000 people died as a result of the Great Smog of London in 1952. That led to the introduction of the Clean Air Act in 1956. In 2008, 4,000 people died in London from air pollution and 30,000 died across the whole of the UK. The government needs to act now, as government did in the 1950s, to save the health of the nation.

–Environmental Audit Committee report

We’ve come a long way, baby…

Image capture from video

Abraham Ramonwana, head guide at Tuli Safari Lodge says: “if a mine develops in South Africa, it’s also going to affect Botswana and Zimbabwe”.

The authorisation given to an Australian company called Coal of Africa Limited (CoAL) to construct an open-cast coal mine, called the Vele Colliery, just outside of the boundaries of the Mapungubwe National Park will affect this fragile natural harmony. To Abraham, “mining and industry is a short term plan, tourism is a long-term plan.”

Abraham, like many others, believes that the Mapungubwe region should be preserved and protected from the impacts of infrastructural development, and allowed to remain pristine for generations to come.

Mapungubwe Belongs to all of Us from Green Renaissance on Vimeo.

photo by congvo (Flickr CC)

Smog kills. This is a well-established scientific fact.

Unhealthy ground ozone levels contribute to and exasperate allergies and asthma. Cities like London, England and Los Angeles, California are particularly bad places to live in terms of air quality. London has the worst air quality in the UK, while Los Angeles – according to the American Lung Association – is the smoggiest region in the US.

US President Barack Obama’s administration looked as if they would tighten controls on ozone levels in the country, but another compromise – aka bow to big business interests – seems to have put an end to hopes of that happening any time soon. Ozone is a major component of smog.

From an opinion piece in the San Francisco Chronicle:

Factually, the regulation could cost as much as $90 billion for electric companies and car manufacturers to implement. But it would bring $100 billion in health care costs savings. That’s already an economic win for the economy as a whole, but remember, too, that the $90 billion in business expenses could include buying pollution-reduction products made in America, and those create jobs. Indeed, the EPA’s analysis predicted $17 billion in economic benefits from the stricter regulations.

Ground-level ozone is formed when certain pollutants – volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) – react. Major sources of ground level ozone are motor vehicles, factories, chemical and power plants.

From the Clean Air Trust:

Long-term, repeated exposure to high levels of ozone may lead to large reductions in lung function, inflammation of the lung lining and more frequent and severe respiratory discomfort.

Republicans and big businesses that profit from pollution are of course pleased that the EPA will not be able to enforce stricter ozone controls, while environmental groups are understandably disappointed.

Read more about this story on BBC News.

photo by Cesar Gomez (cesar3453 on Flickr CC)

Maps using data on ozone pollution, ragweed and “extreme heat days” in the United States show California to be an especially vulnerable place.

The number of unhealthy days in Los Angeles, in particular, is expected to rise in the coming years due to a combination of rising temperatures from climate change, droughts, flooding and pollution.

Research shows that rising temperatures can worsen the negative health impacts of pollution and ragweed on respiratory illnesses such as asthma.

Los Angeles has smog and ragweed pollen problems and is at risk for at least one unhealthy air quality day per summer, meaning the air does not meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s standard for ground-level ozone. Smog intermixed with pollen poses a dual threat to the health of people with allergies and asthma.

–LA Times

For more info and to see the maps check out the full article in the Los Angeles Times.

For more (frankly alarming) news on climate change and health, see the following MSNBC video interview with conservation biologist Dr Reese Halter from California Lutheran University.

photo by Ralph Alswang, Center for American Progress (Flickr CC)

New York City’s long-serving mayor Michael Bloomberg has a history of highlighting the “public health” aspects of political issues: tobacco, trans-fats, handguns and now coal.

Far from a leftist, the pro-business, social liberal, mega-rich philanthropist and media tycoon is neither George Soros nor Silvio Berlusconi, but he’s got a few things in common with both.

Bloomberg, once a Democrat, then a Republican and now an Independent, has come out hard against coal. But his latest move is not a political power play – it’s a charitable donation to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. A cool $50 million (€35m) charitable donation.

From Time Magazine:

This is a public health issue, just like our efforts to stop smoking or help with malaria. The pollutants and the toxins are a big problem.

–NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg

Beyond Coal has already helped to block the construction of over 150 coal plants around the US, largely from changing its focus from climate change to public health. It’s a win no matter what the language, and while the coal lobby can attempt (and succeed) to confuse Americans about the reality of climate change, they’d be hard pressed to claim coal soot didn’t cause health problems. A study by the Clean Air Task Force determined that fine particles from coal pollution contributed to 13,000 deaths last year.

There is also solid political action against coal in the US. The US Environmental Protection Agency is tightening its regulations on coal – regulations the EPA claims will prevent some 34,000 premature deaths per year.

Check Time Magazine and the Washington Post for more on the story.

photo by bcmacsac1 (Flickr CC)

From London fog to LA smog, citizens groups are up in arms over air quality in the big city.

In the 80s Los Angeles was famous for its smog, caused by endless highways choked with the exhaust of millions of cars. Like the Missing Persons song says, “nobody walks in LA”.

Apparently everyone has asthma instead.

Things have gotten better since the heady 80s and emissions standards have become stricter, but LA is still really smoggy. One study even found that air pollution kills more people in the region than even auto accidents.

Los Angeles is the smoggiest region in the nation, according to the American Lung Assn.’s 2011 State of the Air report. Scientific studies have found that ozone inflames the respiratory system, causing asthma attacks, hospitalizations and premature deaths. “Angelenos continue to breathe smoggy air that makes people sick, forcing mothers to question whether to allow children to play outside on dirty-air days.  These are choices mothers should not have to make,” Martinez said.

–LA Times

Since LA is failing to live up to national clean air standards and the US Environmental Protection Agency is not calling the city out on it, environmental and public health groups are suing the EPA.

Read more on that story in the LA Times.

On the other side of the pond, London isn’t fairing much better. Once home to “pea soup” “London fogs”, London has the worst air pollution in the UK and one of the worse levels in Europe.

Last Saturday a group of citizen activists got on their bikes, took to the streets on and literally lay down in the middle of the road (like The Pretenders song), stopping traffic in central London for a few minutes.

Check out the video from Climate Rush below and read more about the story on Demotix.

image © NRDC/ Julia Bovey (Flickr CC: nrdc_media)

Nike, Abercrombie & Fitch, Adidas, Puma, Calvin Klein, Converse, Cortefiel, H&M and Lacoste are among the global megabrands named in a new Greenpeace report on hazardous river pollution by the garment industry in China.

Since 1995 China has been the world’s largest exporter of textiles, attracting Western and Japanese brands to manufacture there due to cheap labor and lax regulations.

Even when major international brands have self-imposed regulations on how their garments are produced, such rules are harder to monitor when outsourced to firms in other countries.

Youngor Group, the Chinese company linked to the international firms, uses chemical dyes and water treatment processes that pollute China’s major rivers with toxic chemicals. These chemicals have been linked to liver problems, low sperm count in men and the feminization of fish. High levels of alkaline and heavy metals have also been found in many Chinese rivers used in the textile industry.

Hong Kong-based Greenpeace campaigners claim that there are hundreds of similar textile suppliers in China.

However, H&M, Nike, Converse, Adidas, Puma and Cortefiel all state that their manufacturing relationship with Youngor does not utilize water treatment.

Read more on the story on the BBC and Guardian websites and see the following video report from NTD TV for more.

Greenpeace Reports Textile Industry Pollutes… by NTDTV

Dakar, Senegal; photo by Jeff Attaway (Flickr CC)

The world’s beaches are covered in filth.

Not to sound alarmist – or heaven forbid, put someone off their well-deserved beach holiday – but reports from around the globe (or glob) show that beaches everywhere are in an increasingly dire state. We’ve already found out that our oceans are facing ‘catastrophic’ conditions, but that shouldn’t spoil a bit of fun, sun, surf and sand, should it?

Problem is, many of those beaches we associate with a nice day out in Mother Nature’s splendor are awash with chemicals and human waste (shit).

Look what the LA Times has to say about the beloved Avalon Harbor beach on California’s Catalina Island:

Even though the city of 4,000 has spent $3.5 million testing and rehabilitating sewer lines, the water is no cleaner. A report last month by the Natural Resources Defense Council listed Avalon as one of the 10 most chronically polluted beaches in the nation for failing state health tests as much as 73% of the time.

Californians are risking a staph infection, stomach illness and rashes because the ocean is pretty much used as a sewer.

Beach blanket bingo anyone? Thought not.

Well at least California still has beaches. According to a report in the Observer, the beaches near Rome, Italy are disappearing due to development and erosion linked to climate change:

Francesco Lalli, a senior researcher at Italy’s environmental research centre, Ispra, said Italy’s beaches lost five million cubic metres of sand between 1950 and 2000.

The rest of the world’s beaches aren’t any better.

Goa’s beaches, India’s most popular among tourists, have been declared by scientists to be unfit for swimming and fishing. Sorry, dreadlocked Euro backpackers, there’ll be no cooling off in the sea after an all night rave this year – unless you fancy risking sepsis.

And if this editorial on the state of Ghana’s beaches is anything to go by, African tourist shores face similar problems of pollution and filth.

But take heart, as the good people of the British island of Guernsey are doing by cleaning up plastic waste from their beaches with their Coastal Cleanup Campaign.

So get stuck in and keep a stiff upper lip, but if you don’t want it infected with staph, you might want to stay out of the water this summer.

photo by Shayne Kaye (Flickr CC)

I have seen the future and it stings.

Climate change, overfishing and agricultural runoff are all possible factors in the rise of jellyfish populations in seas around the globe. Jellyfish invasions such as those experienced by Spain last summer are actually population booms and/or mass migrations attributed to warmer waters, a reduction of predators and an increase of oceanic pollution from organic fertilizers.

Besides wreaking havoc on Spain’s beaches, jellyfish have been blamed for wiping out salmon stocks in Northern Ireland and disrupting the running of coastal power and desalination plants in Africa, the Middle East and Japan.

New research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that the rise in jellyfish populations may not only be aided by climate change, but is also contributing to it by making oceans more acidic, thereby disrupting their function as carbon sinks.

Oceans have been taking up 25% of the carbon dioxide that man has produced over the last 200 years, so it’s been acting as a buffer for climate change. When you add more carbon dioxide to sea water it becomes more acidic. And already that is happening at a rate that hasn’t occurred in 600 million years. The acidification of the oceans is already predicted to have such a corrosive effect that unprotected shellfish will dissolve by the middle of the century

–Dr Carol Turley, Plymouth University Marine Laboratory (as quoted in the Guardian)

The rise of the jellyfish is also changing the balance of oceanic ecosystems around the globe. Though jellies are consumed by humans in some Asian countries, the rest of the world may want to develop a taste for them as global fish stocks decline. Thankfully, I’m a smug vegetarian.

Read more on this story in the Guardian.

But jellyfish are not simply ruining the world, they are also being used by mad scientists to create living laser beams – with therapeutic applications in mind, of course. Researchers at the Wellman Center for Photomedicine at Massachusetts General Hospital in the United States have managed to get a single cell from a glowing jellyfish to emit laser light.

Read more about that on the BBC News website.

According to the Global Energy Network Institute (GENI) recent years have seen the Philippines experience a sharp rise in the production of energy from hydro and natural gas, and especially from geothermal and other renewable sources.

At the same time, power generated from coal and oil peaked and began a somewhat steady decline during the last decade (though figures are only shown up to 2005).

What’s sure is that large cities, especially Manila, suffer from heavy pollution due to road traffic.

Check out the following video report from Al Jazeera English on how the government in the Philippines has begun implementing programs to replace fuel burning jeepneys and trikes (three-wheeled auto rikshaws) with silent and much cleaner electric counterparts. As this policy takes off, it is hoped that air pollution in the Southeast Asian capital will significantly decrease.

Stockholm, photo by Mispahn (Flickr CC)

Diesel engines and heating systems produce fine particle pollution, which shortens life expectancy in European cities, according to a study by the Aphekom project.

The study measured air pollution and human health in 25 cities in Europe, with Bucharest, Romania scoring worst and Stockholm Sweden as cleanest, the latter’s pollution measuring just below targets set by the World Health Organization. The air in Bucharest, on the other hand, is so bad that it is estimated to reduce life expectancy by two years.

The study then focused on 10 cities including Barcelona, Brussels and Rome, and, for the first time, took account of the extent to which pollution may trigger chronic complaints rather than just exacerbate them. About half the urban population lives close to a road with more than 10,000 vehicles a day, and that fact seems to be responsible for 15% of asthma cases among under-17s, 23% of chronic bronchitis cases, and 25% of cardiovascular diseases among over-65s.

-Guardian

Dublin and London also scored at the cleaner end of the spectrum, though just shy of WHO goals, while Budapest, Athens and Barcelona were found to be some of Europe’s most polluted cities.

Read more on this story in the Guardian.

Bucharest, photo by Adrian Ciubotaru (Flickr CC)

photo by Rainforest Action Network (Flickr CC)

An Ecuadoran court has found oil giant Chevron guilty of contaminating the South American country’s Amazon basin.

A judge in an Ecuadoran court levied a fine of $8bn (€6bn) against Chevron for deaths, illnesses and monetary losses sustained by the local inhabitants of the rainforest from spills of toxic waste and crude oil. The spills are estimated by a Swedish University study to total 30bn gallons (113bn liters). This amount dwarfs the 205m gallons spilt by BP in the Gulf of Mexico.

Though the suit is being touted as a hard fought victory for the indigenous people of Ecuador, the amount fell far short of the $27.3 sought by plaintiffs.

The epic and bitterly fought lawsuit over the “Amazon Chernobyl” has been going on for 18 years. It was brought on behalf of 30,000 people whose health and environment were allegedly damaged by chemical-laden waste water dumped by Texaco’s operations from 1972 to 1990. Chevron bought Texaco in 2001.

–Guardian

Chevron blasted the judgment, calling it “illegitimate”, “unenforceable” and a “fraud”. Due to appeals, the US-based multinational energy company will probably be able to avoid paying out for years. This seems to be par for the course for Chevron.

From a statement by Amazon Watch and Rainforest Action Network via a BBC News report:

Chevron has spent the last 18 years waging unprecedented public relations and lobbying campaigns to avoid cleaning up the environmental and public health catastrophe it left in the Amazon rainforest.

Read more on the story in the Guardian and from AP, including a video report.

Image by Christina Kennedy (source: Wikimedia Commons)

I’ve wanted to campaign for this for a long time. Restaurant or kids’ meal toys have always bugged me. For, as good as the marketing idea behind them might be, it only makes their existence and popularity all the more absurd. Toys in kids’ meals are a selling trick, and simply nothing more.

Restaurant toys are not REAL toys. They are Asian manufactured gadgets of average to low quality, often unfit for toddlers, but equally unfit for any other child, as they are unable to entertain children longer than it takes them to stuff a burger and some fries down their throats. So the life span of the restaurant or kids’ meal toy is extremely short. I suppose the toy exists longer in a state of being nothing (in a plastic bag, in a container coming from Asia, in a cardboard box waiting to be unpacked or in the dustbin it eventually ends up in) than in the actual toy state in the hands of a child. This thought alone makes the existence of such toys so impossible to grasp for me. Kids’ meal toys are nothing more than piles of junk causing a huge carbon footprint and lots of waste.

So today, while McDonalds and other restaurant owners are disappointed about the decision of San Francisco authorities to impose a ban on giving away toys with kids’ meals that don’t meet certain nutritional standards, well I’m happy.

Of course the decision to ban the kids’ meal toys is not based on ecological concerns, but one cannot hope to get everything all the time, and must be able to settle for the next best thing. So in this case, although it’s health issues that pushed for the ban (equally important to ecological issues), the result is not only good for kids but for the planet too. A big hooray for San Francisco!

Additional resources:
Make sure to read “The price of comfort and convenience” by Chris on the Localizer Blog for more insights and thoughts on kids’ meals toys.

What is Clean Up The World Weekend? Simply put, it’s a weekend set aside for people to help clean up our world. More specifically, it’s a weekend for people to get together and clean up all the trash in our world. You can clean up the trash on a city block, in a park, at the beach, in a forest, in a parking lot, or anywhere else you can think of.

Once collected, or even while collecting, be sure to separate the recyclables from actual trash. If any of the items are in good enough condition, you could always use them for craft projects or find other ways to reuse and repurpose them.

In addition to the clean up portion of the weekend, cities around the world are holding events and activities to get people involved. This could range from tree planting, to guest speakers, to educational programs, and more.

To find out more about the big event and if there are any activities happening in your area, check out the official site here!

I will be cleaning up local hiking trails, parks and creeks. What will YOU be doing this weekend?

By Heidi Marshall

This meant that four million people discharged their waste into septic tanks, whose contents overflowed city storm sewers and contaminated the water supply. Since the city is so close to the Tietê’s headwaters, this sewage concentrated, mixing with the existing pollution and causing floating foams and strong odours in many parts of the river.

Public outcry over the situation reached a peak in 1992, when over a million signatures were gathered in protest of the poor water quality. In response to the campaign, which also involved strong support from the Brazilian press, the state government of Sao Paulo created the massive Tietê Project.

The Tietê is still polluted.

The European Union (EU) established the REACH system (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) an integrated system for Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals and establishing a European agency for these products. This system requires companies that manufacture and import chemicals to assess the risks arising from their use and take the necessary measures to manage any risk to be identified.

The burden of proof with regard to the safety of chemicals manufactured or sold is on the industry. The regulation aims to ensure a high level of protection of human health and the environment, as well as to strengthen the competitiveness of chemical innovation.

My focus was on flame retardants.

What are flame retardants?

Flame retardants are added to certain components, printed circuit boards (PCB), plastic containers and cables, to reduce their flammability for example, they prevent or reduce the possibility of a fire starting and spreading flame.

There are several types of flame retardants, they are divided between those containing chlorine and bromine compounds (also known as halogenated flame retardants), those containing phosphorus and nitrogen compounds and inorganic flame retardants.

The halogenated flame retardants Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs) are found in many household products, such as furniture, computers and other electrical equipment. They are designed to protect homes and offices from the effects of fires by slowing the rate at which objects burn.
Some types of brominated flame retardants are:

Why ban flame retardants?

These compounds accumulate in the food chain (bio-accumulation) and so are eventually consumed by humans. Exposure can also occur via skin contact or inhalation. Some of these compounds are considered harmful to certain organs and DNA, as well as causes of degenerative diseases and cancer.

Some PBDE compounds decompose in the environment forming, thus, more toxic compounds. The PBDEs can be transferred from materials treated with flame retardants and their environmental effects be long lasting. The PBBs can particularly affect the endocrine (hormonal) system in animals. Similarly, some kinds of chlorinated flame retardants, normally used in plastics, are considered toxic.

The substitution of brominated flame retardants (BFRs)

The BFRs are used in a wide range of consumer products: electronics, textiles, foam for upholstery, carpets and building materials – all jobs where the risk of fire requires attention. The increase in the use of plastic and synthetic combustible materials has contributed to growth in the use of flame retardants.

With increasing evidence of the dangers of flame retardants in the late ’80s, particularly PBBs (polybrominated biphenyls) and PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), Germany, Denmark, Holland and Sweden have begun to restrict and prohibit their use. In a mission statement in 1989, the chemical and plastics manufacturers in Germany stated that they would not produce or use PBDEs.

Has the electronics industry found alternatives to BFRs?

The electronics industry has begun to find alternatives, ranging from material substitution (replacement of halogenated flame retardants with non-halogen) to exchange functional (replacing plastic cases with metal).

Apple does not use RFB in the plastic cases of its products.

Sony Europe has begun to find safer substitutes for halogenated flame retardants. Sony has developed halogen-circuit boards used in television sets, VCRs and DVD players in Europe. The printed circuit boards use a resin material that is itself flammable. Sony’s engineers have adopted a structure containing a resin with nitrogen to increase resistance to heat.

Samsung Electronics Co. has developed a “green” semiconductor that does not use halogen compounds or toxic substances like lead, chlorine and bromine. The company was the first to develop a packaging and a form that does not contain lead or halogens. The alternative has improved the quality of the product and has saved 960 million won (684,000 euros). Samsung has publicized its efforts on the replacement to increase its image as an environmentally friendly company.

National / Panasonic (Matsushita) has joined forces with other major manufacturers to develop alternative electric cables and plastic compounds that contain no halogens. In September 1999, they began to market the first wide screen TV without halogen compounds.

NEC, a leading manufacturer of mobile phones, office equipment and personal computers, aims to abandon the use of halogenated flame retardants by 2011.

IKEA prohibits a large number of hazardous materials in its product lines, including azo dyes in textiles and has totally banned the RFB in their products and PVC. IKEA chooses textiles and materials which by their nature are difficult to ignite and can often completely avoid the use of chemical protection from the flames thanks to new materials, such as linings of non-woven materials that are inherently flame retardant.

Matsushita website: http://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/lead-free/eindex.html ENDS Report 270, Chemical Firms Move to block shift to bromine-free PCs ENDS Report 308, September 2000. NEC unveils circuit boards free of halogen or phosphorus compounds Personal meeting with Magnus Bjork, IKEA, the Brominated Flame Retardants and Foam Furniture Conference and Roundtable: EPA 9. San Francisco, April 2003

Assess the safety of chemical alternatives to BFR

The German Environment Protection Agency (UBA) has examined the toxicity to humans and the environment of 13 flame retardants, with the objective to assess the feasibility of substitution with less hazardous compounds. They selected red phosphorus, ammonium polyphosphate and aluminum trihydroxide as alternatives less problematic for the environment. Red phosphorus can technically be used in a variety of polymers to meet even the most stringent fire safety standards, although it might not work for all applications.

The LU has emphasized that “it is encouraging that there is a general trend towards abandoning the use of halogenated flame retardants in products, replacing them with less hazardous compounds or through the redesign of systems flame retardants, for example by creating more distances from potential sources of heat. “

The results of these surveys are summarized in Table 1.

I. Ban recommended

• Decabromodiphenyl ether
• Tetrabromobisphenol A (additive)

II. Replacing

• Tetrabromobisfeneolo A (reactive)
• Tri (chloropropyl) phosphate

III. Property issues:

• Hexabromocyclododecane
• Sodium borate decahydrate
• Antimony trioxide

IV. No advice possible because of gaps inknowledge of phosphate:

• Bis (pentabromofenil) ethane
• Resorcinol-bis-diphenyl
• Pirovatex new CP
• Melamine cyanurate

V. Unproblematic use :

• red phosphorus
• Ammonium polyphospha
• aluminum trihydroxide

UBA (2003). Precautionary Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Chemicals. Part 1: New Strategies for the Ecological Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Substances. http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/index-e.htm

My conclusion

The BFRs represent major industrial chemicals which use has increased dramatically over the past few decades. They are produced to prevent fires and thus can have a direct and obvious benefit.

However, concerns are being raised because of their persistence, bioaccumulation, and potential for toxicity, both in animals and in humans. Production and use patterns are different in various parts of the world. There is clearly a need for more systematic environmental and human monitoring to understand how and where these chemicals are being released into the environment, and what is happening to them once they enter the environment.

What fate and transport processes are involved in their entrance into the environment?

Are the commercial products breaking down in the environment or in biota?

Is food the major pathway, as is true for many other POPs, or are there other potential sources?

Once we understand what the exposure levels are in both people and wildlife, what should be our level of concern?

Our toxicology database is inadequate to truly understand the risk. Many of the studies that do exist involve the commercial mixtures, which do not represent human exposure.We need studies that focus on the congeners, and potentially their metabolites and/or breakdown products, present in people and wildlife in order to understand the risk from exposure to BFRs.

The circulation of groundwater  in Rome is being threatened by great transformations in natural physiographic systems completely upset by great peripheral urban settlements. Rome is supplied by springs located several hundred km’s from the city.

Local sources contribute marginally to the supply, such as the Acqua Vergine Spring and some other mineral water springs.

The groundwater quality is consistently damaged by extensive urban development, characterised by large new districts developed without respect to regulations (average dimension of thousands of inhabitants), and by the excessive quantity of wells connecting upper water tables that are often polluted with the deep water tables, which are generally non-polluted.

In about 53% of wells, E coli bacteria were found, while the percentage drops to 16% for the deepest wells (more than 100 m deep). The disposal of effluent waters from these districts, made by uncontrolled septic tanks, leads to soil pollution and leakage in the underlying water tables.

The surface waters shaped in geological areas in the roman countryside are landscapes of great value, in some parts with large agricultural flood plains, in others with narrow gorges. These create the dense hydrographical network of the tributaries of the Tiber and Aniene Rivers. The rivers and streams in Roman territory have a very variable discharge. In the case of the Tiber River, this is not only due to the characteristics of the river and its watershed, but also to the dams built upstream mainly for production of hydroelectric power, and to the water intakes from the river, mainly for irrigation, as well as from springs located in the watershed.

Some of the tributary streams of the Tiber and Aniene Rivers are completely dry during drought periods, while others have a consistent discharge during all seasons. The water intakes for different uses (agricultural, industrial, households) produced a general degradation of river ecosystems.

The hydrological network is the receptor of seventy-one public sewers, which were not previously treated by the treatment plants located in the territory of the city. The effluents brought by those sewers correspond to about 500,000 inhabitants. This fact leads to an organic pollution, characterised by the consistent presence of E coli bacteria, high values of BOD, and low values of DO. Moreover, the same water bodies collect about 1316 private sewers, surveyed by the province of Rome, which was instituted by the National Law 319/76, the law dealing with the control of water quality. During the surveys made by the province, a significant quantity of unauthorised sewers was detected.

Concerning the vulnerability of river ecosystems due to low discharges in dry periods, studies are ongoing to define criteria and methods for managing the river in such periods of minimum flow and determining a minimum standard of water quality and biological function.

There is no problem of a shortage of drinking water for the territory of the city of Rome because of the abundant resources. Nevertheless, it is necessary to diminish water consumption in order to achieve the result of sustainable water use; in fact, in the city of Rome, the per capita/per day consumption is about 450l, one of the highest in Europe.

There is a lack of good practice of water re-use, due to the quantity of available resources; it would be better to develop it in order to solve, with this type of low-quality water, the demand for non-drinkable water, such as water for the irrigation of public gardens, for industry, for representative fountains, particularly in dry seasons typical of the Mediterranean climate. The goal for water quality is to reach a given biological quality class and to respect the limitations established in the rules and regulations on aquatic life.

photo by Socialistisk Ungdom – SU (Flickr CC)

The massive leak in the Gulf of Mexico may have been stopped, but oil still continues to spread and flow. Scientists, local communities and businesses wait for the true toll of damage to be revealed as the rest of the world turns its attentions elsewhere.

Environmentalists desperately try to prevent the fossil fuel industry from destroying another pristine environment in the icy Arctic, but the thirst for oil is strong and the geopolitics surrounding it complex.

Yet there is another place where a devastating spill is continually taking place, poisoning lush ecosystems while destroying livelihoods and lives.

In Nigeria’s Niger River delta, oil companies like Shell, Chevron and Agip pollute heavily and on a daily basis, a tragedy compounded by a lack or rule of law in the region, criminality and militant activity. A recent and ongoing United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) report has identified more than 300 oil spills in the Ogoniland region of the delta.

From an article in the Guardian:

[We] observed the oil slick floating on the lake. Destroyed fishing nets were also noticed in the polluted environment. The community is faced with incessant oil spills.

–Alagoa Morris, Friends of the Earth Nigeria

According to another report in the Guardian, a three-year UN investigation places 90% of the blame for the spills on criminal gangs, with the remaining 10% attributed to ‘equipment failures and company negligence’ on the part of Shell. For some, this news is understandably not so easy to swallow:

Tonight the investigation was accused of bias by Nigerians and environmental groups who said the study – paid for by Shell and commissioned by the Nigerian government, who both have massive oil interests in the region – was unbalanced.

To be fair to Shell and Nigeria, who else but the polluter(s) should pay for the study? The criminal gangs or militias who share the blame certainly won’t. Yet, in stark contrast to the UNEP’s findings, an Amnesty International report from last year – while acknowledging criminal contribution to the problem – placed the responsibility squarely on the shoulders of Shell.

Of course, there are sociopolitical forces relating to the oil industry and pollution in Ogoniland that are not cut and dry. The unequal distribution of wealth as well as the health and security of the Ogonis are the responsibility of the Nigerian government and plainly not the concern of Shell and other oil companies operating in the region, who take full advantage of the political and socioeconomic situation in Nigeria. Pollution and poverty are acceptable blowback, as long as long as it’s criminals who take the blame.

What is incontrovertible about the UN survey is the value of the amount information it is finding concerning the extent of contamination in the Niger delta. This data will at least be invaluable for future cleanup efforts.

Additional resources:

Radio Netherlands Worldwide – Nigeria oil spills: UNEP reading out a script written by Shell

Voice of America ­– Criminal Activity Behind Oil Spills in Ogoniland

We disinfect everything all the time and not always wisely.

While many of us are naturally immune against these invisible enemies, aka bacteria, others are born with a deficient immune system that does not allow them to live outside of a sterile room. For them, the battle against germs is a daily struggle as they are unable to produce enough white blood cells. The only treatment available today is still bone marrow donation, but not everyone has the possibility of finding a compatible donor.

For this reason, at the Necker Hospital, researchers are trying new ways. One innovative treatment is gene therapy. This is based on a transfer of genes into patients’ cells in order to introduce a normal copy of the defective gene. Gene therapy promises to be effective, but has yet to demonstrate that it is totally harmless.