ENN: Environmental News Network -- Know Your Environment

By Cameron, 2nd grader, Atlanta, GA, USA

I am 8 years old and like most kids I like balloons. But I’m really worried about what they are doing to our environment and wildlife. Why is throwing trash along the side of a road illegal, but releasing balloons in the sky to explode and fall to the ground in pieces legal? To me it seems that releasing balloons into the air is the same thing as littering and laws need to be put in place to protect both our marine and terrestrial wildlife.

According to Carolyn Shea of the National Audubon Society:

“Once airborne, balloons can travel far afield and often end up joining the flotsam (floating debris) riding the world’s oceans. One that was unleashed in a science fair experiment to investigate wind direction was retrieved on an island 1,300 miles from its release site.” *

On land or in water, balloons can easily be mistaken for prey and eaten by animals. They are especially harmful in an aquatic environment because they look like jellyfish – a major source of food for marine animals including sea turtles, dolphins, whales, fish and seabirds. When these marine animals ingest balloons a valve at the top of the stomach can get blocked so that food cannot pass through, causing slow, painful starvation. Attachments such as ribbons and string tied to balloons are a particular problem for land and sea animals as they can get tangled around the mouths and beaks making it impossible for these animals to eat.

Those in the balloon industry would have us believe that latex balloons are bio-degradable, meaning that balloons have the ability to break down, or decompose back into the natural environment without causing harm, as fast as an oak leaf. However, research published in Soil Biology and Biochemistry found that 54% of oak leaves decomposed in a two-year period, and it takes about four years for oak leaves to completely degrade under natural conditions. This gives wildlife plenty of time to encounter this seemingly harmless killer.** Keep in mind that Mylar balloons (balloons that feature a metallic foil and are made of nylon that can stay inflated from days to weeks), as well as ribbons and strings, are NOT bio-degradable at all.

Balloon releases are illegal in several states including: Virginia, Connecticut, Florida, Tennessee, New York, Texas and California. I recently moved to Georgia from Florida where it is a crime to intentionally release more than (10) balloons in a 24-hour period.

Several years ago, (21) 3rd grade students from Nassakeag School in Long Island, New York successfully asked their county officials to outlaw the mass release of more than 24 balloons into the air. The law imposes fines of $500 for the first violation, $750 for the second, and $1,000 for the third. It also requires balloon sellers to post notices about the new ban.

I would like to see mass balloon releases made illegal in all 50 states. I have started an on-line petition regarding this topic. My hope is that I can present this petition, along with additional information, to my local state representative so that legislation can be put in place to stop mass balloon releases in Georgia. If you’d like to help in my efforts, please go to http://www.change.org/petitions/georgia-politicians-make-mass-balloon-releases-illegal and sign my petition. Together, we can help save one of our world’s most precious resources – its wildlife!

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing’s going to get better. It’s not.” Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax.

*Audubon Magazine, http://archive.audubonmagazine.org/ask/ask0209.html

**Clean Virginia Waterways, http://www.longwood.edu/cleanva/balloons.htm

If you’d like more information about this issue, please contact Amie Koporc at akoporc@gmail.com.

Balloon release image via Shutterstock

Oak leaf image via Shutterstock

Dolphin image via Shutterstock

Cameron Koporc is passionate about nature and the environment. Coming soon, Juno’s Journey, a book she wrote to benefit sea turtle rescue organizations. Visit www.makeyourmarkpublishing.com for more information about her work.

In California, a new law was recently passed that requires beverages which have a certain level of carcinogens now have a cancer warning label on the bottle.

Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc., which account for almost 90% of the soda market, according to Beverage Digest, are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas in response to the new law. Although these companies have already made the changes for their beverages sold in California, there will soon be national changes in order to streamline their manufacturing processes.

The Associated Press has reported that Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are changing the way they produce the caramel coloring which is used their sodas in order to reduce the amount of ammonia sulfite, a carcinogen that has been linked to cancer in animals by consumer advocates.

However, Coke and Pepsi are making themselves clear about their opinion of this new law. They are pointing out that the decision to change their production of the caramel coloring was designed to avoid the warning label on cans and bottles – which could hurt sales. A Coca-Cola spokesman called the law “scientifically unfounded.”

The FDA also points out that the chemical in question is only dangerous in extremely large quantities. A statement by the FDA says, “A consumer would have to consume well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents.”

The American Beverage Association, which represents both Coke and Pepsi, said consumers will not notice a difference taste or appearance of the product because of these changes.

What’s your opinion? Do you think the government is becoming too controlling of what we choose to eat and drink? Or, do you think this precaution is reasonable?

Soda Image via Shutterstock

Gardening programs have been popping up in prisons across the United States and can be found from Rikers to San Quentin.  Inmate gardening programs offer a wide range of benefits to both the inmates themselves and the surrounding communities.

Health Benefits of Gardening

There are many medical benefits to gardening that can be enjoyed by inmates and non non-inmates alike. Gardening is a form of exercise that can be practiced by people with a wide range of physical activity ability, which can make it an important tool for keeping healthy and fighting obesity. According to the National Institute of Health gardening for 30-45 minutes is considered moderate exercise and is comparable to 30 minutes of walking or biking. Research has shown that 30 minute of gardening daily increases flexibility, strengthens joins, decreases blood pressure and cholesterol levels, lowers risk of diabetes and slows osteoporosis.

Gardening can also be beneficial for mental health. Horticultural therapy has become a popular practice in treating a wide range of ailments including stress, anxiety, and depression. The activity of gardening teaches patience and also improves self confidence.

Benefits of Inmate Gardening Programs

Benefits from inmate gardening programs range from increasing access to healthy foods for the prison to reducing the recidivism rate. In 2004, Pepperdine University Graduate Student Kathryn Waitkus wrote her thesis on the effects of San Quentin Prison in California starting their new Insight Garden Program. Waitkus conducted interviews with program stakeholders including prison staff, inmates participating in the program, and an inmate control group. Waitkus found that being near or in a garden reduced stress, created an environment neutral from segregation, built a community among participants, and inspired feelings of hope and possibility for change.

Garden programs also teach inmates valuable skills that can be applied to finding work when they get out of jail. Designing a garden not only teaches inmates about horticulture but can also teach inmates about budgeting and design.  Rikers’ program Greenhouse provides inmate participants 9-12 month paid internships after they leave prison, which can later lead to permanent careers in landscaping. Inmates in Rikers’ Greenhouse have a recidivism rate of 5-10% while recidivism rate for the general population is 65%.

The fruits (and vegetables) of the inmates labor benefit a variety of people. Produce finds it’s way into the prison kitchens, providing fresh food for all inmates or is donated to local food pantry’s. Philadelphia’s Root to Re-Entry has donated 47,000 pounds of organic produce to needy families in the Philadelphia area.  Prison gardening programs are only available in a limited number of prisons so imagine the benefits increased implementation could have.

 For more information please visit:

http://www.worldwatch.org/urban-garden-programs-reach-out-inmates-and-risk-populations

Gardening Via Shutterstock

Mom always said that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. She also said that you can never have dessert after you have your turkey bacon and eggs. However, a new study out of Tel Aviv University in Tel Aviv, Israel has found reason to support a theory that combined with a 600-calorie diet balanced with carbohydrates and protein, dessert after breakfast can actually keep the weight off.

Prof. Daniela Jakubowicz said that eating dessert after breakfast is better than at night because your metabolism is most active in the morning. This way, Jakubowicz said people will have more time to burn off the excess calories throughout the day. Jakubowicz also said that people should not avoid these foods either because if you avoid them, it will create a psychological addiction to that food. Jakubowicz also said that eating sweets early on can help control cravings to curb that mental

dependence on specific foods.

Jakubowicz said that the study was over a 32 week period to a group of 193 clinically obese, non-diabetic men and women. They were then assigned to two random groups which followed an identical caloric intake. In the study, the men consume 1,600 calories and the women eat 1,400 calories. A major difference is that members of the first group were given a low carb diet which has participants eating a small 300 calorie breakfast. The second group of participants was given a larger 600 calorie breakfast which was high in both protein and carbohydrates. The second group’s breakfast also included something sweet like a chocolate cupcake or brownie. During the mid-point of the study, members of both groups lost an average of 33 pounds. Despite promising results in the beginning of the study, the research’s outcome changed in the second half of the analysis. The first group which ate a low carb diet regained an average of 22 pounds, whereas members of the second group lost another 15 pounds. At the end of the research study, members of the second group lost 40 pounds more than their peers in the other group.

Jakubowicz said that one of the biggest obstacles people have in their everyday lives is actually keeping the weight they lost, off. When thinking about it, having sweets in the morning rather than as a midnight snack may help people lose more weight because it can boosts a person’s metabolism and also creates a balanced diet between protein and carbohydrates. Plus, it dispels the theory that my mom always told me: you CAN eat sweets and won’t ruin your dinner!

For more information, please visit: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039128X11003515.

Most people like chocolate in one form or another. Whether it is dark, milk, or white, people usually do enjoy what they taste. But if they eat a lot of it, which one will they like the most? According to a new study by the Association for Psychological Science and University of Michigan psychologist Ed O’Brien, research shows that people will enjoy their last piece of chocolate, the best. O’Brien said that “endings affect us in lots of ways, and one is this ‘positivity effect.’”

O’Brien’s research team also wanted to find out if this “last is the best” notion rings true in other unimportant things such as ice cream, potato chips, and soda. The research said that in fact it does. O’Brien said that this is true because “when you simply tell people something is the last, they may like that thing more.”

During the study, 52 students were told they were going to taste five different kinds of locally-made Hershey’s kisses. After each taste test, they rated it from 1-10. Some of the participants were told, “This is the next one,” before every trial. Another group of participants were told the same thing, except at the fifth and final taste trial, they were told that “This is the last one.” The results showed that more of the participants liked the fifth chocolate best when it was designated as “the last chocolate” compared to when it was a part of an old-fashioned taste test. Also, 64 percent of the sample enjoyed the designated “last” chocolate the best, no matter what the randomized flavor was. In comparison, only 22 percent enjoyed the fifth chocolate the best as it was described as the next chocolate.

O’Brien said that there are a few theories behind the “last” chocolate being the favorite among the sample: firstly, it is motivational. He said that in many cases, people want to “reap the benefits of this experience even though it’s going to end” and also to get something out of it at the end. O’Brien also said that another theory is that most people like happy endings, no matter if it is in a movie or a piece of chocolate. He also said that this research could have implications in the academic world, where professors could now expect better grades from their students during the final exam.

Last night while watching the 88^th Annual Academy Awards I was inspired to make a list of my own environmentally themed “award winning” movies.   Enjoy!

• Best Nature Empowerment Film:

The Happening (2008)

When a fatal airborne pathogen attacks  the north east coast of the United States, survivors are forced to flee without knowing what they are running from.

• Best Over Reaction to Global Warming:

The Day After Tommorow (2004)

In the ultimate disaster film, global warming causes a catastrophic storm that includes tornados, tidal waves, hurricanes, and a below freezing ice storm.

• Best Use of 80’s Popstars to Demonstrate Vigilante Environmentalists :

Mega Python Vs Gatoroid (2011)

In this Sci-Fi Channel Original Movie, two super creatures battle it out in the Everglades as a result of misguided actions by an animal activist and a park ranger.

• Best Animated Film Ever:

Princess Mononoke (1997)

After being cursed by an demon boar,  Prince Ashitaka finds himself caught in a battle between a mining town and the magical creatures in the surrounding forest.

• Best Monster Created by Dumping Formaldehyde Down The Sink:

The Host (2006)

In this horror film from Korea, a grandfather leads his family to rescue his grand daughter from a strange tentacled beast.

• Best Superhero to Come From  Something Radioactive:

Toxic Avenger (1985)

This campy classic follows a nerd, who becomes a gross superhero. The Toxic Avenger is a cult classic and inspired 3 sequels.

PS. If you have any environmentally themed movie you would like to share please include them  as a comment!

Scared Movie Spectators via Shutterstock

These days, more than 90% of the shrimp we consume here in the U.S. comes from overseas – totaling over 1.23 billion pounds per year, according to SeafoodSource.com. The majority of these imports come from various locations in Asia – places like Thailand, China, Vietnam, India, and Malaysia. While these countries might be able to supply lots of shrimp at cheap prices to the U.S. and other countries where demand is high, it was found that these shrimp farms are not nearly as eco-friendly or sustainable as one would hope.

In his 2008 book, Bottomfeeder: How to Eat Ethically in a World of Vanishing Seafood, author Taras Grescoe examined the Asian operations that supply our shrimp. He claims, “The simple fact is, if you’re eating cheap shrimp today, it almost certainly comes from a turbid, pesticide- and antibiotic-filled, virus-laden pond in the tropical climes of one of the world’s poorest nations.”

In a 2011 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office regarding imported seafood, it is said, “About half of the seafood imported into the U.S. comes from farmed fish (aquaculture). Fish grown in confined aquacultured areas can have bacterial infections, which may require farmers to use drugs like antibiotics. The residues of some drugs can cause cancer and antibiotic resistance.”

Not only are health standards in some of these countries a concern, but in order to create a shrimp farm, sometimes native mangroves need to be cleared and privatized – which displaces locals, removes their access to fishing areas, and of course, is terrible for the environment. A new study from J. Boone Kauffman, a University of Oregon researcher, points out that mangroves are important carbon sinks, meaning they store carbon from the atmosphere in their flora and water. By destroying these habitats, the carbon that would be contained is then released into the atmosphere – clearly a problem when it comes to global warming. That is not to mention the native wildlife that is also affected from the clearing of these areas.

In his study, Kauffman estimated that 50% to 60% of shrimp farms are built on cleared mangrove areas, and the resulting shrimp produced from these farms have a carbon footprint 10 times higher than beef from cows raised on cleared Amazon rainforest, when taking all the of impacts into consideration. What Kauffman further revealed was that the shrimp farms are only useful for about 5 years before sludge and acidic soil buildup makes them unfit for production.

I bet you are thinking, “So what can I eat??” Well, it’s not that you can’t or shouldn’t eat any shrimp, but definitely try to be more aware of where your shrimp is coming from. The Monterey Bay Aquarium has a great program in place for people to find out about which type of seafood is sustainable – or at least, more environmentally responsible – called Seafood Watch. You can check out shrimp specific guidelines here. It might not be so easy to refer to these lists when eating out, particularly if the restaurant doesn’t know where their shrimp comes from. However, when making purchases at a grocery store, take a few extra moments to check these lists – there is even a Seafood Watch application that can be downloaded right to your smart phone!

Shrimp Image via Shutterstock

Mangrove Image via Shutterstock

I remember the day my roommate spotted the first cockroach in our apartment. I also remember the day she spotted a second cockroach and the day after that when I spotted the third and fourth.  My roommate, who unlike me, is terrified by bugs was willing to do anything to make the roaches go away, so we called a local extermination service for a consultation. The exterminator told us that based on our description of the roaches look and their size that they were most likely coming in from outside and he suggested we get door lining to prevent the roaches from coming into our house and would do a light spraying for good measure. I wasn’t very happy about the spraying but my roommate really wanted it done. Could there be a better way to have handled the situation without spraying chemicals in my apartment? Yes there is, and it’s called Integrated Pest Management or IPM for short.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency IPM is “an effective and environmentally sensitive approach to pest management that relies on a combination of common-sense practices. IPM programs use current, comprehensive information on the life cycles of pests and their interaction with the environment. This information, in combination with available pest control methods, is used to manage pest damage by the most economical means, and with the least possible hazard to people, property, and the environment.”

The EPA divides IPM into four major components:

1. Setting Action Thresholds

Sighting a single pest does not necessarily mean pest control actions need to be taken. Before taking action it is important to first decide upon action thresholds, the point at which pest populations or environmental conditions indicate actions are needed due to economic of health threat.

2. Monitor and Identify Pests

Monitoring and identification of pests provides the information needed to follow the predetermined action thresholds. One type of pest management action might not be appropriate appropriate for all pests in all situations, so  it is important to correctly identify the pest and the magnitude of infestation.

3. Prevention

Prevention is the first line of defense against infestation whether in your home, lawn, or garden. Prevention tactics can be culturally based or structurally based. Some easy examples of prevention measures for the home include keeping food sealed and regularly talking out the garbage.

4. Control

Control measures should be taken if monitoring, identification, and action thresholds indicate that pest control is required.  Targeted, less risky, control measures should be tried first. If the targeted control measures seem not to be working and action thresholds continue to be met targeted spraying of pesticides could be tried. Non-specific pesticides should only be used as last resort.

A recent study published in the Journal of Integrated Pest Management found that there were significant benefits to implementing IPM. The study began in 2003, when the University of Florida’s Department of Housing and Residence Education implemented an IPM program in campus residence halls, and lasted through 2008. Results of the study found the use of active pesticide ingredients were reduced by over 90 percent.

If I could take it back I would not have let the exterminators spray my apartment. Instead I should have put out some sticky traps in order to see if we really did have an infestation worthy of pesticides. Pesticides are known to have detrimental effects not only to the environment but also on human health. The use of IPM strategies gives people control over their pest situation while at the same time reduces the risks caused by pesticide use.

For more information on Household practice of IPM: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/controlling/index.htm

Screaming Lady image via jayforde.com

Funny Roach image via Shutterstock

If you’ve ever been to the doctor, you surely are familiar with the questionnaires given to you when you first arrive – those which ask about your medical history, medications, and any current health issues. Some questionnaires even ask you to rate your own health, a seemingly subjective question. Researchers at The University of Zurich have noted that how you answer this question is actually a good indication of your probability of survival and death. Depending on your attitude, you may or may not have a more likely chance of getting sick and surviving (or not surviving) illness. People who rate their health as poor have an overall unhealthier lifestyle than those who rate it higher.

The researchers from the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Zurich found with a recent study, that your attitude and opinion toward your own health can determine long-term issues as well as immediate and short term health. Your self-rated health can be linked to the probability of survival or death over a period of more than thirty years.

According to the study, men who rated their health as “very poor” were found to be 3.3 times more likely to die of illness than men of the same age who gave themselves an “excellent” rating. For women, those who identified their health as “very poor” were 1.9 times more likely to die from illness than those who said it was “excellent”. Environmental factors and lifestyle choices were also taken into consideration – education level, marital status, smoking, blood pressure and glucose levels – yet these risk factors only had a small effect on the correlation between health rating and mortality levels.

“Our results indicate that people who rate their state of health as excellent have attributes that improve and sustain their health,” says Dr. David Fäh, a doctor, scientist and lecturer at the University of Zurich, “these might include a positive attitude, an optimistic outlook and a fundamental level of satisfaction with one’s own life.”

The World Health Organization (WHO) has long suggested that health is the physical, mental, and social wellbeing of a person, not just the presence or absence of disease. Positive attitudes towards our health and optimism in life cancertainly influence our susceptibility to illness, recovery likelihood and time, and stress levels.

The Mayo Clinic points out that positive thinking can have various health benefits including:

• Increased life span
• Lower rates of depression
• Lower levels of distress
• Greater resistance to the common cold
• Better psychological and physical well-being
• Reduced risk of death from cardiovascular disease
• Better coping skills during hardships and times of stress

The lesson? Try to stay positive – think of the best case scenario rather than the worst. Of course, we can’t always be thrilled about what is going on in our lives, especially during difficult times or when challenges arise – but making an effort to keep in mind that a good attitude makes it easier to get through illness or stress and surrounding yourself with positive people and healthy habits – can make the process a little easier.

For more information and contacts on the research done in Zurich, visit EurekAlert.

Survey Image via Shutterstock

Chalkboard Image via Shutterstock

Who knew that social media could be beneficial for adolescents? According to a new study

by University of Haifa, Israel researchers, teenagers who blog to express their feelings and emotions is therapeutic for children ages 13-17. Psychology professors Meyran Boniel-Nissim and Azy Barak have found that a teenager writing a publicly-viewed blog on the internet is more effective for relieving stress rather than keeping a private diary. The study, published in the journal Psychological Services, supports the long-backed notion that expressing one’s self through writing can be therapeutic.

To conduct the research, Boniel-Nissim and Barak randomly selected Israeli high school students who displayed a certain degree of stress. The teenagers were then divided into six groups. Two groups were asked to post blogs twice a week about their social difficulties, but only one of them were to have opened the blogs for comments. The next set of groups were also asked to blog twice a week post about whatever was going on in their mind, again with one group allowing comments. The two control groups were asked to keep an old-fashioned private diary.

The researchers then collected the blog posts and diaries to discuss the adolescents’ emotional and social position. From the research, they saw that the greatest improvement in mood was with the bloggers who wrote about their personal troubles, and allowed people to interact with their posts. The research also noted that the comments were mostly positive and constructive. Boniel-Nissim and Barak said that the commenters’ interactions helped the bloggers while they were distressed. The conclusive research notes that expressing yourself on the internet not only lets others know what is personally going on with you, but also helps you figure out some things about yourself too.