The oil’s vanishing act is a comforting thought but a false one. While some media subtly shift the meaning of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) official numbers, we’ve been thinking you would appreciate a straightforward breakdown. … Read ahead
Source: blog.joingreenrevolution.com
Latest at blog.joingreenrevolution.com
- Where did all the oil in the Gulf go? Not as far as the media spin
- Energy Efficiency then, if we will not agree on anything else.
- Say Goodbye to Our Best Chance for a Green Revolution
- Green Revolution stands by One Water’s Cable TV Premiere
- Boosting Green Technologies – How a Cap-N-Trade bill would affect you
- Green Innovations… The Supply vs. Demand Impasse
- Water Saving Ideas Now! How Access to Water affects Sanitation
The federal government has thrown its weight behind plans to field a novel weapon – the American appetite – in a bid to halt the spread of the voracious and invasive lionfish. Like Tribbles proliferating in the holds of the Starship Enterprise, lionfish have spread throughout the Caribbean and along the Atlantic Coast in recent years, most recently invading critical reef habitat off the Florida Keys. The non-native fish, with their “manes” of venom-tipped spines, have no natural predators in these waters. They eat indiscriminately — consuming some 56 species of fish and many invertebrate species — and reproduce rapidly. This has prompted scientists to turn to an equally ravenous species to control the beautiful pest. “The only way to really help the reefs is to actually get people interested in fishing for lionfish,” says Renata Lana, a spokeswoman for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which just launched an “Eat Lionfish” campaign. “In fact they are quite delicious fish.” Lionfish, also called turkey, scorpion or fire fish, are not considered food by residents of the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific, their native habitat. They were kept as exotic pets in the United States for years, and researchers say it was probably someone in the aquarium trade who first freed lionfish into the Atlantic near Florida, where they were first spotted in the mid-1980s. Since then, there has been a population explosion. A single female produces about 2 million eggs a year, and hatchlings become sexually mature in about one year, said James Morris, ecologist at … 
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the "vast majority" of the 4.9 million barrels released into the Gulf has either evaporated "or been burned, skimmed, and recovered from the wellhead, or dispersed." … 
Land and ocean temperatures for the period of January to June were the hottest seen since record-keeping began in 1880, according to an analysis released July 15 by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The average temperature for the first half of 2010 was 57.5 degrees Fahrenheit (14.2 degrees Celsius)—about 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit (0.7 degrees Celsius) above the 20th-century average. Nine countries shattered heat records, including … 
Wednesday, citing a new comprehensive review of the last decade of climate data. Without addressing why this is happening, the researchers said there was no doubt that every decade on Earth since the 1980s has been hotter than the previous one, and that the planet has been warming for the last half-century. This confirms the findings of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which reported in 2007 with 90 percent certainty that climate change is occurring. The IPCC also said that human activities contribute to this phenomenon. The new report was released after U.S. Senate Democrats delayed any possible legislation to curb climate change until September at the earliest. Prospects for U.S. climate change legislation this year are considered slim. Released by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as “The 2009 State of the Climate Report,” the new report draws on the work of 303 scientists from 48 countries, including data from last year. The 10 key planet-wide indicators of a warming climate identified by the report are: — Higher temperatures over land — Higher temperatures over oceans — Higher ocean heat content — Higher near-surface air temperatures (temperatures in the troposphere, where Earth’s … 
The past decade was the hottest recorded, part of an unequivocal pattern of warming dating back 50 years, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report declared on Wednesday. … 
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Oil giant BP Plc rejected a request from Texas for a $25 million cash advance to clean up shorelines sullied by the Gulf oil spill, and got a scathing response from top Texas officials, according to letters given to Reuters on Thursday. BP denied a July 5 request from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott for a $25 million "block grant," similar to cash advances for clean up that BP gave to all other Gulf Coast states, the letter from BP to Abbott showed. While BP will not grant the cash advance, it promised to pay Texas for clean-up costs as they arise, and pledged $5 million for the Texas Coastal Protection Fund, which is meant for oil spill responses. Some tar balls linked to BP's Gulf of Mexico spill have hit Texas shores, although damage has so far been small compared to widespread fouling of beaches in other Gulf states. The BP letter, dated July 12, was given to Reuters by Abbott's office. In a scathing response letter, dated July 22, Texas Governor Rick Perry and Attorney General Abbott urged BP to advance more clean-up funds quickly. "BP has taken steps to ensure every other Gulf Coast state is prepared to respond, yet you shortchange the state in which you have chosen to domicile – and whose beaches you threaten with tar balls," reads one passage of the response letter given to Reuters. London-based BP has its U.S. headquarters in Houston and holds billions of dollars in Texas assets. In another passage, Governor Perry, a Republican, tells BP executive Doug Suttles that "you are essentially asking Texas to just trust you." BP did not immediately return phone calls or emails requesting comment on the letters. The company said in its letter to Abbott that Texas shores may face only "the occasional random scattering of tar balls," citing an estimate from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Chemical analysis of sludgy tar balls found at McFadden Beach near Port Arthur, Texas, showed the oil was from BP's spill. BP has paid around $4 billion so far to respond to the massive spill caused by its Gulf of Mexico oil well blowout on April 20. The company has provided "block grant" advances of $50 million to other states affected by the spill. "BP contends that Texas' request for financial assistance to defend its Gulf Coast is "premature" and that BP "expects" that any risk to Texas is "limited," Perry and Abbott wrote. "These predictions about the future are entitled to no weight, and offer no comfort to Texans impacted by the spill," they added. BP has received more than 100,000 oil spill claims so far. According to Perry's letter to BP, more than 4,400 are from Texas, and BP has paid out more than $5 million to Texas claimants. (Editing by David Gregorio) … 
HOUSTON – Faced with hundreds of lawsuits and a deep need for experts, BP has been offering some Gulf Coast scientists lucrative consulting contracts that bar them from releasing their findings on the company’s massive oil spill for three years. Some scientists say the contracts constrain academic freedom. A few signed the agreements, then changed their minds. And others argue BP’s contract is standard, and with little federal funding available to study the spill’s impact, Gulf Coast researchers have few other options. “I personally wouldn’t care to have my research limited, but if I wanted to do work on the spill and this was the only way I could get out there and get working on it, I don’t think there’s a lot of alternatives,” said Chris D’Elia, dean of the Louisiana State University School of the Coast and Environment. BP confirms hiring more than a dozen scientists who have Gulf Coast expertise to assist with hundreds of lawsuits and assess the environmental damage caused by the spill. “What we have asked is that they treat information from BP’s lawyers as confidential, as is customary,” said David Nicholas, a BP spokesman in London. “But we do not take the position that environmental data is confidential and we do not place restrictions on academics speaking about scientific data.” Still, American Association of University Professors President Cary Nelson said the three-year limitation could suppress information key to restoring the environment. “Many scientists are turning down these contracts because they feel this research needs to be shared with the public, it needs to be shared with the government,” said Nelson, whose group represents about 48,000 academics. Researchers are asked to sign similar contracts with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the federal agency charged with tracking the oil and assessing the damage. Also in the mix is a hesitance to be associated with the company that’s responsible for around 184 million gallons of oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico. “Setting aside any good intentions, the idea of being affiliated with BP was not a good thing,” said Joe Griffitt, a scientist at the Gulf Coast Research Marine Lab at the University of Southern Mississippi, who initially signed a deal with BP, then changed his mind. In the end, each side will try to get as many experts on their team as possible, removing knowledge from the public domain, said Mark Davis, director of the Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy at Tulane Law School in New Orleans. “That’s not wrong. Those are the rules of the game,” he said. “It’s the survival of a company, the survival of a crucial industry is at stake in a vital market area. This is serious business.” ___ Schwartz reported from Los Angeles. …