Suncor Energy Inc. today announced the release of its web-based 2009 Report on Sustainability - a comprehensive review of the company’s environmental, social and economic performance for the past twoyears.
The seventh biennial report, entitled ’Seeing the Possibilities in a Changing World,’ profiles Suncor’s progress on a wide range of sustainability objectives. For the first time, the report outlines performance goals aimed at reducing the company’s environmental footprint.
"The theme of our report is timely," says Rick George, president and chief executive officer. "Suncor has always been about seeing possibilities when others saw only problems and obstacles. Through our focus on operational excellence, we’re targeting improvements in every aspect of our business. And, with the goals outlined in the report, we’re working hard to produce energy required to fuel our economy in a way that is socially beneficial and preserves a healthy environment."Suncor has set the following company-wide environmental performance goals in relation to its existing assets:- Reduce water intake by 12 percent by 2015- Increase land area reclaimed by 100 percent by 2015- Improve energy efficiency by 10 percent by 2015- Reduce current air emissions by 10 percent by 2015All of the proposed reductions are absolute, except for energy efficiency, which is intensity based (energy used per unit of production). While the goals will require significant financial and human resources, Suncor plans to achieve them even while targeting production growth.
The Report on Sustainability also serves as Suncor’s 15th annual Climate Change report, documenting the company’s progress in managing greenhouse gas emissions using its seven-point climate change action plan. The action plan includes developing renewable energy sources and participating in public policy discussions. As part of its sustainability commitment, the company plans to align its current greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy to address emerging climate change policies by 2010.Suncor’s Report on Sustainability also provides historical performance trends in a number of key areas. Performance highlights include: - A 22 percent reduction in absolute water use over the past six years.- Reclamation of more than 1,000 hectares of land.- A reduction in GHG emissions intensity at its oil sands plant by 45 percent compared to 1990 levels.- A reduction in the frequency of Suncor employee and contractor lost-time injuries by two thirds and a 50 percent reduction in the frequency of recordable injuries.- Investment of $24.9 million in 2007 and 2008 by Suncor and the SuncorEnergy Foundation in hundreds of charitable organizations and non-profit groups.- Over $13 billion in capital spending in 2007 and 2008. Suncor’s supply chain spending reached all ten provinces and the Northwest Territories.- Achieving a $1 billion spending milestone in Aboriginal goods and services, including $367 million in 2007 and 2008.- $2.6 billion in royalty payments to the Alberta government. An additional $2 billion was paid in property and excise taxes to all three levels of government.Suncor compiled the 2009 Report on Sustainability in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative G3 Guidelines - an internationally recognized standard in sustainability reporting. As in previous years, an independent third party verified a number of performance indicators. Suncor also enlisted the guidance of Ceres, a network of investors, labour, environmental, and other public interest groups in developing the report.
The web-based report, which incorporates text articles, photos, data tables, charts, graphs, and videos of Suncor leaders and stakeholders, as well as a summary pdf document, is now available at www.suncor.com/sustainability
Monday, June 22, 2009
Google Earth to map climate change over next 50 years
Millions of Google Earth users around the world will be able to see how climate change could affect the planet and its people over the next century, along with viewing the loss of Antarctic ice shelves over the last 50 years, thanks to a new project launched today.The project, Climate Change in Our World, is the product of a collaboration between Google, the UK Government, the Met Office Hadley Centre and the British Antarctic Survey to provide two new 'layers', or animations, available to all users of Google Earth. It was launched by Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the Google Zeitgeist conference today.One animation uses world leading climate science from the UK's Met Office Hadley Centre to show world temperatures throughout the next hundred years under medium projections of greenhouse gas emissions, along with stories of how people in the UK and in some of the world's poorest countries are already being affected by changing weather patterns.Users can also access information on action that can be taken by individuals, communities, businesses and governments to tackle climate change, and highlights good work already underway.Another animation, developed by the British Antarctic Survey, show the retreat of Antarctic ice caps since the 1950s, and features facts about climate change science and impacts in the Antarctic.Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said: "Climate change is redrawing the map of the world. Unless we act, its impacts will be felt everywhere, as sea levels rise, crops fail, extreme weather increases and more areas are at risk of drought and flooding."This project shows people the reality of climate change using estimates of both the change in the average temperature where they live, and the impact it will have on people's lives all over the world, including here in Britain."By helping people to understand what climate change means for them and for the world we can mobilise the commitment we need to avoid the worst effects by taking action now."International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander said: "Climate change is happening and it is the world's poorest who are facing the greatest threat."Now, for the first time, Google Earth maps allow us to see first hand accounts of poor people coming to terms with everything from floods and droughts to melting glaciers. Amidst the massive impact on the world's environment the initiative highlights the personal costs to people least able to withstand the changes."Global action is needed to cut emissions and help communities adapt to changing weather patterns. It can be done - and the lives of those in poverty depend upon the world taking bold action."Met Office Chief Executive John Hirst said: "Climate change is arguably one of the biggest issues facing the world today."Merging the Met Office's unparalleled climate science expertise with the exciting technology of Google Earth is a great way of bringing the impacts of a warming world to life."British Antarctic Survey Director Professor Nick Owens said: "This is a fantastic opportunity to use the power of Google Earth technology to engage people all over the world in the importance and relevance of Antarctica in the climate change story."Ed Parsons, Geospatial technologist at Google, said: "Google Earth brings stories to life and opens up their reach to a limitless number of potential users."We are really excited about the work of the UK Government and its partners to raise the profile of climate change impacts on a global scale."The project is currently a snapshot of some of the recent scientific information about climate change and its impacts. The partners in the project will be looking to develop these ideas further in the future, preferably with additional partners.
Google searches generate 1,400 tonnes of CO2 daily: report
A normal Google search on a desktop computer generates about seven gm of carbon, nearly half the amount of CO2 a kettle generates while it reaches boiling point, reports quoting researchers at the Harward University said.
Considering that Google handles around 200 million searches a day, this would amount to releasing 1,400 tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere each day, The Times, London said in report on the `Environmental Impact of Google Searches', published in its Sunday edition.
The report is based on research report by Harward researcher Alex Wissner-Gross, who has submitted it for publication by the US Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The researcher has also set up a website called `www.CO2stats.com'.
The report said the carbon impact of the searches come from the enormous power that Google consumes. "Google operates huge data centres around the world that consume a great deal of power," adding that Google seldom reveals the number of its centers or the amount of power it consumes.
Overall, the report said, the IT industry generates about two per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions – equivalent to the total greenhouse gases generated by the world's airlines - according to a recent study by research firm Gartner.
Google, a member of a new group called `Climate Savers Computing Initiative', however, refutes the findings.
Google says the CO2 figure in the research report by Alex Wissner-Gross is "many times too high" and is too inflated. "In terms of greenhouse gases, one Google search is equivalent to about 0.2 gm of CO2," it added.
"We have designed and built the most energy efficient data centers in the world, which means the energy used per Google search is minimal. In fact, in the time it takes to do a Google search, your own personal computer will use more energy than Google uses to answer your query," Google said.
Larry Brilliant, executive director of Google, heads the search giant's efforts to fight global warming that aims to reduce computing power consumption by half by 2010.
The organisation is encouraging member companies, including Google, to turn off computers that are not in use. The organisation has targeted reducing carbon releases equivalent of that generated by 11 million cars on the road.
The Google-led not-for-profit organisation has also made a number of recommendations on how to reduce US coal and oil use for electricity generation by 2030.
Google chief executive Eric Schmidt, an adviser to president-elect Barack Obama, has also called on the US government to show the political will to foster clean-technology.
Schmidt said Google itself plans to invest more in solar, wind and geothermal energy projects.
Considering that Google handles around 200 million searches a day, this would amount to releasing 1,400 tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere each day, The Times, London said in report on the `Environmental Impact of Google Searches', published in its Sunday edition.
The report is based on research report by Harward researcher Alex Wissner-Gross, who has submitted it for publication by the US Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The researcher has also set up a website called `www.CO2stats.com'.
The report said the carbon impact of the searches come from the enormous power that Google consumes. "Google operates huge data centres around the world that consume a great deal of power," adding that Google seldom reveals the number of its centers or the amount of power it consumes.
Overall, the report said, the IT industry generates about two per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions – equivalent to the total greenhouse gases generated by the world's airlines - according to a recent study by research firm Gartner.
Google, a member of a new group called `Climate Savers Computing Initiative', however, refutes the findings.
Google says the CO2 figure in the research report by Alex Wissner-Gross is "many times too high" and is too inflated. "In terms of greenhouse gases, one Google search is equivalent to about 0.2 gm of CO2," it added.
"We have designed and built the most energy efficient data centers in the world, which means the energy used per Google search is minimal. In fact, in the time it takes to do a Google search, your own personal computer will use more energy than Google uses to answer your query," Google said.
Larry Brilliant, executive director of Google, heads the search giant's efforts to fight global warming that aims to reduce computing power consumption by half by 2010.
The organisation is encouraging member companies, including Google, to turn off computers that are not in use. The organisation has targeted reducing carbon releases equivalent of that generated by 11 million cars on the road.
The Google-led not-for-profit organisation has also made a number of recommendations on how to reduce US coal and oil use for electricity generation by 2030.
Google chief executive Eric Schmidt, an adviser to president-elect Barack Obama, has also called on the US government to show the political will to foster clean-technology.
Schmidt said Google itself plans to invest more in solar, wind and geothermal energy projects.
Are Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs Good for the Environment?
Almost every news story about global warming recommends that consumers switch from incandescent light bulbs to more efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs, or CFLs.
But are CFLs really that good for the environment?
Incandescent light bulbs use electricity to heat a filament to a white-hot state, producing light. Yet 90 percent of the energy used is wasted as heat, according to General Electric's Web site.
Compact fluorescent light bulbs use electricity to excite gas within a glass tube. The gas fluoresces, producing ultraviolet light which the human eye cannot see. This UV light then reacts with mercury and a phosphorescent chemical compound inside the tube to create visible light.
Because CFL bulbs do not use heat as the lighting mechanism, less energy is spent to create an equivalent amount of light.
• Click here to visit FOXBusiness.com's Energy Center.
The packaging of an N:Vision-brand CFL bulb purchased at Home Depot, for example, states that it uses only 14 watts to produce the same amount of light, as measured in lumens, as a 60-watt incandescent bulb.
Related
Stories
Whatever Happened to Wave Energy?
Pentagon Working on Solar-Powered Satellite Engines
Far-Out Ideas Could Provide Solutions to World's Energy Crisis
Pentagon Report: Let's Put Solar Power Collectors in Orbit
/**/
This decreased demand for electricity reduces the need for electrical generation, which environmentalists point out reduces emissions from coal-fired plants.
In February, Australia announced a nationwide ban on incandescent bulbs, which will go into effect in 2010. The country's environment minister said the move will cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 800,000 tons by 2012, according to Reuters.
But this assumes that Australians will significantly reduce their current levels of electrical consumption.
What if a consumer who has a $100 monthly electric bill reduces it to $50 by installing CFLs, but then leaves the new lights on longer, because he's already accustomed to paying $100 per month?
The consumer would be using less raw electricity than before, but not that much less.
"Sometimes when you cut the cost of things, people use more of them," said James S. Shortle, professor of environmental economics at Penn State University.
"People have a certain lighting requirement," said Shortle, and they would be happy to fulfill that need more cheaply.
He suggested that people probably would not turn on their lights more often. "What they might not do is turn them off."
Manufacturers, meanwhile, tout the savings to consumers in reduced electrical costs over the lifetime of the CFL bulb.
The 14-watt N:Vision states on the packaging that it will save the buyer $46 over its lifetime. How did the manufacturer arrive at that number?
CFL makers claim the bulbs have lifetimes of 10,000 hours each, whereas most equivalent 60-watt incandescent bulbs last 1,000 hours.
Based on a rate of $0.10 per kilowatt-hour, a CFL costs $14 to power over its lifetime. The consumer would go through 10 incandescent bulbs in that time, costing a total of $60. Hence, a difference of $46 in electric costs per light fixture.
Since CFLs last longer than incandescents, consumers have to buy fewer bulbs for their fixtures, but here the cost savings are trivial.
At $3.97 for a four-pack of N:Visions versus $1.04 for four Philips incandescents, and assuming 10 incandescents used for every CFL used, a consumer opting for the N:Vision would save about $1.60 per fixture in addition to the electricity conserved.
You won't save a lot of scratch on the bulbs themselves, but at least you'll spend less time changing them.
But what about any drawbacks to CFLs?
CFLs don't operate well in frigid conditions, limiting their use for exterior lighting in cold areas.
According to a spokeswoman from Philips Lighting, most CFLs require a minimum starting temperature of minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit; below that, it's difficult for the bulb's reaction process to begin.
Other problems in cold temps include reduced light output and a pinkish glow, rather than the desirable "soft white" (actually faintly yellow) color.
Those problems alone may make nationwide bans on incandescent bulbs impractical in parts of the United States. Winter temperatures in Australia's southernmost state of Tasmania average 52 degrees Fahrenheit, but Minnesota spends most of its winters between 6 and 16 degrees F.
The bigger problem with CFLs is their mercury content.
Along with the phosphor, which can be one or many of several chemical compounds, mercury helps shift the invisible UV light into the visible part of the spectrum.
The National Electrical Manufacturers Association, or NEMA, which sets voluntary industry standards, suggests that CFLs of 25 watts or less — the equivalent of a 100-watt incandescent bulb — contain no more than 5 milligrams of mercury, the size of the tip of a ballpoint pen.
Both CFL manufacturers and the Environmental Protection Agency recommend recycling CFL bulbs, since breaking or incinerating them releases mercury into the air. The poisonous metal can then find its way into soil, water, fish and fish-eating humans.
Sites such as epa.gov/bulbrecycling, lamprecycle.org and earth911.org offer information about where CFLs can be recycled, and certain retailers such as IKEA accept used CFLs for recycling.
Should you break out the hazmat suit if you break a CFL at home? The EPA offers a checklist at epa.gov/mercury that suggests you leave the room for 15 minutes, then return to sweep up and double-bag the mess — and not to vacuum unless absolutely necessary.
So handle with care, lest you end up like Brandy Bridges of Prospect, Maine, who broke a CFL bulb in her daughter's room in March and was told that professional environmental cleaning would cost about $2,000.
According to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Bridges was concerned about any amount of mercury in her house, even at levels far below the state hazard threshold. (Hazardous levels were found on an area of carpet "the size of a dinner plate.")
It was in response to her "nervousness" that the DEP responder who came to her house recommended the cleanup service.
Two months after the incident, state DEP officials came back and found no mercury hazard. Even so, they removed the piece of carpet — which Bridges had planned to take up even before the bulb was broken — at her request.
• Click here for the Maine DEP's account of the events (pdf).
In the meantime, manufacturers are racing for bragging rights to the CFL with the lowest mercury content. Philips says that it sells 19 CFL products at Wal-Mart that contain 40 percent to 60 percent less mercury than the suggested NEMA level of 5 milligrams.
Whether decreases in power-plant emissions are offset by people releasing mercury into the environment by disposing of their CFLs improperly remains to be seen.
One thing's for sure: Using compact fluorescent light bulbs makes sense for anyone paying an electric bill — and who doesn't have butterfingers.
But are CFLs really that good for the environment?
Incandescent light bulbs use electricity to heat a filament to a white-hot state, producing light. Yet 90 percent of the energy used is wasted as heat, according to General Electric's Web site.
Compact fluorescent light bulbs use electricity to excite gas within a glass tube. The gas fluoresces, producing ultraviolet light which the human eye cannot see. This UV light then reacts with mercury and a phosphorescent chemical compound inside the tube to create visible light.
Because CFL bulbs do not use heat as the lighting mechanism, less energy is spent to create an equivalent amount of light.
• Click here to visit FOXBusiness.com's Energy Center.
The packaging of an N:Vision-brand CFL bulb purchased at Home Depot, for example, states that it uses only 14 watts to produce the same amount of light, as measured in lumens, as a 60-watt incandescent bulb.
Related
Stories
Whatever Happened to Wave Energy?
Pentagon Working on Solar-Powered Satellite Engines
Far-Out Ideas Could Provide Solutions to World's Energy Crisis
Pentagon Report: Let's Put Solar Power Collectors in Orbit
/**/
This decreased demand for electricity reduces the need for electrical generation, which environmentalists point out reduces emissions from coal-fired plants.
In February, Australia announced a nationwide ban on incandescent bulbs, which will go into effect in 2010. The country's environment minister said the move will cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 800,000 tons by 2012, according to Reuters.
But this assumes that Australians will significantly reduce their current levels of electrical consumption.
What if a consumer who has a $100 monthly electric bill reduces it to $50 by installing CFLs, but then leaves the new lights on longer, because he's already accustomed to paying $100 per month?
The consumer would be using less raw electricity than before, but not that much less.
"Sometimes when you cut the cost of things, people use more of them," said James S. Shortle, professor of environmental economics at Penn State University.
"People have a certain lighting requirement," said Shortle, and they would be happy to fulfill that need more cheaply.
He suggested that people probably would not turn on their lights more often. "What they might not do is turn them off."
Manufacturers, meanwhile, tout the savings to consumers in reduced electrical costs over the lifetime of the CFL bulb.
The 14-watt N:Vision states on the packaging that it will save the buyer $46 over its lifetime. How did the manufacturer arrive at that number?
CFL makers claim the bulbs have lifetimes of 10,000 hours each, whereas most equivalent 60-watt incandescent bulbs last 1,000 hours.
Based on a rate of $0.10 per kilowatt-hour, a CFL costs $14 to power over its lifetime. The consumer would go through 10 incandescent bulbs in that time, costing a total of $60. Hence, a difference of $46 in electric costs per light fixture.
Since CFLs last longer than incandescents, consumers have to buy fewer bulbs for their fixtures, but here the cost savings are trivial.
At $3.97 for a four-pack of N:Visions versus $1.04 for four Philips incandescents, and assuming 10 incandescents used for every CFL used, a consumer opting for the N:Vision would save about $1.60 per fixture in addition to the electricity conserved.
You won't save a lot of scratch on the bulbs themselves, but at least you'll spend less time changing them.
But what about any drawbacks to CFLs?
CFLs don't operate well in frigid conditions, limiting their use for exterior lighting in cold areas.
According to a spokeswoman from Philips Lighting, most CFLs require a minimum starting temperature of minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit; below that, it's difficult for the bulb's reaction process to begin.
Other problems in cold temps include reduced light output and a pinkish glow, rather than the desirable "soft white" (actually faintly yellow) color.
Those problems alone may make nationwide bans on incandescent bulbs impractical in parts of the United States. Winter temperatures in Australia's southernmost state of Tasmania average 52 degrees Fahrenheit, but Minnesota spends most of its winters between 6 and 16 degrees F.
The bigger problem with CFLs is their mercury content.
Along with the phosphor, which can be one or many of several chemical compounds, mercury helps shift the invisible UV light into the visible part of the spectrum.
The National Electrical Manufacturers Association, or NEMA, which sets voluntary industry standards, suggests that CFLs of 25 watts or less — the equivalent of a 100-watt incandescent bulb — contain no more than 5 milligrams of mercury, the size of the tip of a ballpoint pen.
Both CFL manufacturers and the Environmental Protection Agency recommend recycling CFL bulbs, since breaking or incinerating them releases mercury into the air. The poisonous metal can then find its way into soil, water, fish and fish-eating humans.
Sites such as epa.gov/bulbrecycling, lamprecycle.org and earth911.org offer information about where CFLs can be recycled, and certain retailers such as IKEA accept used CFLs for recycling.
Should you break out the hazmat suit if you break a CFL at home? The EPA offers a checklist at epa.gov/mercury that suggests you leave the room for 15 minutes, then return to sweep up and double-bag the mess — and not to vacuum unless absolutely necessary.
So handle with care, lest you end up like Brandy Bridges of Prospect, Maine, who broke a CFL bulb in her daughter's room in March and was told that professional environmental cleaning would cost about $2,000.
According to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Bridges was concerned about any amount of mercury in her house, even at levels far below the state hazard threshold. (Hazardous levels were found on an area of carpet "the size of a dinner plate.")
It was in response to her "nervousness" that the DEP responder who came to her house recommended the cleanup service.
Two months after the incident, state DEP officials came back and found no mercury hazard. Even so, they removed the piece of carpet — which Bridges had planned to take up even before the bulb was broken — at her request.
• Click here for the Maine DEP's account of the events (pdf).
In the meantime, manufacturers are racing for bragging rights to the CFL with the lowest mercury content. Philips says that it sells 19 CFL products at Wal-Mart that contain 40 percent to 60 percent less mercury than the suggested NEMA level of 5 milligrams.
Whether decreases in power-plant emissions are offset by people releasing mercury into the environment by disposing of their CFLs improperly remains to be seen.
One thing's for sure: Using compact fluorescent light bulbs makes sense for anyone paying an electric bill — and who doesn't have butterfingers.
Green tea may affect prostate cancer progression
According to results of a study published in Cancer Prevention Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, men with prostate cancer who consumed the active compounds in green tea demonstrated a significant reduction in serum markers predictive of prostate cancer progression.
"The investigational agent used in the trial, Polyphenon E (provided by Polyphenon Pharma) may have the potential to lower the incidence and slow the progression of prostate cancer," said James A. Cardelli, Ph.D., professor and director of basic and translational research in the Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, LSU Health Sciences Center-Shreveport.
Green tea is the second most popular drink in the world, and some epidemiological studies have shown health benefits with green tea, including a reduced incidence of prostate cancer, according to Cardelli. However, some human trials have found contradictory results. The few trials conducted to date have evaluated the clinical efficacy of green tea consumption and few studies have evaluated the change in biomarkers, which might predict disease progression.
Cardelli and colleagues conducted this open-label, single-arm, phase II clinical trial to determine the effects of short-term supplementation with green tea's active compounds on serum biomarkers in patients with prostate cancer. The biomarkers include hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and prostate specific antigen (PSA). HGF and VEGF are good prognostic indicators of metastatic disease.
The study included 26 men, aged 41 to 72 years, diagnosed with prostate cancer and scheduled for radical prostatectomy. Patients consumed four capsules containing Polyphenon E until the day before surgery — four capsules are equivalent to about 12 cups of normally brewed concentrated green tea, according to Cardelli. The time of study for 25 of the 26 patients ranged from 12 days to 73 days, with a median time of 34.5 days.
Findings showed a significant reduction in serum levels of HGF, VEGF and PSA after treatment, with some patients demonstrating reductions in levels of greater than 30 percent, according to the researchers.
Cardelli and colleagues found that other biomarkers were also positively affected. There were only a few reported side effects associated with this study, and liver function remained normal.
Results of a recent year-long clinical trial conduced by researchers in Italy demonstrated that consumption of green tea polyphenols reduced the risk of developing prostate cancer in men with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN).
"These studies are just the beginning and a lot of work remains to be done, however, we think that the use of tea polyphenols alone or in combination with other compounds currently used for cancer therapy should be explored as an approach to prevent cancer progression and recurrence," Cardelli said.
William G. Nelson, V., M.D., Ph.D., professor of oncology, urology and pharmacology at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center, believes the reduced serum biomarkers of prostate cancer may be attributable to some sort of benefit relating to green tea components.
"Unfortunately, this trial was not a randomized trial, which would have been needed to be more sure that the observed changes were truly attributable to the green tea components and not to some other lifestyle change (better diet, taking vitamins, etc.) men undertook in preparation for surgery," added Nelson, who is also a senior editor for Cancer Prevention Research. However, "this trial is provocative enough to consider a more substantial randomized trial."
In collaboration with Columbia University in New York City, the researchers are currently conducting a comparable trial among patients with breast cancer. They also plan to conduct further studies to identify the factors that could explain why some patients responded more dramatically to Polyphenon E than others. Cardelli suggested that additional controlled clinical trials should be done to see if combinations of different plant polyphenols were more effective than Polyphenon E alone.
"There is reasonably good evidence that many cancers are preventable, and our studies using plant-derived substances support the idea that plant compounds found in a healthy diet can play a role in preventing cancer development and progression," said Cardelli
"The investigational agent used in the trial, Polyphenon E (provided by Polyphenon Pharma) may have the potential to lower the incidence and slow the progression of prostate cancer," said James A. Cardelli, Ph.D., professor and director of basic and translational research in the Feist-Weiller Cancer Center, LSU Health Sciences Center-Shreveport.
Green tea is the second most popular drink in the world, and some epidemiological studies have shown health benefits with green tea, including a reduced incidence of prostate cancer, according to Cardelli. However, some human trials have found contradictory results. The few trials conducted to date have evaluated the clinical efficacy of green tea consumption and few studies have evaluated the change in biomarkers, which might predict disease progression.
Cardelli and colleagues conducted this open-label, single-arm, phase II clinical trial to determine the effects of short-term supplementation with green tea's active compounds on serum biomarkers in patients with prostate cancer. The biomarkers include hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and prostate specific antigen (PSA). HGF and VEGF are good prognostic indicators of metastatic disease.
The study included 26 men, aged 41 to 72 years, diagnosed with prostate cancer and scheduled for radical prostatectomy. Patients consumed four capsules containing Polyphenon E until the day before surgery — four capsules are equivalent to about 12 cups of normally brewed concentrated green tea, according to Cardelli. The time of study for 25 of the 26 patients ranged from 12 days to 73 days, with a median time of 34.5 days.
Findings showed a significant reduction in serum levels of HGF, VEGF and PSA after treatment, with some patients demonstrating reductions in levels of greater than 30 percent, according to the researchers.
Cardelli and colleagues found that other biomarkers were also positively affected. There were only a few reported side effects associated with this study, and liver function remained normal.
Results of a recent year-long clinical trial conduced by researchers in Italy demonstrated that consumption of green tea polyphenols reduced the risk of developing prostate cancer in men with high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN).
"These studies are just the beginning and a lot of work remains to be done, however, we think that the use of tea polyphenols alone or in combination with other compounds currently used for cancer therapy should be explored as an approach to prevent cancer progression and recurrence," Cardelli said.
William G. Nelson, V., M.D., Ph.D., professor of oncology, urology and pharmacology at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center, believes the reduced serum biomarkers of prostate cancer may be attributable to some sort of benefit relating to green tea components.
"Unfortunately, this trial was not a randomized trial, which would have been needed to be more sure that the observed changes were truly attributable to the green tea components and not to some other lifestyle change (better diet, taking vitamins, etc.) men undertook in preparation for surgery," added Nelson, who is also a senior editor for Cancer Prevention Research. However, "this trial is provocative enough to consider a more substantial randomized trial."
In collaboration with Columbia University in New York City, the researchers are currently conducting a comparable trial among patients with breast cancer. They also plan to conduct further studies to identify the factors that could explain why some patients responded more dramatically to Polyphenon E than others. Cardelli suggested that additional controlled clinical trials should be done to see if combinations of different plant polyphenols were more effective than Polyphenon E alone.
"There is reasonably good evidence that many cancers are preventable, and our studies using plant-derived substances support the idea that plant compounds found in a healthy diet can play a role in preventing cancer development and progression," said Cardelli
Pythons Grow Bigger Hearts at Mealtimes
Burmese pythons like a meal they can really get their fangs around, especially since the snakes are known to go half a year or more between meals. That gustatory pause is merely one of pythons' more remarkable adaptations.
New research shows that when the reptiles swallow whole rats, birds, and other prey, the pythons' hearts temporarily grow bigger.Scientists in California say the snakes experience a 40 percent increase in heart muscle mass within 48 hours of feeding. The change enables the pythons to meet the metabolic demands of digesting a meal.
What's more, the process is fully reversible, with the snakes' hearts shrinking back to their original size once feeding ends.
Pythons can offer new insights to understanding heart growth in other species, including humans, according to researchers behind the discovery, which is reported in the current issue of the science journal Nature.
One of the world's largest snakes, the Burmese python can grow as long as 25 feet (7.6 meters) and weigh as much as 200 pounds (90 kilograms). Native to Southeast Asia, it preys on mammals, birds, and other animals, which the reptile swallows whole. But python meals are few and far between.
"These animals have a remarkable ability to shut down their metabolism between meals," said James Hicks, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California, Irvine.
"We currently have 1.5-kilogram [3.3-pound] pythons in the lab that have not eaten for three months and have only lost one to ten grams [four to thirty-five hundredths of an ounce] of weight," noted Hicks, who is also the study's lead author.
But when these reptiles do feed, Hicks added, they often tackle prey that is 50 to 100 percent the size of their own body mass. Such meals require a considerable digestive effort.
"Some investigators have reported as much as a 44-fold increase in metabolism during digestion," Hicks said.
Metabolic Demands
Hicks and his colleagues investigated how Burmese pythons meet the metabolic demands of digestion.
They found that oxygen consumption rose sevenfold in lab pythons after feeding. This was accompanied by an extraordinarily rapid growth in heart size. The snakes' heart ventricle muscle mass (ventricles are the heart's pumping chambers) increased 40 percent in just two days.
The study team was able to link this sudden growth to increased production of a cardiac protein. The protein is associated with cells that enlarge the heart and boost its pumping capacity, a condition known as cardiac hypertrophy.
The researchers say feeding-induced cardiac hypertrophy likely explains why Burmese pythons pump 50 percent more blood per heartbeat while quietly digesting a meal than when slithering at full speed.
Previous studies point to why python hearts need to go into overdrive when these animals digest food. Researchers report livers growing to three times their normal size, intestines doubling in mass, and pancreatic enzyme activity increasing threefold. Such changes within the snake significantly raise the demand for oxygenated blood.
Stephen Secor, a biologist at the University of Alabama in Birmingham, is among those to have studied digestion in pythons. While most carnivores are able chew, tear up, or crush their prey first, snakes "swallow only intact prey and must delegate to the stomach the whole job of breaking [it] down," Secor said.
Yet once a python has finished its meal, its heart quickly returns to its usual size.
Heart Remodeling
Hicks, the University of California ecologist and evolutionary biologist, said that by quickly remodeling their hearts depending on whether they are feeding or fasting, Burmese pythons are able to match their metabolism to their bodily needs.
Hicks said he is unaware of any other animal that is able to do this with such speed.
His lab is currently investigating other reptiles that feed intermittently, including lizards and crocodiles. American alligators, for instance, exhibited a two- to threefold increase in metabolism during digestion. But, Hicks added, "So far, we haven't seen cardiovascular remodeling."
Nevertheless, hearts are known for their ability to adapt to the physiological demands of their owners. Human athletes, for example, often develop cardiac hypertrophy in response to vigorous training routines. Benefits of the condition include lowered heart rates and improved blood circulation.
The difficulty, Hicks said, is in understanding the mechanisms that lead to heart remodeling in humans and other mammals. Such investigations involve complex and highly invasive surgical procedures that could easily result in death.
Hicks and his colleagues propose the Burmese python as an ideal investigative model instead.
August Krogh, the 20th-century Danish physiologist, once wrote, "For a large number of problems there will be some animal of choice, or a few such animals, on which it can be most conveniently studied."
Krogh's approach has been a guiding principle for comparative physiology ever since.
Hicks said if we want to better understand how the human heart is able to remodel itself, we should look no further than the Burmese python.
After all, the reptile can grow its heart in the time it takes to eat its lunch
New research shows that when the reptiles swallow whole rats, birds, and other prey, the pythons' hearts temporarily grow bigger.Scientists in California say the snakes experience a 40 percent increase in heart muscle mass within 48 hours of feeding. The change enables the pythons to meet the metabolic demands of digesting a meal.
What's more, the process is fully reversible, with the snakes' hearts shrinking back to their original size once feeding ends.
Pythons can offer new insights to understanding heart growth in other species, including humans, according to researchers behind the discovery, which is reported in the current issue of the science journal Nature.
One of the world's largest snakes, the Burmese python can grow as long as 25 feet (7.6 meters) and weigh as much as 200 pounds (90 kilograms). Native to Southeast Asia, it preys on mammals, birds, and other animals, which the reptile swallows whole. But python meals are few and far between.
"These animals have a remarkable ability to shut down their metabolism between meals," said James Hicks, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California, Irvine.
"We currently have 1.5-kilogram [3.3-pound] pythons in the lab that have not eaten for three months and have only lost one to ten grams [four to thirty-five hundredths of an ounce] of weight," noted Hicks, who is also the study's lead author.
But when these reptiles do feed, Hicks added, they often tackle prey that is 50 to 100 percent the size of their own body mass. Such meals require a considerable digestive effort.
"Some investigators have reported as much as a 44-fold increase in metabolism during digestion," Hicks said.
Metabolic Demands
Hicks and his colleagues investigated how Burmese pythons meet the metabolic demands of digestion.
They found that oxygen consumption rose sevenfold in lab pythons after feeding. This was accompanied by an extraordinarily rapid growth in heart size. The snakes' heart ventricle muscle mass (ventricles are the heart's pumping chambers) increased 40 percent in just two days.
The study team was able to link this sudden growth to increased production of a cardiac protein. The protein is associated with cells that enlarge the heart and boost its pumping capacity, a condition known as cardiac hypertrophy.
The researchers say feeding-induced cardiac hypertrophy likely explains why Burmese pythons pump 50 percent more blood per heartbeat while quietly digesting a meal than when slithering at full speed.
Previous studies point to why python hearts need to go into overdrive when these animals digest food. Researchers report livers growing to three times their normal size, intestines doubling in mass, and pancreatic enzyme activity increasing threefold. Such changes within the snake significantly raise the demand for oxygenated blood.
Stephen Secor, a biologist at the University of Alabama in Birmingham, is among those to have studied digestion in pythons. While most carnivores are able chew, tear up, or crush their prey first, snakes "swallow only intact prey and must delegate to the stomach the whole job of breaking [it] down," Secor said.
Yet once a python has finished its meal, its heart quickly returns to its usual size.
Heart Remodeling
Hicks, the University of California ecologist and evolutionary biologist, said that by quickly remodeling their hearts depending on whether they are feeding or fasting, Burmese pythons are able to match their metabolism to their bodily needs.
Hicks said he is unaware of any other animal that is able to do this with such speed.
His lab is currently investigating other reptiles that feed intermittently, including lizards and crocodiles. American alligators, for instance, exhibited a two- to threefold increase in metabolism during digestion. But, Hicks added, "So far, we haven't seen cardiovascular remodeling."
Nevertheless, hearts are known for their ability to adapt to the physiological demands of their owners. Human athletes, for example, often develop cardiac hypertrophy in response to vigorous training routines. Benefits of the condition include lowered heart rates and improved blood circulation.
The difficulty, Hicks said, is in understanding the mechanisms that lead to heart remodeling in humans and other mammals. Such investigations involve complex and highly invasive surgical procedures that could easily result in death.
Hicks and his colleagues propose the Burmese python as an ideal investigative model instead.
August Krogh, the 20th-century Danish physiologist, once wrote, "For a large number of problems there will be some animal of choice, or a few such animals, on which it can be most conveniently studied."
Krogh's approach has been a guiding principle for comparative physiology ever since.
Hicks said if we want to better understand how the human heart is able to remodel itself, we should look no further than the Burmese python.
After all, the reptile can grow its heart in the time it takes to eat its lunch
Global warming not linked to sun
Cyclical changes in the sun's energy output are not responsible for Earth's recent warming, a new study asserts.
The findings put the blame for climate change squarely on human-created carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, reinforcing the beliefs of most climate scientists.
The sun's output waxes and wanes due to a variety of mechanisms. Its power rose during much of the 20th century, but it has declined. “Up until 1985, you could argue that the sun was (trending) in a direction that could have contributed to Earth's rising temperatures,” said study author A. Mike Lockwood of the University of Southampton in Britain.
Two decades ago, “it did a U-turn. If the sun had been warming the Earth, that should have come to an end, and we should have seen temperatures start to go the other way,” Lockwood said.
Yet temperatures have continued to climb since that date, making a strong solar role in warming appear unlikely.
read more >
Global Warring: Climate Change Could Be The Root Of Armed Conflicts
Source - www.sciencedaily.com Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Climate change, and the resulting shortage of ecological resources, could be to blame for armed conflicts in the future, according to David Zhang from the University of Hong Kong and colleagues. Their research, which highlights how temperature fluctuations and reduced agricultural production explain warfare frequency in eastern China in the past, has been published online in Springer’s journal Human Ecology.
Zhang and his team looked at the impact of climate change on warfare frequency over the last millennium in eastern China. The agricultural production in the region supports the majority of the Chinese population. The authors reviewed warfare data from 899 wars in eastern China between 1000 and 1911, documented in the Tabulation of Wars in Ancient China. They cross-referenced these data with Northern Hemispheric climate series temperature data for the same period.
They found that warfare frequency in eastern China, and the southern part in particular, significantly correlated with temperature oscillations. Almost all peaks of warfare and dynastic changes coincided with cold phases.
Temperature fluctuations directly impact agriculture and horticulture and, in societies with limited technology such as pre-industrial China, cooling temperatures hugely impact the availability of crops and herds. In times of such ecological stress, warfare could be the ultimate means of redistributing resources, according to Zhang and his team.
The authors conclude that "it was the oscillations of agricultural production brought by long-term climate change that drove China’s historical war-peace cycles." They recommend that researchers consider climate change part of the equation when they consider the reasons behind wars in our history.
Looking to the future and applying their findings, Zhang and colleagues suggest that shortages of essential resources, such as fresh water, agricultural land, energy sources and minerals may trigger more armed conflicts among human societies.
The findings put the blame for climate change squarely on human-created carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, reinforcing the beliefs of most climate scientists.
The sun's output waxes and wanes due to a variety of mechanisms. Its power rose during much of the 20th century, but it has declined. “Up until 1985, you could argue that the sun was (trending) in a direction that could have contributed to Earth's rising temperatures,” said study author A. Mike Lockwood of the University of Southampton in Britain.
Two decades ago, “it did a U-turn. If the sun had been warming the Earth, that should have come to an end, and we should have seen temperatures start to go the other way,” Lockwood said.
Yet temperatures have continued to climb since that date, making a strong solar role in warming appear unlikely.
read more >
Global Warring: Climate Change Could Be The Root Of Armed Conflicts
Source - www.sciencedaily.com Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Climate change, and the resulting shortage of ecological resources, could be to blame for armed conflicts in the future, according to David Zhang from the University of Hong Kong and colleagues. Their research, which highlights how temperature fluctuations and reduced agricultural production explain warfare frequency in eastern China in the past, has been published online in Springer’s journal Human Ecology.
Zhang and his team looked at the impact of climate change on warfare frequency over the last millennium in eastern China. The agricultural production in the region supports the majority of the Chinese population. The authors reviewed warfare data from 899 wars in eastern China between 1000 and 1911, documented in the Tabulation of Wars in Ancient China. They cross-referenced these data with Northern Hemispheric climate series temperature data for the same period.
They found that warfare frequency in eastern China, and the southern part in particular, significantly correlated with temperature oscillations. Almost all peaks of warfare and dynastic changes coincided with cold phases.
Temperature fluctuations directly impact agriculture and horticulture and, in societies with limited technology such as pre-industrial China, cooling temperatures hugely impact the availability of crops and herds. In times of such ecological stress, warfare could be the ultimate means of redistributing resources, according to Zhang and his team.
The authors conclude that "it was the oscillations of agricultural production brought by long-term climate change that drove China’s historical war-peace cycles." They recommend that researchers consider climate change part of the equation when they consider the reasons behind wars in our history.
Looking to the future and applying their findings, Zhang and colleagues suggest that shortages of essential resources, such as fresh water, agricultural land, energy sources and minerals may trigger more armed conflicts among human societies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)