One year after Exelon unveiled its strategy to eliminate the equivalent of its 2001 carbon footprint by 2020, the company continues to work toward its goal, including new efforts to help the customers and communities it serves to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To report on its progress to date and how the economic landscape has reshaped its options for achieving its goal, Exelon has published a one-year update, which is available at exeloncorp.com.
Exelon 2020 is the company’s comprehensive strategy to reduce, offset or displace more than 15 million metric tons of GHG emissions per year by 2020 by greening its own operations, helping customers and the communities Exelon serves reduce their GHG emissions, and offering more low-carbon electricity in the marketplace. The 2009 update reports that Exelon so far has reduced more than one-third, or 6 million metric tons, of its GHG emissions.
“We have demonstrated already that we are capable of achieving meaningful carbon reductions,” said Exelon Chairman and CEO John W. Rowe. “But Exelon still has considerable work to do, and we have picked most of the low-hanging fruit.”
Exelon has relied on greening its operations to achieve the bulk of its emissions reductions to date. It also has announced plans to offer substantial new low-carbon electricity in the marketplace by raising the output of Exelon nuclear plants and investing in new renewable energy projects. Going forward, the company will increase its investment in customer initiatives to continue progress toward its 2020 goal. Exelon’s energy delivery companies — ComEd in northern Illinois and PECO in southeastern Pennsylvania — will spend more than $350 million through 2011 on energy efficiency and demand response programs that will help residential and business customers reduce their energy consumption by more than 1.6 million MWh and reduce peak load by 226 MW.
Just last month, ComEd introduced an Advanced Metering Infrastructure pilot program that will provide automated “smart” meters to as many as 141,000 customers, allowing them to use real-time electricity usage data to better manage their electricity bills and reduce energy consumption. Also, after the first year of its energy efficiency programs, ComEd has sold nearly 3 million discounted compact fluorescent light bulbs, recycled close to 12,000 appliances, and is saving customers more than $20 million in annual energy costs. Just today, PECO filed a plan with regulators to spend $342 million on customer programs to reduce overall electricity consumption by 3 percent and peak load by 4.5 percent by 2013. Another filing this summer will propose the deployment of two-way smart meters to PECO’s 1.6 million customers.
Beyond Exelon’s one-third reduction in emissions, other achievements reported at the one-year mark include:
Completing a 38 MW nuclear uprate, the first of many planned uprates that could yield 1,300 to 1,500 MW of additional, virtually GHG-free capacity — the equivalent output of a new advanced nuclear reactor — by 2017, without turning a spade of earth
Reducing energy usage across Exelon’s facilities by 16 percent from 2001 levels
Recycling or reusing more than 30 million pounds of scrap metal and other solid material and 700,000 gallons of oil in 2008 alone
Acquiring 198 MW of wind farm output, 4.8 MW of landfill gas output and 4.5 MW of solar output
Unveiling plans for the nation’s largest urban solar power plant (10 MW) in Chicago.
The one-year update also shows how the flexibility of the company’s plan will allow it to respond to two potential scenarios for the future U.S. economic recovery — one more optimistic in its assumptions, and one more pessimistic — and examines how each would affect the potential requirements for achieving Exelon’s 2020 goal.
“Since we prepared the initial Exelon 2020 analysis, economic growth has slowed and the natural gas prices that set the market price for electricity have plummeted,” said Rowe. “Technologies that once looked attractive are less so, and other technologies that once looked prohibitively expensive look more reasonable. As such, we are continually reassessing our options for reducing emissions and adjusting our strategy accordingly.”
Exelon’s 2009 update also reaffirms the company’s position that although it will not wait for Washington to act, it is encouraged by recent progress Congress has made on climate legislation.
“To fully realize our goal — and for other companies and our society to realize national greenhouse gas reduction goals — we need focused federal action,” Rowe said. “With the House’s passage of the Waxman-Markey bill last week, the nation is one step closer to enacting comprehensive climate change legislation during this Congress. Exelon will continue to work with policymakers in the Senate to encourage the adoption of a sound national energy policy that balances the need to protect consumers, business and the economy with the urgent need to reduce our nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.”
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
What is the Greenhouse Effect?
The “greenhouse effect” often gets a bad rap because of its association with global warming, but the truth is we couldn’t live without it.
What Causes the Greenhouse Effect?Life on earth depends on energy from the sun. About 30 percent of the sunlight that beams toward Earth is deflected by the outer atmosphere and scattered back into space. The rest reaches the planet’s surface and is reflected upward again as a type of slow-moving energy called infrared radiation.
As it rises, infrared radiation is absorbed by “greenhouse gases” such as water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone and methane, which slows its escape from the atmosphere.
Although greenhouse gases make up only about 1 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, they regulate our climate by trapping heat and holding it in a kind of warm-air blanket that surrounds the planet.
This phenomenon is what scientists call the "greenhouse effect." Without it, scientists estimate that the average temperature on Earth would be colder by approximately 30 degrees Celsius (54 degrees Fahrenheit), far too cold to sustain our current ecosystem.
How Do Humans Contribute to the Greenhouse Effect?While the greenhouse effect is an essential environmental prerequisite for life on Earth, there really can be too much of a good thing.
The problems begin when human activities distort and accelerate the natural process by creating more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than are necessary to warm the planet to an ideal temperature.
Burning natural gas, coal and oil —including gasoline for automobile engines—raises the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Some farming practices and land-use changes increase the levels of methane and nitrous oxide.
Many factories produce long-lasting industrial gases that do not occur naturally, yet contribute significantly to the enhanced greenhouse effect and “global warming” that is currently under way.
Deforestation also contributes to global warming. Trees use carbon dioxide and give off oxygen in its place, which helps to create the optimal balance of gases in the atmosphere. As more forests are logged for timber or cut down to make way for farming, however, there are fewer trees to perform this critical function.
Population growth is another factor in global warming, because as more people use fossil fuels for heat, transportation and manufacturing the level of greenhouse gases continues to increase. As more farming occurs to feed millions of new people, more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere.
Ultimately, more greenhouse gases means more infrared radiation trapped and held, which gradually increases the temperature of the Earth’s surface and the air in the lower atmosphere.
The Average Global Temperature is Increasing QuicklyToday, the increase in the Earth’s temperature is increasing with unprecedented speed. To understand just how quickly global warming is accelerating, consider this:
During the entire 20th century, the average global temperature increased by about 0.6 degrees Celsius (slightly more than 1 degree Fahrenheit).
Using computer climate models, scientists estimate that by the year 2100 the average global temperature will increase by 1.4 degrees to 5.8 degrees Celsius (approximately 2.5 degrees to 10.5 degrees Fahrenheit).
Not All Scientists AgreeWhile the majority of mainstream scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem that is growing steadily worse, there are some who disagree. John Christy, a professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville is a respected climatologist who argues that global warming isn’t worth worrying about.
Christy reached that opinion after analyzing millions of measurements from weather satellites in an effort to find a global temperature trend. He found no sign of global warming in the satellite data, and now believes that predictions of global warming by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century are incorrect
Scientists agree that even a small increase in the global temperature would lead to significant climate and weather changes, affecting cloud cover, precipitation, wind patterns, the frequency and severity of storms, and the duration of seasons.
Rising temperatures would raise sea levels as well, reducing supplies of fresh water as flooding occurs along coastlines worldwide and salt water reaches inland.
Many of the world’s endangered species would become extinct as rising temperatures changed their habitat.
Millions of people also would be affected, especially poor people who live in precarious locations or depend on the land for a subsistence living.
Certain vector-borne diseases carried by animals or insects, such as malaria, would become more widespread as warmer conditions expanded their range.
Carbon Dioxide Emissions are the Biggest ProblemCurrently, carbon dioxide accounts for more than 60 percent of the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by the increase of greenhouse gases, and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing by more than 10 percent every 20 years.
If emissions of carbon dioxide continue to grow at current rates, then the level of the gas in the atmosphere will likely double, or possibly even triple, from pre-industrial levels during the 21st century.
Climate Changes are InevitableAccording to the United Nations, some climate change is already inevitable because of emissions that have occurred since the dawn of the Industrial Age.
While the Earth’s climate does not respond quickly to external changes, many scientists believe that global warming already has significant momentum due to 150 years of industrialization in many countries around the world. As a result, global warming will continue to affect life on Earth for hundreds of years, even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and the increase in atmospheric levels halted.
What is Being Done to Reduce Global Warming?To lessen those long-term effects, many nations, communities and individuals are taking action now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, increasing the use of renewable energy, expanding forests, and making lifestyle choices that help to sustain the environment.
Whether they will be able to recruit enough people to join them, and whether their combined efforts will be enough to head off the most serious effects of global warming, are open questions that can only be answered by future developments
What Causes the Greenhouse Effect?Life on earth depends on energy from the sun. About 30 percent of the sunlight that beams toward Earth is deflected by the outer atmosphere and scattered back into space. The rest reaches the planet’s surface and is reflected upward again as a type of slow-moving energy called infrared radiation.
As it rises, infrared radiation is absorbed by “greenhouse gases” such as water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone and methane, which slows its escape from the atmosphere.
Although greenhouse gases make up only about 1 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, they regulate our climate by trapping heat and holding it in a kind of warm-air blanket that surrounds the planet.
This phenomenon is what scientists call the "greenhouse effect." Without it, scientists estimate that the average temperature on Earth would be colder by approximately 30 degrees Celsius (54 degrees Fahrenheit), far too cold to sustain our current ecosystem.
How Do Humans Contribute to the Greenhouse Effect?While the greenhouse effect is an essential environmental prerequisite for life on Earth, there really can be too much of a good thing.
The problems begin when human activities distort and accelerate the natural process by creating more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than are necessary to warm the planet to an ideal temperature.
Burning natural gas, coal and oil —including gasoline for automobile engines—raises the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Some farming practices and land-use changes increase the levels of methane and nitrous oxide.
Many factories produce long-lasting industrial gases that do not occur naturally, yet contribute significantly to the enhanced greenhouse effect and “global warming” that is currently under way.
Deforestation also contributes to global warming. Trees use carbon dioxide and give off oxygen in its place, which helps to create the optimal balance of gases in the atmosphere. As more forests are logged for timber or cut down to make way for farming, however, there are fewer trees to perform this critical function.
Population growth is another factor in global warming, because as more people use fossil fuels for heat, transportation and manufacturing the level of greenhouse gases continues to increase. As more farming occurs to feed millions of new people, more greenhouse gases enter the atmosphere.
Ultimately, more greenhouse gases means more infrared radiation trapped and held, which gradually increases the temperature of the Earth’s surface and the air in the lower atmosphere.
The Average Global Temperature is Increasing QuicklyToday, the increase in the Earth’s temperature is increasing with unprecedented speed. To understand just how quickly global warming is accelerating, consider this:
During the entire 20th century, the average global temperature increased by about 0.6 degrees Celsius (slightly more than 1 degree Fahrenheit).
Using computer climate models, scientists estimate that by the year 2100 the average global temperature will increase by 1.4 degrees to 5.8 degrees Celsius (approximately 2.5 degrees to 10.5 degrees Fahrenheit).
Not All Scientists AgreeWhile the majority of mainstream scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem that is growing steadily worse, there are some who disagree. John Christy, a professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville is a respected climatologist who argues that global warming isn’t worth worrying about.
Christy reached that opinion after analyzing millions of measurements from weather satellites in an effort to find a global temperature trend. He found no sign of global warming in the satellite data, and now believes that predictions of global warming by as much as 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century are incorrect
Scientists agree that even a small increase in the global temperature would lead to significant climate and weather changes, affecting cloud cover, precipitation, wind patterns, the frequency and severity of storms, and the duration of seasons.
Rising temperatures would raise sea levels as well, reducing supplies of fresh water as flooding occurs along coastlines worldwide and salt water reaches inland.
Many of the world’s endangered species would become extinct as rising temperatures changed their habitat.
Millions of people also would be affected, especially poor people who live in precarious locations or depend on the land for a subsistence living.
Certain vector-borne diseases carried by animals or insects, such as malaria, would become more widespread as warmer conditions expanded their range.
Carbon Dioxide Emissions are the Biggest ProblemCurrently, carbon dioxide accounts for more than 60 percent of the enhanced greenhouse effect caused by the increase of greenhouse gases, and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing by more than 10 percent every 20 years.
If emissions of carbon dioxide continue to grow at current rates, then the level of the gas in the atmosphere will likely double, or possibly even triple, from pre-industrial levels during the 21st century.
Climate Changes are InevitableAccording to the United Nations, some climate change is already inevitable because of emissions that have occurred since the dawn of the Industrial Age.
While the Earth’s climate does not respond quickly to external changes, many scientists believe that global warming already has significant momentum due to 150 years of industrialization in many countries around the world. As a result, global warming will continue to affect life on Earth for hundreds of years, even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and the increase in atmospheric levels halted.
What is Being Done to Reduce Global Warming?To lessen those long-term effects, many nations, communities and individuals are taking action now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming by reducing dependence on fossil fuels, increasing the use of renewable energy, expanding forests, and making lifestyle choices that help to sustain the environment.
Whether they will be able to recruit enough people to join them, and whether their combined efforts will be enough to head off the most serious effects of global warming, are open questions that can only be answered by future developments
Environment clearance process will be made transparent: Jairam
In an attempt to clean up the environmental clearance stable, environment minister Jairam Ramesh on Friday said the chairman of Expert
Committee, P Abraham, who was also on the board of several power companies, had resigned. The committee is one of the seven that recommends environmental clearance of various development projects. The move came after NGOs raised the issue but even then it took more than a week for Abraham to resign. Ramesh said it was part of the plan to improve the clearance process and make it more transparent. As part of the move, he has made it mandatory for companies to disclose the clearance letters and periodic status of compliance. At the same time, hinting that the clearances would become tougher to secure, Ramesh said, “The ministry has an unnaturally healthy rate of accepting proposals — 98%. I would be much happier with a higher rate of rejection.” While promising to reduce the time taken for both forest and environment clearances, Ramesh said he was studying how to do away with the “business of in-principle clearance”.
Committee, P Abraham, who was also on the board of several power companies, had resigned. The committee is one of the seven that recommends environmental clearance of various development projects. The move came after NGOs raised the issue but even then it took more than a week for Abraham to resign. Ramesh said it was part of the plan to improve the clearance process and make it more transparent. As part of the move, he has made it mandatory for companies to disclose the clearance letters and periodic status of compliance. At the same time, hinting that the clearances would become tougher to secure, Ramesh said, “The ministry has an unnaturally healthy rate of accepting proposals — 98%. I would be much happier with a higher rate of rejection.” While promising to reduce the time taken for both forest and environment clearances, Ramesh said he was studying how to do away with the “business of in-principle clearance”.
SA's greenhouse emissions very high, says WWF
"South Africa's emissions are very high," said the World Wide Fund for Nature's (WWF) local climate change manager, Richard Worthington."It is well above the developing country average partly because of our strong dependence on coal."He was speaking in Johannesburg at the release of climate scorecards for G8 and G5 countries which map their carbon emission trends.The scorecards check for improvements since 1990, the current status of each country and its policies for the future.Out of the G8 countries, Germany received the best score, followed by the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United States (rated seventh out of the G8) and Canada in the last place.Worthington said the G5 countries, which are Brazil, India, China, Mexico and South Africa, had done more to commit themselves to climate change goals than some of the G8 countries.Although the G5 countries were not ranked like the G5 countries, the scorecard showed that South Africa's current carbon emissions were 11 tonnes a person a year."To be carbon neutral by 2050, emissions in South Africa need to be one tonne per person per annum," said Worthington.
Brazil was currently standing at five tonnes of carbon emissions a person a year, China and India were standing at six tonnes and Mexico at two tonnes.This while 73% of South Africa's population had access to electricity, compared to 99% in China, 95% in Brazil and Mexico and 43% in India, according to the information released by the WWF.Among the G8 countries, Germany's emissions were 12 tonnes a person a year. The UK had 11 tonnes, Italy nine, Japan 12, Russia 16 and the US 25."South Africa's emissions per capita are only slightly below the average of industrialised countries," said Worthington.However, the government's long-term climate change plans showed promise, he said."South Africa provided the most comprehensive plan [out of the G5 countries] on options to reduce emissions in the future ... We're not there yet, but we seem to be going in the right direction."Worthington said the African National Congress (ANC) acknowledged the importance of climate change goals at its conference in Polokwane in 2007.He quoted from a Polokwane resolution, which stated that the ANC would "recognise that climate change is a new threat on a global scale and poses an enormous burden upon South Africans and Africans as a whole, because we are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change".Asked if he had any message to President Jacob Zuma, Worthington replied: "I guess the message would be [to] go back and read the Polokwane resolution again."On the new administration's attitude toward the challenges of climate change, he said: "It's too early to tell, but so far, so good ..."South Africa has acknowledged that emissions need to be reduced by 30% by 2050." Climate change refers to changes in temperature on earth that are happening too fast because of human intervention.According to the South African Weather Service website, climate change could affect South Africa by causing unreliable rainfall which could negatively affect agriculture and forestry.Climate change also causes sea levels to increase, but the consequences of that in South Africa "are not very extensive because the coastline is relatively steep", says the website.However, higher sea levels could create changes in ocean currents, which could cause "major changes in several fish resources important to the country".Small isolated plant populations may go extinct in South Africa as a result of climate change."South Africa has about 10% of all the plant species in the world, of which about half occur nowhere else on earth."Warming, and a change in the seasonal rainfall of the Cape floral kingdom, are issues of concern to conservationists," states the website.The Kyoto Protocol, which will come under discussion again at Copenhagen later this year, aims to get countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent the earth from getting warmer too fast for nature to cope.According to the plan of action, industrialised countries must fund climate change programmes in developing nations. -- Sapa
Brazil was currently standing at five tonnes of carbon emissions a person a year, China and India were standing at six tonnes and Mexico at two tonnes.This while 73% of South Africa's population had access to electricity, compared to 99% in China, 95% in Brazil and Mexico and 43% in India, according to the information released by the WWF.Among the G8 countries, Germany's emissions were 12 tonnes a person a year. The UK had 11 tonnes, Italy nine, Japan 12, Russia 16 and the US 25."South Africa's emissions per capita are only slightly below the average of industrialised countries," said Worthington.However, the government's long-term climate change plans showed promise, he said."South Africa provided the most comprehensive plan [out of the G5 countries] on options to reduce emissions in the future ... We're not there yet, but we seem to be going in the right direction."Worthington said the African National Congress (ANC) acknowledged the importance of climate change goals at its conference in Polokwane in 2007.He quoted from a Polokwane resolution, which stated that the ANC would "recognise that climate change is a new threat on a global scale and poses an enormous burden upon South Africans and Africans as a whole, because we are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change".Asked if he had any message to President Jacob Zuma, Worthington replied: "I guess the message would be [to] go back and read the Polokwane resolution again."On the new administration's attitude toward the challenges of climate change, he said: "It's too early to tell, but so far, so good ..."South Africa has acknowledged that emissions need to be reduced by 30% by 2050." Climate change refers to changes in temperature on earth that are happening too fast because of human intervention.According to the South African Weather Service website, climate change could affect South Africa by causing unreliable rainfall which could negatively affect agriculture and forestry.Climate change also causes sea levels to increase, but the consequences of that in South Africa "are not very extensive because the coastline is relatively steep", says the website.However, higher sea levels could create changes in ocean currents, which could cause "major changes in several fish resources important to the country".Small isolated plant populations may go extinct in South Africa as a result of climate change."South Africa has about 10% of all the plant species in the world, of which about half occur nowhere else on earth."Warming, and a change in the seasonal rainfall of the Cape floral kingdom, are issues of concern to conservationists," states the website.The Kyoto Protocol, which will come under discussion again at Copenhagen later this year, aims to get countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent the earth from getting warmer too fast for nature to cope.According to the plan of action, industrialised countries must fund climate change programmes in developing nations. -- Sapa
Uganda: Cattle Corridor in Climate Scare
Going by this year's rainfall performance and outlook reports issued by the meteorology department, most areas in Uganda have received poor rainfall.
Statistics show that most parts of the country have received rainfall within the near normal to below normal range throughout the first half of this year, a proof that global warming is real.
In the last two years alone, the country has experienced shortage of food, inflation, floods and general increase in temperature, which has affected the economy.
Global warming, a gradual increase in the temperature of the atmosphere, is tending to change the earth's climate permanently. The warming is largely the result of emissions of greenhouse gasses for human activities, fossil fuel combustion and changes in land use such as deforestation and agriculture as well as industrial processing.
The greenhouse effects is a phenomenon whereby certain gases (CO2 methane and the other gases) in the earth's atmosphere, absorb heat that would otherwise escape to space.
As the country feels the impacts of climate changes, the worst scenario is reported in the cattle corridor, stretching from the northern region to the southwest region.
It is reported that the cattle corridor has a fragile ecosystem that is gravely affecting agriculture, cattle keeping, health and water.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetB" );
Ms Rehema Kahigwa Akiki, a subsistence farmer of Wabigalo village, Wabinyonyi Sub-county in Nakasongola District (one of the districts that lies in the corridor), says the situation is worrying.
Ms Kahigwa, a single mother of eight, whose livelihood solely depends on farming, says bad weather has frustrated their efforts to overcome poverty.
The farmer, who grows matooke (bananas) and rears local poultry, reveals that chronic drought has gravely affected her banana plantations, diminishing her returns by more than half.
"In order to maintain this garden, I have to irrigate it daily with water I fetch from a water dam located about one and half kilometre from here," a distressed mother says.
"At times I am forced to buy water at Shs200 per 20litre jerrican to irrigate because I can't sit and look on when my garden, the only source of income, is drying up."
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetC" );
To Salongo Stanley Senku, a commercial farmer of Macumu-Sasira parish in Nakasongola District, this year's first season has been a gamble. He says the change in weather patterns has prompted them to plant whenever they see some rains, which was a grave move.
"We have harvested nothing in this year's first season due to poor rain," Mr Senku who has lived on farming for over 30 years, says.
All crops he planted after receiving mild rains stunted or dried up as temperatures soared.
"This season alone, I have slashed two maize plantations, one of seven acres and another on of 10 acres after they dried up," he narrates.
Salongo Senku says Uganda's two rainy seasons, the long rain starting in March and lasting through until June and the short rains running from around October/November to December are now erratic.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetD" );
The farmers' misery, however, is echoed by the District's Production officer Sarah Nakamya, who admits that the district is in crisis.
"We have been advising farmers to diversify cattle keeping with crop farming, but what disturbs, is that people are not harvesting due to bad weather and animals have started dying," she laments. She says though they receive weather focus reports from the meteorology department, purposely to advise farmers on when to start sowing with a view of minimising losses, the practice has yielded nothing because reports are also erratic.
She says with such experiences, farmers have lost trust in them. Despite the fact that Nakasongola greatly depend on agriculture, the district has intensely destroyed its tree cover due charcoal burning.
Currently, the district is ranked among the three districts (Nakasongola, Kiboga and Apac) that lead in charcoal supply.
Meanwhile, Ms Nakamya, says the district is currently sensitising residents to abandon charcoal burning and plant more trees to restore what has been degraded. But the rate at which trees are cut doesn't match with those being planted.
Currently, deforestation in Uganda is alarming. Over 90,000 hectares of Uganda's forest cover disappear per year yet deforestation is responsible for up to 20 per cent greenhouse gases.
According to the March 1 to April 30, 2009 meteorology report, places in the Lake Basin and central, Kampala recorded 43 per cent, Namulonge 61 per cent and Kituza 67 per cent of their Long-Term Mean (LTM) rainfall, which was in the below normal range. Only Kibanda, Entebbe and Mubende recorded amounts which were within the near normal range; 102 per cent, 93 per cent and 80 per cent respectively.
Statistics show that most parts of the country have received rainfall within the near normal to below normal range throughout the first half of this year, a proof that global warming is real.
In the last two years alone, the country has experienced shortage of food, inflation, floods and general increase in temperature, which has affected the economy.
Global warming, a gradual increase in the temperature of the atmosphere, is tending to change the earth's climate permanently. The warming is largely the result of emissions of greenhouse gasses for human activities, fossil fuel combustion and changes in land use such as deforestation and agriculture as well as industrial processing.
The greenhouse effects is a phenomenon whereby certain gases (CO2 methane and the other gases) in the earth's atmosphere, absorb heat that would otherwise escape to space.
As the country feels the impacts of climate changes, the worst scenario is reported in the cattle corridor, stretching from the northern region to the southwest region.
It is reported that the cattle corridor has a fragile ecosystem that is gravely affecting agriculture, cattle keeping, health and water.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetB" );
Ms Rehema Kahigwa Akiki, a subsistence farmer of Wabigalo village, Wabinyonyi Sub-county in Nakasongola District (one of the districts that lies in the corridor), says the situation is worrying.
Ms Kahigwa, a single mother of eight, whose livelihood solely depends on farming, says bad weather has frustrated their efforts to overcome poverty.
The farmer, who grows matooke (bananas) and rears local poultry, reveals that chronic drought has gravely affected her banana plantations, diminishing her returns by more than half.
"In order to maintain this garden, I have to irrigate it daily with water I fetch from a water dam located about one and half kilometre from here," a distressed mother says.
"At times I am forced to buy water at Shs200 per 20litre jerrican to irrigate because I can't sit and look on when my garden, the only source of income, is drying up."
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetC" );
To Salongo Stanley Senku, a commercial farmer of Macumu-Sasira parish in Nakasongola District, this year's first season has been a gamble. He says the change in weather patterns has prompted them to plant whenever they see some rains, which was a grave move.
"We have harvested nothing in this year's first season due to poor rain," Mr Senku who has lived on farming for over 30 years, says.
All crops he planted after receiving mild rains stunted or dried up as temperatures soared.
"This season alone, I have slashed two maize plantations, one of seven acres and another on of 10 acres after they dried up," he narrates.
Salongo Senku says Uganda's two rainy seasons, the long rain starting in March and lasting through until June and the short rains running from around October/November to December are now erratic.
GA_googleFillSlot( "AllAfrica_Story_InsetD" );
The farmers' misery, however, is echoed by the District's Production officer Sarah Nakamya, who admits that the district is in crisis.
"We have been advising farmers to diversify cattle keeping with crop farming, but what disturbs, is that people are not harvesting due to bad weather and animals have started dying," she laments. She says though they receive weather focus reports from the meteorology department, purposely to advise farmers on when to start sowing with a view of minimising losses, the practice has yielded nothing because reports are also erratic.
She says with such experiences, farmers have lost trust in them. Despite the fact that Nakasongola greatly depend on agriculture, the district has intensely destroyed its tree cover due charcoal burning.
Currently, the district is ranked among the three districts (Nakasongola, Kiboga and Apac) that lead in charcoal supply.
Meanwhile, Ms Nakamya, says the district is currently sensitising residents to abandon charcoal burning and plant more trees to restore what has been degraded. But the rate at which trees are cut doesn't match with those being planted.
Currently, deforestation in Uganda is alarming. Over 90,000 hectares of Uganda's forest cover disappear per year yet deforestation is responsible for up to 20 per cent greenhouse gases.
According to the March 1 to April 30, 2009 meteorology report, places in the Lake Basin and central, Kampala recorded 43 per cent, Namulonge 61 per cent and Kituza 67 per cent of their Long-Term Mean (LTM) rainfall, which was in the below normal range. Only Kibanda, Entebbe and Mubende recorded amounts which were within the near normal range; 102 per cent, 93 per cent and 80 per cent respectively.
Traffic Noise Pollution
Vehicular traffic noise pollution may be one of those everyday pollutions that we overlook, considering it to be annoying but not really detrimental to our health or well-being. In reality, traffic noise might just be killing many of us slowly, as well as causing lots of other irritations that we just can’t get away from.
Healthy human hearing is very sensitive, so to be subjected to prolonged exposure to traffic noise estimated to be in the range 50 to 95 dB (of equivalent sound level, or the energy mean sound level, to use the right jargon) can be both annoying and damaging to your hearing. The last century is the noisiest in the history of the world due to the advent of fossil fuels.
It seems every country has their own limits for what levels are considered to be non-damaging to the human ear, some say 85dB for more than 8 hours a day (which means 88dB for 4 hours, 91dB for 2 hours and 94dB for 1 hour, in terms of acoustical energy exposure). For sleeping, the World Health Organization proposes limits of 30 dB(A) constant noise and 45 dB(A) for individual noise events.
More than just hearing damage though, there is the stress of noise pollution that can lead to sleepless nights, anxiety, higher blood pressure and even increased chances of heart failure. Missing out on sleep makes people irritable and compromises the immune system, that lack of sleep might also mean a lack of concentration at school or work, which mean lower grades, lower pay rises and maybe an increase in accidents. Sleepless nights can also make partners grumpy the next day, meaning less blissful partnerships and maybe even contributing to break-ups.
I think we should all be looking forward to the arrival of electric and/or solar powered vehicles, they will be a lot quieter than today’s gasoline and diesel powered ones, so quiet in fact that governments might have to legislate that manufactures make them more noisy. The concern is that children and visually impaired people might not hear the vehicles coming when they are crossing the road or in parking lots.
Lotus, the specialist UK car manufacturer, has demonstrated a 300W externally mounted sound system on a Toyota Prius Hybrid which made engine like sounds when the vehicle was in hybrid mode but which switched-off when the internal gasoline engine came on. Hopefully the regulations won’t turn your future electric vehicle from a whispering buzz into a roaring V8, otherwise we won’t be able to look forward to quieter, more harmonious and healthier cities.
Healthy human hearing is very sensitive, so to be subjected to prolonged exposure to traffic noise estimated to be in the range 50 to 95 dB (of equivalent sound level, or the energy mean sound level, to use the right jargon) can be both annoying and damaging to your hearing. The last century is the noisiest in the history of the world due to the advent of fossil fuels.
It seems every country has their own limits for what levels are considered to be non-damaging to the human ear, some say 85dB for more than 8 hours a day (which means 88dB for 4 hours, 91dB for 2 hours and 94dB for 1 hour, in terms of acoustical energy exposure). For sleeping, the World Health Organization proposes limits of 30 dB(A) constant noise and 45 dB(A) for individual noise events.
More than just hearing damage though, there is the stress of noise pollution that can lead to sleepless nights, anxiety, higher blood pressure and even increased chances of heart failure. Missing out on sleep makes people irritable and compromises the immune system, that lack of sleep might also mean a lack of concentration at school or work, which mean lower grades, lower pay rises and maybe an increase in accidents. Sleepless nights can also make partners grumpy the next day, meaning less blissful partnerships and maybe even contributing to break-ups.
I think we should all be looking forward to the arrival of electric and/or solar powered vehicles, they will be a lot quieter than today’s gasoline and diesel powered ones, so quiet in fact that governments might have to legislate that manufactures make them more noisy. The concern is that children and visually impaired people might not hear the vehicles coming when they are crossing the road or in parking lots.
Lotus, the specialist UK car manufacturer, has demonstrated a 300W externally mounted sound system on a Toyota Prius Hybrid which made engine like sounds when the vehicle was in hybrid mode but which switched-off when the internal gasoline engine came on. Hopefully the regulations won’t turn your future electric vehicle from a whispering buzz into a roaring V8, otherwise we won’t be able to look forward to quieter, more harmonious and healthier cities.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Rising Acidity Levels Could Trigger Shellfish Revenue Declines, Job Losses
Changes in ocean chemistry — a consequence of increased carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human industrial activity — could cause U.S. shellfish revenues to drop significantly in the next 50 years, according to a new study by researchers at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI).
Intensive burning of fossil fuels and deforestation over the last two centuries have increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by almost 40 percent. The oceans have absorbed about one-third of all human-generated carbon emissions, but the buildup of CO2 in the ocean is pushing surface waters toward more acidic conditions.
This “ocean acidification” creates a corrosive environment for marine organisms such as corals, marine plankton, and shellfish that build carbonate shells or skeletons. Mollusks — including mussels and oysters, which support valuable marine fisheries — are particularly sensitive to these changes.
In a case study of U.S. commercial fishery revenues published in the June issue of Environmental Research Letters, WHOI scientists Sarah Cooley and Scott Doney calculated the possible economic effects of ocean acidification over the next 50 years using atmospheric CO2 trajectories from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and laboratory studies of acidification’s effects on shell-forming marine organisms, focusing especially on mollusks.
Mollusk sales by fishermen currently generate about $750 million per year — nearly 20 percent of total U.S. fisheries revenue. The study assumed that mollusks harvests in the U.S. would drop 10 to 25 percent in 50 years’ time as a result of increasing acidity levels, which would decrease these mollusk sales by $75 to $187 million dollars annually.
“Losses in primary revenue from commercial mollusk harvests—or the money that fisherman receive for their catch—could add up to as much as $1.4 billion by 2060,” said Cooley.
Reduced harvests of mollusks, as well as losses of predatory fish and other species that depend on mollusks for food, could lead to economic hardships for fishing communities.
“Ocean acidification will impact the millions of people that depend on seafood and other ocean resources for their livelihoods,” said Doney. “Losses of crustaceans, bivalves, their predators, and their habitat — in the case of reef-associated fish communities — would particularly injure societies that depend heavily on consumption and export of marine resources.”
Because changes in seawater chemistry are already apparent and will grow over the next few decades, Cooley and Doney suggest measures that focus on adaptation to future CO2 increases to lessen the impact on marine ecosystems, such as flexible fishery management plans and support for fishing communities.
“Limiting nutrient runoff from land helps coastal ecosystems stay healthy,” said Cooley. “Also fishing rules can be adjusted to reduce pressure on valuable species; fisheries managers may set up more marine protected areas, or they may encourage development of new fisheries.”
Intensive burning of fossil fuels and deforestation over the last two centuries have increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by almost 40 percent. The oceans have absorbed about one-third of all human-generated carbon emissions, but the buildup of CO2 in the ocean is pushing surface waters toward more acidic conditions.
This “ocean acidification” creates a corrosive environment for marine organisms such as corals, marine plankton, and shellfish that build carbonate shells or skeletons. Mollusks — including mussels and oysters, which support valuable marine fisheries — are particularly sensitive to these changes.
In a case study of U.S. commercial fishery revenues published in the June issue of Environmental Research Letters, WHOI scientists Sarah Cooley and Scott Doney calculated the possible economic effects of ocean acidification over the next 50 years using atmospheric CO2 trajectories from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and laboratory studies of acidification’s effects on shell-forming marine organisms, focusing especially on mollusks.
Mollusk sales by fishermen currently generate about $750 million per year — nearly 20 percent of total U.S. fisheries revenue. The study assumed that mollusks harvests in the U.S. would drop 10 to 25 percent in 50 years’ time as a result of increasing acidity levels, which would decrease these mollusk sales by $75 to $187 million dollars annually.
“Losses in primary revenue from commercial mollusk harvests—or the money that fisherman receive for their catch—could add up to as much as $1.4 billion by 2060,” said Cooley.
Reduced harvests of mollusks, as well as losses of predatory fish and other species that depend on mollusks for food, could lead to economic hardships for fishing communities.
“Ocean acidification will impact the millions of people that depend on seafood and other ocean resources for their livelihoods,” said Doney. “Losses of crustaceans, bivalves, their predators, and their habitat — in the case of reef-associated fish communities — would particularly injure societies that depend heavily on consumption and export of marine resources.”
Because changes in seawater chemistry are already apparent and will grow over the next few decades, Cooley and Doney suggest measures that focus on adaptation to future CO2 increases to lessen the impact on marine ecosystems, such as flexible fishery management plans and support for fishing communities.
“Limiting nutrient runoff from land helps coastal ecosystems stay healthy,” said Cooley. “Also fishing rules can be adjusted to reduce pressure on valuable species; fisheries managers may set up more marine protected areas, or they may encourage development of new fisheries.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)