Parakeets Gone Wild? Try the New Parakeet Contraceptive
July 19, 2008
Environment
If your parakeet is out of control, and you fear it may be practicing unsafe parakeet behavior, you can now look to researchers at the University of Florida. They may just have the answer to your problem. According to the article, the USDA has already been field-testing (PDF) the chemical in south Florida in hopes they can get the EPA to approve its use in the field.
Unfortunately, some of the side effects of DiazaCon™ (20,25-diazacholesterol dihydrochloride) being used as the contraceptive include cramping or seizures (myotonia), diabetes (increased Acetyl-CoA), and cancerous tumors (multinucleated giant cells).
It’s strange that the USDA publications, and the article reporting the study don’t mention any of these side effects. Perhaps it’s not such a good idea to distribute this chemical into the wild.
Email this Article:
Share this Article:
The Price on Your Head: $6.9M
July 10, 2008
Environment, Politics
The Associated Press reports today that an Environmental Protection Agency report released in May shows that the value of an American life has fallen by more than a million dollars.
The EPA regularly keeps track of the value of a statistical life (VSL), and provides this figure in weighing all sorts of risks and benefits in governmental services. While the figure is only an estimate, and the EPA is clear that this is a “mean” figure (mean, as in average - not mean, as in not nice), the fact that the figure has gone down by nearly ten percent in spite of inflation says a good deal about our economy and how federal government calculates the value of citizens.
While it can be a distasteful perspective from which to view life, assuming that every life is priceless and invaluable, this figure could and does have wide-ranging implications: specifically, as the AP article points out,
When drawing up regulations, government agencies put a value on human life and then weigh the costs versus the lifesaving benefits of a proposed rule. The less a life is worth to the government, the less the need for a regulation, such as tighter restrictions on pollution.
Consider, for example, a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), the lifesaving benefits outweigh the costs. But at $6.9 million per person, the rule costs more than the lives it saves, so it may not be adopted.
…economists calculate the value based on what people are willing to pay to avoid certain risks, and on how much extra employers pay their workers to take on additional risks. Most of the data is drawn from payroll statistics; some comes from opinion surveys.
While the EPA figures are not widely applied across varying industries, these types of figures are more prominent than many people realize. Insurance companies keep running tabs on these kinds of values, as do militaries and social services. It’s a sad reality, but the cost of a human life is in some respects just another aspect of doing business.
However, these kinds of calculations have the potential for curbing the rapid increase in the cost of such instances as wrongful death and medical malpractice claims. While unpopular in terms of placing a dollar value on human life, capping damages in these kinds of litigations could possibly have wide-ranging economic benefits: from the cost of health-care, to taxes, to inflation and beyond.
Email this Article:
Share this Article:
Get the Oil Story Straight
July 2, 2008
Business, Environment, Politics
In an article today out of Madrid, Santosh Menon reports that Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah al-Attiyah claims it would not be wise to curb production of crude oil, saying that even though “there is a surplus,” it could “cause a psychological problem.”
The statement is apparently based in part on claims by Libya’s senior oil official that he was studying the possibility of reducing output in response to moves by the U.S. House of Representatives allowing the U.S. to sue OPEC member countries for antitrust violations in connection with manipulating crude prices.
The veiled threat from Libya’s oil official worried speculators and investors, which drove up crude oil prices over $142 per barrel.
But, wait. Let’s hit the brakes for a second.
In the last few weeks, there have been stories, upon stories, upon stories touting the U.S. friend Saudi Arabia as a key player in helping to reduce crude oil prices by increasing production from their vast reserves. However, according to Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah al-Attiyah, “There is a surplus.”
So, what’s really happening here? Are oil prices being jacked up by limited supply? Apparently not. It seems it may be a simple matter of OPEC putting financial pressure on the U.S., which could explain this week’s story, after story, after story about the urgency to resume oil drilling efforts here at home.
UPDATE: 7/2/08 - According to this Reuters article, supply is down again.
Email this Article:
Share this Article:
Environmentalists to Salmon: WTF?
June 29, 2008
Environment
According to this article referenced by the Washington Post, sockeye salmon in the Columbia River dealt a blow to global warming enthusiasts this year by parading up the Pacific Northwest river and long-time recreational fishing destination to spawn in numbers ten times that of the previous year.
To bolster the plight of the salmon in the Columbia River, environmental groups have long targeted the eight dams, pollution, and global warming along the U.S. portion of the U.S.-Canadian international river as being detrimental to their populations.
In an unprecedented gesture of nature’s seeming disregard for global warming and man-made dam claims as recent as 2006 and 2007 claiming the dire situation and growing dangers to salmon in the Columbia, this year’s sockeye salmon have returned in numbers not seen since the 1950’s.
Get out your fly-fishing gear!
Email this Article:
Share this Article:
Oh No! The Sky Is Falling!
June 27, 2008
Environment
From the desk of Steve Connor, Science Editor of The Independent UK website, comes a startling announcement about the effects of global warming: the North Pole will be completely melted by this summer!
According to Connor, “…Ice is on course to disappear entirely from the North Pole this year.” He bases the prediction on statements from Mark Serreze of the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre, and research professor at the University of Colorado. According to Serreze,
From the viewpoint of science, the North Pole is just another point on the globe, but symbolically it is hugely important. There is supposed to be ice at the North Pole, not open water.
Chalk one up for the academics! These are the same folks who believe driving golf-carts everywhere will save the planet, and feel good about spending ten bucks on a cup of coffee. Genius - sheer genius.
Unfortunately, this article from Steve Connor doesn’t address some critical aspects of the environment at the North Pole. It is a naturally shifting block of ice which is rarely centered at the “geographic North Pole.” Submarine expeditions in the 1990’s revealed that the ice doesn’t seem to be dwindling, but actually getting thicker. Let’s not forget that there is consistent volcanic activity on the ocean floor beneath the Arctic Circle.
So it looks like there is no need to get out your high-waters and wading-boots just yet.
Email this Article:
Share this Article:
-
Did You Know?
One third of Americans identify themselves as 'Independent' when it comes to political affiliation. Don't let the Red and Blue fool you. It's okay to be Independent!
-
Sponsors
-
