Biodegradable Products does not equals to environmental friendly

When you buy something that has the sign biodegradable on it, it doesn't mean that this product does not have an impact on the earth, often it is a marketing strategy more than anything.

If a biodegradable product end up in landfill, it will produce methane as they biodegrade, methane is a strong green house gas that warm up our planet. Notably, there are landfills that can collect methane gas generate and anaerobic digestion, and produce electricity, but many don't. In those cases, biodegradable products may actually be worse for the environment than ordinary trash.




In many cases however, biodegradable products are more earth-friendly, if they are deposed correctly. The key is to get biodegradable products into composting facilities, they can make the most value our of these materials.

According to scientists however, the best way to mince your environmental foot print, is to reduce how much you consume and throw away in the first place.






http://www.seeker.com/biodegradable-products-damage-environment-too-discovery-news-1765278803.html

Can trees cause pollution?

Having too much of something is often harmful, even trees.

In Japan, cypress and cedar trees are causing massive amounts of nitrogen runoff into local streams. Because algae feed off nitrogen, the amount of algae was significantly increased in these rivers, they produce natural toxins, and deal mechanical damage to other organisms(They sucks oxygen out of the water), therefore harming the environment.

However, it is not because cypress and cedar are naturally harmful to the environment, these are the same type of trees in Amazon forest and keep the planet cool. In fact, these trees are planted artificially for commercial use 50 years ago, at a time when Japan has a large demand for wood. However, later for a number of reasons including labour cost and legislation, Japan began to increasingly import wood.

This leads to an overabundance of trees which causes today's problem. Because older trees use less nitrogen than younger trees, and these forest are so full go older trees that block the sunlight access for younger trees, leaving large amount of nitrogen being washed down to the river and caused algae blooms.

Scientist are proposing that owners of these land should thinner the first and let younger trees grow.

http://www.seeker.com/excess-trees-in-japan-are-harming-the-environment-1769934569.html

A better way to dispose of the biodigester waste

PepsiCo's agriculture team in Turkey has been successful in developing the anaerobic digestion technology. This technology uses a mixture of potato peels, corn kernels and other ingredients used in the company's snack foods to generate electricity and fertiliser in the same time.

The biogas generated by that this anaerobic digestion technology covers approximately 35 percent of the electricity needed to run the company's two Frito-Lay snack food plants.



This process also was able to produce a type of more environment-friendly fertiliser, supplying to its more than 350 contract farmers in Turkey.

To produce the fertiliser, after the the anaerobic digestion process, PepsiCo plants ship the left-overs to an external partner, which composts it for about three weeks to dry it out. Next, nutrients are added and the pellets are produced, packed into bags and shipped to farmers.

"As the team was thinking about what to do with the sludge, another team was looking for new fertilizer approaches that were more sustainable. Together, they found this process." said Ece Aksel, general manager of PepsiCo Turkey.




https://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2013/11/25/pepsico-turns-biodigester-sludge-fertilizer

"environmentally friendly" product.

So I came across this article on the abc website:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-22/food-processing-waste-recycled-as-premium-bottled-water/7325790

Food processing waste recycled as premium bottled water AquaBotanical

This article states that"A watery by-product of fruit and vegetable processing, which used to end up in the sewerage system, is now being served at restaurants as premium drinking water."

"When fresh produce is condensed and turned into concentrate, he collects the water that is removed and purifies it so it is fit for drinking.While he says the process would work for most fruit and vegetables, his early aqua creations have come mainly from carrots and grapes."

Although I believe the intention is good--- to recycle a waste product or a by-product of another food-based application, it simultaneously created another waste: bottled water. As I mentioned before in my journal, bottled water is doing absolutely no good to the environment. 

These plastic water bottles take literally forever to decompose, it is worse if they got incinerated. in many developing country such as india, plastic bottles has become a major environmental problem, because many developed countries ship their waste to these countries, where only 20% of plastic bottles are recycled. 

I am not sure what price tag this product would be put on, but I would imaging it would be much more expensive than an ordinary bottled water, hence I doubt that profit didn't play a major role in his invention.

2 More everyday items that are heating up our climate

As I continue my research, i find out more small things that we didn't really pay attention to but are also ruining the atmosphere in a big way.


1. lighters.

A typical lighter releases about 237 milligrams of carbon dioxide per minute. A typical power plant produces 12,200 kilograms of CO2 in the sam period. The only byproducts of burning the butane from our lighters are water and carbon dioxide, so it is not a pollution to the atmosphere, but just think about how often people use lighters, there are still a large amount of greenhouse gas being emitted.

Not to mention the plastic used to make these lighters is really harmful to the environment. so instead of buying disposable ones perhaps it would be a good option to switch to refillable metal ones.

2. Personal Generators 

engineers have found that firing up diesel backup generators in non-emergency situations triggers rising atmospheric ozone concentrations due to additional nitrogen oxide emissions, another contributor to the lower atmospheric o-zone. Scientist are calling for having diesel generators properly sited with state-of-the-art control technologies to lower nitrogen oxide emissions. Because when people experience power shortage, especially during summer, they tend to turn on their personal diesel generators, resulting high temperature, high electricity demand, high electricity prices, and high pollution levels during those periods.

http://phys.org/news/2015-01-relieve-power-grid-worsen-ozone.html

A Tiny Mobile Home by Snowboarder Mike Basich

Tiny houses is a new trend nowadays, it is exciting to see that some people, instead of going for larger and larger house, their aim is to build a home that is small and extremely efficient, they aim for just enough of everything, minimum footprint.

Mike's tiny home feels a little different than others. According to Mike, His dream is to chase after the perfect snow -- the fresh powdery kind. His ultimate goal was to have a home he could take with him anywhere, and that's exactly what he built.

He used mostly recycled materials, like siding from an old building, a stove he already had in storage, and he purchased a sink and windows from the Habitat for Humanity store. The house has a water tank, hot water heater, furnace, fireplace, stove, and even a skylight, but unfortunately no toilet -- Mike prefers to use the great outdoors as his bathroom.

http://www.seeker.com/taking-a-tiny-home-on-the-road-with-snowboarder-mike-basich-1815160479.html

Air pollution in China, how to improve the air quality? (Series 4/4)

First of all, we have to admit that air pollution is a very complicated problem and can not not solved with one solution.

During the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation 2014, the people in Beijing experience the best air quality in years. The locals call it "APEC Blue". Seems incredible how the quality has improved, but how the Beijing government achieve this? They enforced a serious of law including, temperately shut down all the factories near Beijing, limit the amount of vehicles on the road, construction sites stopped operating, and more frequent of road-cleaning,

Although the result is undeniable, it is clearly not a sustainable way to improve air quality. China is a developing country that heavily rely on its industrial production, and just shut down all factories will cripple the nation's economy.


However, there are things that can certainly be done.


China needs to reduce the emission from the source. Use renewable, clean energy sources (such as solar , wind, hydro ). Stop using coal. Fuel Pretreatment ( such as coal desulfurization ), improve combustion technology. Plants can also help purified the air. 

There is also the issue of Chinese steel factory over producing their products, these factories need to be regulated.

Local citizens need to use more pubic transport, if driving is unavoidable, install exhaust treatment device to their cars.

http://en.people.cn/90882/8519889.html

Air pollution in China, what are the causes? (Series 3/4)

The main source of air pollution in China are:


(1) Industrial: Industrial production is an majorsource of air pollution. Electric power plants, industrial facilities released varies types of pollution into the air, including soot, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, organic compounds, halides, carbon compounds.


(2) Stoves and heater: Many people in northern part of China use large amounts of coal to fuel their heater, coal combustion process will release large amounts of dust, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other harmful substances that will pollute the atmosphere.


(3) Transportation: cars, trains, airplanes, ships are the main form of modern transportation, their exhaust gas from burning coal or oil is also an important source of pollution. Especially in urban area, where cars are in large number and concentrated, the problem of PM 2.5 became extremely serious, because they can be inhaled deep into and accumulate in the respiratory system.

The harmful particles that cars emitted  including: carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons, the first three substances are specifically dangerous.

(4) Forest fire smoke

http://news.discovery.com/earth/china-pollution-how-bad-can-the-air-get-151209.htm

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/China-Air-Quality-Paper-July-2015.pdf

Air pollution in China, how bad is it? (Series 2/4)

According to the data provided by the Ministry of Environmental Protection , nearly 500 thousand people died from air-pollution related diseases every year. In 2014, 175 days of Beijing's air quality are classified as "polluted",

Tianjin 197 days,

Chengdu, 125 days,

Shenyang,152 days,

Lanzhou, 112 days,

Shijiazhuang, 264 days


Notably cities in the north suffered far worse than southern cites. This is because northern cites have lower average temperature, therefore they burn more coals to keep warm.

China's environmental protection ministry claim that in early 2014 , central and eastern provinces of China has been affected by smog, affecting an area of ​​about 1.43 million square kilometers, about 810,000 square kilometers, 20 cities, experienced heavy smog. The situation is expected to be worsen.

In 2015, Beijing declared its first ever 72-hour pollution red alert, 22 millions people in Beijing are advised to stay indoors if possible due to concerns they’ll be exposed to hazardous levels of microscopic-sized particles that can penetrate deep into the lungs and lead to ailments such as heart attack, stroke, lung cancer and asthma. The observed air pollution is calculated to contribute to 1.6 million deaths/year in China , roughly 17% of all deaths in China.

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/04/10/five-revelations-from-the-u-s-embassys-beijing-pollution-data-dump/

Air pollution in China, what is Smog? (Series 1/4)

One of most obvious thing that people see when it comes to air pollution is the Smog. So what is the

Smog? and what does it made of?




The term "Smog" comes from Fog and Smoke

Smoke refers to is mixture of dust, sulfuric acid, Nitrate,hydrocarbons,

when these particals mix with fog, it will produce Sulfur dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, and other particulate matter(PM)

It is this mixture of Fog and Smoke that makes the sky look like this:

One of the most important stats that decide how serious is the air being polluted is how many PM 2.5 in the air, meaning particulate matters that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, these particles are believed to pose the greatest health risks, because they can be inhaled deep into and accumulate in the respiratory system.


PM 10, particulate matters that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter, also known as "coarse" particles, can also be inhaled into and accumulate in the respiratory system, these particles are crushing or grinding operations, and dust from paved or unpaved roads, while PM 2.5,aka "fine" particles, are mainly come from combustion activities such as engines and burning woods and coals.

https://www3.epa.gov/pmdesignations/faq.htm#0

Air pollution in China

Air pollution is a problem for much of the developing world and is believed to kill more people worldwide than AIDS, malaria, breast cancer, or tuberculosis.

Coming from a Chinese background, I am very concerned health and safety of the people in China due to the air pollution problem that occurred in recent years, and it is not just about China and Chinese people, I think this is something that effects all developing countries, especially countries that are becoming more and more industrialized. Since the climate change is here, and we all shared one atmosphere, I would make the argument that the air quality of China, a country where 1.3 billion people live, is a global environmental issue, and it will effect not just China, but the whole world. Therefore, for the following week, I will do a series of study on the air pollution in China.

Why Are We Wasting So Much Food?

Internationally, over 800 million people endure hunger, yet the world wasted at least 1/3 of the food it produce. Even in the richest countries like the US, millions suffered from 'food poverty'. So why are we still wasting so much food?


One of the biggest problem comes from supermarkets,

Large number of perfectly fresh delicious food are discarded before they get in to the supermarket. Producing food requires land,water,fossil fuel and soil, we use precious resource to produce food. Therefore it is a true pity that half of these food are dumped just because they didn't meet  the cosmetic standard of supermarkets. Writer Tristram states that "in a blink an of en eye, we missed the true beautify of these ugly vegg"

Supermarkets also regularly change or cancel order, making tons of food that already produced gets dumped.

Supermarkets created an image of overwhelmingly abundant of food supply to lure people buy more than they need, resulting food waste. Also, over-cautious expiry labels confused customers and make them toss out what is still good to eat. 

Supermarkets and restaurants overproducing to maintain a full menu. They also increased the size of plate, food so that people are eating more than they need, causing food wastes and obesity. One statistics shows that the average calorie in one slides of pizza increased 70% from 1982 to 2002.

http://www.lovefoodhatewaste.nsw.gov.au/

The Paris Agreement, can it actually stop global warming?

The Paris Agreement is said to be the biggest step towards global environmental responsibility ever, roughy 120 countries signed a legally binged treaty on earth day in paris. The climate change conference call it a "historic point"

The main goal of the paris agreement is to stop the earth's temperature from rising 2 degree Celsius, compares to pre-industrial era, the number might seem small, but it would be a global disaster had it happened.

However, many people including supporters questioned the effectiveness of the paris agreement. because roughly 85% of the global pollution were produced by 55 countries, and most of the major polluter, expect the US, are developing counties. Therefore in a countries were many people were still struggling to live a decent life, whether they still follow the agreement is still unknown. 

Of course, most importantly the two biggest countries the US and China must work together in order to make this work.


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/13/paris-climate-deal-cop-diplomacy-developing-united-nations

Why Do People Still Deny Climate Change?

Cimate change, according to almost all scientists is a fact, overwhelming number of evidents suggested that climate change is real. During the 2015 United Nation's climate change conference in Paris, over 190 countries are reaffirming their commitment in dealing with climate change. 

It is said that the Paris UN climate conference in December 2015 will deliver a new universal climate change agreement. The new agreement is aimed at putting the world firmly on track to a low-carbon, sustainable future that keeps a global temperature rise under 2 degrees C.

Even with the majority of the world leader and scientists agreed that climate change is real and we need to do everything we can to safe our planet, there are still a lot of "skeptics" of climate change. (skeptics are those who use scientific inquiry and critical investigation to challenge claims, which climate change DENIERS were not) 

Well, i think most climate change deniers refused to believe that human activity has substantially increased the rate of global warming, not because they are blind to science and reason, but because once they admit climate change is man made, many large energy corporations will have to spend a large number of money to switched to new source of energy. Therefore, they choose to ignore the facts.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris/

http://www.earthtoparis.org/

http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/events/2015/december/COP21-paris-climate-conference.html

GMO or not GMO?

Recently the US The Food and Drug Administration claim the safety of two types of food, apples that resist browning and potatoes that resist bruising, these are examples of genetically modified organisms - GMOs. Therefore many people are debating about the safety of GMOs.

Although 88% of scientist say that there is nothing to worried about GMOs, many people still worried about the long term effect of modifying the DNA of our food, the unnatural mixing of different spices, and the environmental impact of GMOs, 

However, there are many researches indicates that GMOs are perfectly safe, a study that compare animals that feed with GMO and conventional crops over the course of 20 years, and found that there is almost no difference between the two.

In fact, humans have been modifying the genes of animals and crop for thousands of year through human selection, that's why we have chicken, dogs, cows, corns tamatos etc. The argument of GMOs being bad are more related to the un-trust of corporations rather than facts.   

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/03/03/proof-hes-the-science-guy-bill-nye-is-changing-his-mind-about-gmos/

http://modernfarmer.com/2015/03/fda-approves-gmo-apples-and-potatoes/

Is Being a Vegetarian Better for the Environment?

People chose to be a vegetarian for all kind of the reasons. Some don't like the idea of killing animals, some think vegetarianism is a healthier diet, and some people become a vegetarian because they think being a vegetarian is better for the environment.

Our food production system, from fertilizer manufacture to food storage and packaging is responsible for one-third of our greenhouse gas emissions. Animals like cow, goat, sheep ferment food before they digest it, and this fermentation will produce methane, it is estimated that a single cow will release 100 kg of methane per year. That is almost the same as a car's greenhouse gas emission every year.

Different meats and different production systems have varying health, climate and other environmental impacts. The argument of being a vegetarian is better for the environment is base on the fact the we feed our animals with plant, then we eat the animals, therefore we use more resources and produce more greenhouse gases than if we simply eat the plants.

However, it is not that simple, from this diagram you can see that while in a kg per kg view, meats and diary production looks really bad. But the reality is that people need certain amount of calories per day to live, and when you looking from a cal per cal perspective, pork or chicken can be a better choice than broccoli.

So, is being a vegetarian better for the environment, yes, however, if your chose your choice of meat carefully, you can be just as un-harmful to the environment as a omnivore.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/vegetarian-or-omnivore-the-environmental-implications-of-diet/2014/03/10/648fdbe8-a495-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

http://www.nature.com/news/one-third-of-our-greenhouse-gas-emissions-come-from-agriculture-1.11708

http://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/a-meat-eaters-guide-to-climate-change-health-what-you-eat-matters/

How Does Plastic Bags Get Into the Ocean?

Even if you're hundreds of miles away from the coast, the trash you toss into the gutter can end up as plastic pollution at ocean.

According to a groundbreaking study published earlier this year in the journal Science,somewhere between 40,000 and 110,000 metric tons of plastic waste generated by Americans ends up in the ocean.Population size and the quality of waste management systems largely determine which countries contribute the greatest mass of uncaptured waste available to become plastic marine debris.

The ocean is always downstream. One of the problem is the illegal dumping of trash in rural areas , which includes a lot of plastic, A 2013 survey of the Meuse River, which flows 575 miles through France, Belgium and the Netherlands to the North Sea, found that it contained 70,000 pieces of plastic per square meter of water, about 500 of which were roughly an inch or bigger in size..

According to the research, Without waste management infrastructure improvements, the cumulative quantity of plastic waste available to enter the ocean from land is predicted to increase by an order of magnitude by 2025

http://www.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1260352

http://www.seeker.com/plastic-trash-islands-forming-in-ocean-garbage-patch-1768827806.html#news.discovery.com

https://wastefreewaters.wordpress.com/

Can Air Pollution atcually be good?

The Earth is a magical place, while we all know that air pollution is bad, and it is bad, scientists actually find some positive side effects of air pollution.

Believe it or nor, the more  an area is polluted, the less likely a hurricane will form. One of main source of air pollution is aerosol, and aerosol will absorb heat and makes the clouds brighter and reflects more light from the sun. Large amount of aerosol can reflect enough sunlight to change the ocean's temperature and air circulation patterns and make it harder for hurricanes to form.

Research also find that sometimes air pollution has a positive effect on global warming. That's right.
While we tend to think that plant need as much direct sunlight as possible to grow fast, the haziness cause by air pollution actually shatters sunlight so that more leafs gets sunlight, therefore they will grow faster.

Moreover, dimmer, hazier skies causes plants to absorb 20% more carbon, therefore reduces the level of carbon dioxide in the air.

So, are we supposed to keep destroying our environment? No, but scientists are looking into ways to re-create these environment without polluting the air, it is call geo-engineering. But that is an topic for another day.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2013/atlantic-hurricane

http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/news/story.aspx?id=392&cookieConsent=A

The Great Barrier Reef, Is Coal Mining Endangering It?

One of the world's wonders, the great barrier reef,is facing destruction due to accelerating climate change, according to environmentalists. However, is coal mining to be blame?


The government of the Australian state of Queensland has approved a controversial coal mining project that scientists and environmental groups worry may harm the Great Barrier Reef, the world’s largest collection of coral formations.

Adani, the Indian energy company that will build and operate the mine, describes it as “a core component of Adani’s plans for delivering energy security in India, as well as pursing export opportunities in other Asian markets.”However, according to New Scientist,to handle those coal exports, the port at Abbott Point, which is next to the reef, would be expanded.It could potentially release plumes of soil and debris over the reef, damaging a delicate ecosystem.

Moreover,eventually burning all of that coal would put a lot of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. helping to drive the climate change that’s raising sea temperatures and causing the reef to deteriorate.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/mining-and-resources/adanis-galilee-basin-project-mine-leases-approved-20160403-gnx016.html

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2083116-anger-as-coal-mine-that-could-damage-great-barrier-reef-approved/

Fish Think Plastic Is Food

Pollution is so prevalent in water bodies now that fish can't help but eat it. Many perch larvae preferred eating the tiny plastic pieces, and those that did often exhibited stunted growth and very sluggish behavior.

The findings, published in the journal Science, strengthen prior research calling for a reduction of plastic waste and a ban of microbeads in personal care products. Microbeads can be found in everything from toothpaste to facial cleansers, and are so small that they pass unfiltered through sewage treatment plants.

When the perch were placed with a natural predator, pike, they ignored the smell of these predators and were caught and eaten more than four times quicker than perch that did not consume the plastic. By eating perch that previously consumed plastics, the pike also wound up ingesting plastic. This can go on up the food chain in the wild. All of the perch exposed to microplastic particles were dead within 48 hours.

Are paper bags really better than plastic bags?

More and more cites are enforcing law to reduce the use of plastic bags, and replace them with paper bags or reusable

bags, but are these bags really better than plastic bags?

At least not in a financial stand point, a paper published by NCPA states that after a study done within in cities that have plastic bag reduction law, find no evidence of a reduction in costs attributable to reduced use of plastic bags. 

This is because paper bags, while biodegradable unlike plastics, are ten times heavier and they take up more space than plastic bags, and most reusable bags are made in China, and shipped all the way to other countries, therefore their environmental footprint is really large as well.

According to the paper, plastic bags are less than 0.5% of the total waste, and often paper bags don't have a chance to biodegrade in time. Therefore in total, cities are not saving any money in waste management from banning plastic bags.

So, is banning plastic bags a bad idea overall?

Not at all, because we don't ban plastic bags to make money, we ban plastic bags to protect our environment. Plastics don't biodegrade, it will took 500-1000 years for a plastic bag to break down into small pieces that our eye cannot see, but they never went away.

There are two examples to look into: Bangladesh uses plastic bags heavily, 9.3 million plastic bags are dumped in the city every day, with only 10-15% put in dustbins. The rest are left go into drainage and sewage lines, causing blockages.

On the other hand, Rwanda, a country located in the Africa, has banned the use of plastic bags nation-wide 18 years ago, now Rwanda is one of the cleanest country in Africa, the ban of plastic bag didn't just made to country cleaner, it booted the country's tourism, productivity and national pride.

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st353.pdf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-carver/rwanda-plastic-bags_b_2680631.html
http://www.edie.net/news/0/Bangladesh-to-ban-plastic-bags-in-capital-city/5029/

2 everyday items that are heating up our climate

We all know that large power plants and cars and factories are major contributors of the global warming, but what are the things that we didn't notice but are ruining the atmosphere as well?


1. Gas- powered lawn mowersAccording to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Gas- powered lawn mowers contribute to 5% of the air pollution, Each weekend, about 54 million Americans mow their lawns, using 800 million gallons of gas per year and producing tons of air pollutants. That is due to the deregulation of emissions of garden equipment. According to the EPA, the amount of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides emissions air pollution that gas- powered lawn mowers are responsible are equivalent to 11 cars operating in the same time.

2.  gas-powered leaf blowers

Similar to lawn mowers, many leaf blowers use the two-stroke engine, it is a lightweight, cheap, compact and simple engine, which makes it a handy motor often found in leaf blowers, chain saws, lawn mowers and jet skis. However the two-stroke engine is known as a environmental hazard, 30 percent of the fuel the engine uses fails to undergo complete combustion, as a result, it emits a large amount of pollutions.

Also, leaf blowers are known to be a major source of noise pollution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/how-bad-for-the-environment-are-gas-powered-leaf-blowers/2013/09/16/8eed7b9a-18bb-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html

http://www.peoplepoweredmachines.com/faq-environment.htm

February 2016 was by far the warmest February

February 2016 is by far the hottest February on record for the planet. The number surprised even the climate scientists who closely monitor global temperature data. It was also the warmest any month the Earth has seen in 135 years.since NASA record keeping.It is really possible that 2016 could set a new record for hottest year.

“I think we all knew this would be a warm year due to the major El Niño event. But I don’t think any of us expected such remarkable and persistent record-breaking warmth,” said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State and a co-author on a recent study on the issue.

According to data released by NASA this weekend, February 2016 was 2.43°F (1.35°C) warmer than the average from 1951 to 1980, and 0.8°F (0.5°C) warmer than the previous record February, in 1998. It was the 10th month in a row to set such a monthly record,according to data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

As a student, it is easy to say that my power is limited and I cant do much to change the situation. However, we must start to do what we can to protect the environment. It could be taking public transport, it could be saving food fromg going to waste,every bits of effort counts, oftentimes it is the small things that make all the difference.

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep19831

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt