U.S. Plans ‘for Worst’ in Gulf, Seeing Risk in Leak Strategy

The U.S. Government was astounded at how the oil spill did not spot. Therefore, American officials made sure that if the oil spill did not stop for some time, BP will have to make a second relief well, in order to balance the pressure, stopping the leakage.

The American officials, including President Barack Obama, said that they are ready to take substantial actions in order to stop the worst leakage in American history. By Y.J. Kim

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/us/31spill.html?ref=earth

Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizons Oil Spill

BP is using numerous tactics in order to capture and get rid of the crude oil in the Gulf of Mexico spilling from the Deepwater Horizons accident. They tried to capture the oil with floats, then used a massive dome to suck up the oil, and now is dumping mud and cement to stop the oil from spreading. All of the oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico have stopped operating for some time while the Deepwater Horizons oil well is spilling about 12,000 to 25,000 barrels (1.4 to 6 million liters) every day. This is said to be the worst oil spill accident in the history of the United States, releasing twice the amount of the Exxon Valdez spill.

Although, I appreciate that the US government and BP are using all sorts of chemicals to stop the oil from spreading, bioremediation is also a very helpful tool. An excessive amount of chemicals is hazardous to the environment, whereas an abundance of microbes has no effect on the Earth. By Y.J. Kim

http//topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/oil_spills/gulf_of_mexico_2010/index.html

Biofuels Are Not So Green

Did you know that biofuels are not actually eco-friendly? Since their discovery in the early 21st century, biofuels have been widely regarded as the means of saving the earth from environmental catastrophe due to harmful carbon emissions from fossil fuels. Research in 2001 and 2002 did show that biofuels were more green and efficient than fossil fuels. However, scientists then did not consider some crucial factors that would completely change our view of biofuels. Recent studies show that there are many disadvantages to using biofuels as alternative energy sources. Biofuels, once promising alternative energy sources, are not actually green. (Picture from Washington Post 2008)

To begin with, the production of biofuels causes enormous amounts of carbon dioxide to be released into the atmosphere. In the past, people thought that using biofuels released only a minute amount of carbon dioxide; indeed, burning biofuels emits eight times less carbon dioxide than burning regular fossil fuels. However, changing crops into energy sources yields a great deal of carbon dioxide. For example, forests are destroyed in order to create space for biofuel crops. This is unfortunate because forests play an important role in reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, absorbing forty percent of it. When forests are destroyed, carbon dioxide accumulates. Transporting biofuels across the globe produces a great deal of carbon dioxide as well. Moreover, during the refinement of biofuels, a large amount of carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere from the reaction created when oxygen is pumped into the liquefied crops. Thus, biofuels actually yield more carbon than conventional fossil fuels.

Second, producing biofuels causes deforestation, land degradation, and the destruction of the environment. The majority of people think that biofuels do not cause harm to the environment because they do not pollute the atmosphere or the oceans. Unfortunately, in order to produce biofuels, crops such as corn need to be grown. The amount of arable land on the planet is limited to approximately seven percent of the total surface area. Of this tiny amount of arable land, about half is already being utilized. Therefore, biofuel crops must be grown in the other half of the total arable land, most of which is located in large jungles and forests. When this occurs, deforestation is inevitable, even though it is quite hazardous to the organisms living in those areas and to the environment. Furthermore, soybeans are grown every year to replenish the nutrients of the land; if crops for biofuels replace those for soybeans, the land will be depleted and become barren. For this reason, those who want to cultivate biofuels tend to search mostly around the Amazon rainforest of Brazil. Therefore, biofuels can be partially blamed for deforestation and the destruction of the land and the environment.

Third, biofuels put an increasing strain on fresh water sources. A large amount of water is used in farming and irrigation. Just like other plants, biofuel crops require water to grow; it is crucial to their health. Biorefineries also need water. When biofuel crops are sent to refineries, the crops first have to be liquefied by pumping water into the spores of the stem. Hence, a large amount of water is used to produce a trivial amount of biofuel.

Fourth, the use of biofuels leads to the loss of biodiversity. In the past, most people believed that biofuels were not hazardous to any living organism because biofuels are essentially plants. However, excessive development for the cultivation of biofuel crops destroys natural habitats where many organisms live. For example, let us assume that the entire Amazon rainforest was cleared for biofuel crops. This would cause a catastrophic imbalance of biodiversity in the region because nearly twenty-six million exotic species would be wiped out, just for the sake of two or three species of crops for biofuels.

Finally, during the refinement of biofuels, a chemical compound called aldehyde is created. This compound is usually found in car exhaust, paint chemicals, cigar remnants, and construction materials. Not only is this chemical extremely flammable, but it also causes many serious health problems. For example, formaldehyde, part of the aldehyde group, causes headaches, skin disorders, and sick house syndrome. Sick house syndrome occurs when a person first arrives in a new building and inhales the formaldehyde from the wallpaper and other construction materials. This syndrome can develop into lung disorders, heart disease, and even cancer. Aldehyde, produced in the refinement of biofuels, may kill humans and animals.

In conclusion, biofuels are not green but quite dangerous. The production of biofuels emits large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causes deforestation and land degradation, uses an enormous amount of water, leads to the loss of biodiversity, and produces aldehyde, an extremely harmful chemical compound. Therefore, biofuels as alternative energy is not as positive a solution as we have expected. By Y.J.Kim

Green Transportation system in 2010 World Cup

My entire family is a huge soccer fan. My mom even delivered me while she was watching 1998 World Cup game. So, when I wathced an preview of South Africa's World cup preparation process on TV, scheduled to air this weekend on 'Inside Africa', I got hooked up by the phrase 'green-transportation system for 2010 World cup'.

In 2006, The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has earmarked approximately $11 million for upgrading the South African public transport system ahead of the 2010 World Cup. They believe that the World Cup presents a great opportunity to lay out a 21st century sustainable transport network in South African cities.

They aim to develop pilot projects, together with local governments, that will look at sustainable transport alternatives that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In smaller cities, plans are being developed to demonstrate how well-designed cycleways and pedestrian routes feeding into bus networks can offer rapid and efficient alternatives to private cars.

It is envisaged that no cars will be permitted within a two kilometer radius of the stadiums, and that using alternative means to get to the matches will be promoted as an advantage ? as simply the most efficient way of getting to venues. South Africa has a wonderful opportunity and sufficient time to use the excitement generated by the upcoming World Cup as an impetus for heightening the consciousness of South Africans about eco-friendly alternatives to transport, including the use of alternative fuels. Developing greener transport systems will have multiple benefits for South Africa long after the World Cup.

Achim Steiner, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme, said, 밬se the four years that you now have to trigger the imagination of the nation.? He was speaking at Africa's first hosting of the Global Environment Facility in Cape Town. The GEF is a partnership that looks at ways to protect the global environment and promote sustainable development.

The GEF wants to help South Africa develop a good transport system that is environmentally sustainable. They do not simply want to replicate the transport systems used in Germany, but want South Africa to come up with plans and ideas unique to our situation. The GEF said that Mexico and Panama had both worked with GEF to develop systems that 밽ive fantastic results? which not only reduce carbon emissions but also benefit public health, security and land management. A simple decision about where to put a bus route can affect millions of people's lives, Steiner explained. He urged the South African authorities to use the 2010 World Cup as a catalyst for a better, leaner transport system.

My parent's friends are going to move to South Africa in April.

They promise us to send the pictures of 'Green-transportation'. I will post them on Eco-gen site. Meanwhile, anybody interested in South Africa's green effort for the upcoming World cup Soccer game, please check out 'Inside the Africa' on CNN.

by Yeokyoug Alberta Yoo

James Cameron stands up for his cause

I watched the movie, 'Avatar' twice. First in digital, and second in 3D. I praised the movie for its eco-friendly theme.
Now I'm praising movie's director James Cameron for executing his message in real life.

This week, with his film star, Ms.Sigourney Weaver, Mr.Cameron is down in Brazil to protest the building of a dam in Amazon rain forest. Similar to the movie, an indigenous Amazon tribe will lose its home, if the construction starts. The dam is called, " Belo Monte" and would be the world's third-largest hydroelectric project when completed.

In Korea, 'New Green Deal' plan has launched since 2009. It's effect on the environment is still debated among the environmentalists.

Mr. James Cameron's words are quoted by locals:
"The snake kills by squeezing very slowly, this is how the civilized world slowly, slowly pushes into the forest...and takes away the world that used to be."

A penny for your thought?

by Yeokyoung Alberta Yoo

Green Naval Base in Jeju Island

Recently, our nation went through terrible emotional turmoil regarding the death of Waship 'Cheon-Ahn'. National security comes off as a top priority.

While I was reading about 'Oil-spill' in Mexican gulf, I came across an article about 'Jeju Naval Base', which plans to open in 2014.

According to the article, the new naval base will serve as the home port for the Navy's strategic mobile fleet of two Aegis destroyer-led squadrons to be initially operational beginning next year.

The mobile squadrons, which are designed to be rapidly deployed in regional conflict, consist of 4,500-ton KDX-II destroyers, 7,600-ton Aegis-equipped KDX-III destroyers, Type-214 1,800-ton submarines, anti-submarine Lynx helicopters and frigates, among others.

The Navy has two of the planned three KDX-III Aegis destroyers with the lead ship, Sejong the Great, deployed since last December. The second ship, Yi I, was launched last November for commissioning late this year.

The Aegis combat system, built by Lockheed Martin, is the world's premier surface-to-air and fire-control system, capable of conducting simultaneous operations against aircraft, ballistic and cruise missiles, ships and submarines. Only a handful of countries, including the United States, Spain, Japan and Norway, deploy Aegis warships.

The KDX-III is one of the most advanced Aegis warships. Its SPY-1D radar can simultaneously track about 1,000 aircraft within a 500-kilometer radius, providing 360-degree coverage.

The squadron is expected to develop the South Korean Navy's blue-water operational capability beyond coastal defense against a North Korean invasion, Navy officials say.

In line with the plan, the Air Force also plans to build a base for a search-and-rescue unit to help facilitate the Navy's operations in the southern waters.

"Jeju has long been considered a tactical, strategic point to secure southern sea lanes for transporting energy supplies and to conduct mobile operations in the case of an emergency in the region," the Navy official said.

"Following the construction, the Navy will be able to successfully conduct long-range operations to protect our commercial vessels in blue waters, including the Malacca Strait, as well as carry out full-scale operations around the Korean Peninsula," he said.

He emphasized that the base makes sense in terms of both military and commercial interests, as the nation`s economy heavily depends on trade, 96 percent of which is transported by sea.

However, there is a backlash. The construction site in Jeju is known for the beautiful coral reefs, and it has been named by the United Nations as key environmental treasures that should be saved. Building a naval base on top of these wonders of nature will not ensure they will be protected.

Also, local people are worried that their mundane life will be changed when the base starts to operate fully, citing the case of Okinawa.

Our national security is really mattered. We learn from current tragedy. Still, there's always a question that a sacrifice for a greater good can be legitimate or not. Also can we define 'sacrifice', and from whose perspective?

Again, a penny for your thought?

by Yeokyoung Alberta Yoo