Project Port San Luis

Hello guys there is a new project going around in the areas of Port San Luis. The project has been going on for some time now and is called the Harbor Terrace. It is decided that the San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission will hear the oncoming project on March 12. However, to proceed the Planning Commission will have to issue a coastal development permit so that the project can continue on. Now, let’s talk about what the project really is.

 The project includes a restaurant, store, 34 acre campground and other facilities to be made along the lines of the entrance to the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. The camping is also said to consist of tent camping, recreational vehicle hookups and cabins. The Home Fed Corp. of Carlsbad is said to be selected to run the project. The expected cost is about $20 million to build the facility. More information will be provided at a later date.

sanluisobispo

Energy Saving House

Hello guys long time no see. Today we are going to talk about the saving of energy and the use of Thermos-Like Passive Homes. Row houses near the White House are fit with solar panels which is claimed to produce a lot of savings in energy.

The houses are so sealed that they act like a thermos so that the heat can stay inside. We are moving forward in the world by building new innovations and saving more energy. The houses are also affordable as they are built for low-income families.

The house can revolutionize the way we as humans use energy, so that we can keep the environment safe. Energy is something we must take great care in. Many people waste energy every day, and it costs them and the planet a lot. These houses can help stop that. They can help bring down the costs and the wasteful energy.

nationalgeographic

Our Civilization is in Danger

Goodbye.

Valentin Sigalov // Prokhor Zakharov

The Guardian reported on environmental degradation on Earth. Apparently, our kind of life on Earth is at risk of dying out due to humanity’s consumption of resources and general degradation of our own life support systems. The rate at which we are growing causes great damage to ourselves.

They split the devices required for the survival of life into 9 categories, of which 4 are massively off-track - exceeding safe levels. The effects of our ever-growing civilization includes human-driven climate change, loss of biosphere integrity, land system change, and phosphorous and nitrogen content in oceans due to fertilizer run-off.

In the last 60 years, we have caused changes not seen in the last 10,000 years. Carbon dioxide levels are at historic highs, and the rate at which species become extinct is now 100 times faster than ever before. Our urban populations have increased seven-fold, energy use by a factor of 5, and fertilizer use by 8.

The article proceeds to explain that these actions are driving the planet into the environment not hospitable for human life. So, what are we going to do about it? Well, according to the writer of the article, our economic system is driving us towards an unsustainable future. Our generation will be the ones to experience the blow of this maddening industrialization and growth. So that’s probably what we should change for us to stand a chance.

“History has shown that civilisations have risen, stuck to their core values and then collapsed because they didn’t change. That’s where we are today.”

Article

Yellowstone Oil Spill

Valentin Sigalov // Prokhor Zakharov

Just a few days ago, a Montana pipeline burst, which led to over 50,000 gallons of oil to gush into the Yellowstone River. This led to their governor declaring a state of emergency, warning residents of nearby cities to not drink the tap water.

The pipeline ruptured 5 miles upstream from Glendive, right into a frozen river. This is both a blessing and a curse - The oil hopefully wouldn’t spread far, but the weather conditions make it difficult to clean. Nearby residents reported a distinct diesel smell from their drinking water.

This isn't the first time that an oil pipeline has ruptured into this river - back in 2011, 42,000 gallons poured out of an Exxon pipe. These incidents are exactly what leads me to be against the construction of pipelines, specifically, I am referring to the Keystone XL. A high chance of causing ecological disaster for slicing off a few bucks off the final product’s cost. Is it truly worth it?
Article

Fracking Ban in NY

Valentin Sigalov // Prokhor Zakharov

This concerns us locally. As you may have heard, New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo finalized a ban on hydraulic fracturing (fracking) several days ago. What were his administrations reasons for this action?

First of all, he had his back covered. Polls indicate that no major group, whether a political party, gender, age of interest group has had disapproval over the ban.

The thing is, over time, mountains of evidence piled up pointing at fracking as the origin of several major problems. Let’s take a look:

A 2014 report by Colorado School or Public Health and Brown University researchers found that women living near fracking sites has as much as a 30 percent increased chance of giving birth to babies with congenital heart defects.

An October 2013 Yale/Washington/Colorado State study found fracking significantly increases upper respiratory and skin problems.

New York's Institute of Health and the Environment at the University of Albany and others studied air emissions in five fracking states, finding dangerously high levels of carcinogenic chemicals like benzene (levels ranged from 35 times to more than 770,000 times normal) and formaldehyde (levels from 30 to 240 times normal) near frack sites.

I truly hope that New York’s actions have an effect on Pennsylvanian policies. The effects of fracking are real, health-wise and environmentally. Let’s hope that New York shows our politicians that a fracking ban will not ruin the economy, and will instead improve people’s living conditions.


Article

The Oil Price Crash - Environment?

Prokhor Zakharov // Valentin Sigalov

Reporting on the recent crash in oil prices. While excellent for the consumer, is it a detriment or a positive for the environment? Well, according to NewScientist, some are hailing it as good.






Oil prices have halved since last June, obviously leading to an increase in the amount of oil burned as fuel. This is because consumers are both less careful for things that are low cost to them, and low fuel prices encourage economic activity (Generally, transported goods get cheaper as well as their transportation costs are part of their final shelf price.) Furthermore, this discourages research into alternative energy sources. To top it all off, there doesn’t seem to be a slacking in this price slash as OPEC is reluctant to pump less. Some argue that gas-guzzlers may come back.

According to some experts, however, this is in fact a good thing environmentally. Low oil prices discourage investment into the oil market, as people want to gain money. This means that new ventures look like bad deals - as extraction is quite expensive, to tap sources yet untapped will lead to lesser gains.

Energy-wise, the boom in China is beginning to cool down as their demand for coal shrinks. China has set tight limits on future coal burning by 2020, leading to lowering coal costs around the world and mothballing on expensive coal-mining related projects.

It seems to me, personally, that on a policy-making level the slash in oil prices will in fact cause a decrease in alternative energy research and policies, as most people are most interested in their wallet. At the same time, it doesn’t seems as if it would affect pro-environmental initiatives.

Article

EPA and oil

EPA's administrator Gina McCarthy, has vowed that oil prices will not affect the new environmental regulations. It will also not affect the regulations coming this spring on commercial vehicles. The price for a barrel of oil is less than $50. EPA plans on decreasing methane and gas emissions by 40% from the 2012 standards by 2025. This is probably in compliance with Obama's not so secret dealing with China. Business in America will continue like usual.

EPA has always been placing environmental regulations on business, if anything these regulations will not be a surprise. People and companies will continue to use oil and gas and we will save money, at least compared to the prices before. The GOP has to agree with what EPA will propose, for we can not rely on cheap oil and gas, the price will eventually rise again. WE must slowly get rid of our dependence on non-renewable sources, and shift towards renewable sources, but the cheap prices will make that shift even slower. For the short term usually outweighs the long term to the average consumer. So people may not care about renewable energy sources as it is more expensive than existing conventional means. However, short term events are usually short, so we can hope for the better.

-Stephen

Wildfires: The Ties Against Humanity

Does the Government Cause of Prevent Wildfires

Initially, I had to read an article for my Environmental science class about wildfires. The article is split into 8 section and talk about if the Government causes wildfires and the policies to prevents them. Instead of regurgitating the ideas of these "important" and "well-known" people, I will share my opinions. Fair enough. That makes 9 sections you guys have to read. 

Wildfires could be caused by natural responses and also be anthropogenic. Wildfires are uncontrollable and fueled by the climate, wind and burn countless amount of land. This also means the amount of money in damage the U.S has to spend. I believe that the government has the potential to create policies to prevent forest fires, but they should put the right people in charge. The government serves to protect us, but if it fails to do so, then we could sue. Judging from the fact that this is a suing nation. 

The cause of wildfires are too many to look into. There can be many ways in which a fire can start. But more importantly, we should look into ways to prevent the fires. I always say, prevention is better than the cure. I cannot leave out one of the reasons why fires start. Humans. Yes we cause fires. Just a single cigarette can cause the destruction of thousands of acres. We need to take care of our environment; otherwise, we are hurting ourselves. I am fine with people who choose to live in an isolated area. Nature is beauty. Being able to live in an area surrounded by wildlife seems wonderful. Government should not intervene with the homeowners about living in the forest. "What people do with their own property should be between them and their insurance company." (O'Toole). "Regulation isn't necessary because Forest Service research has shown that wild land property owners" use simple techniques to protect from fires. The government could make policies but there is no point in them unless these polices are integrated into society.   

Night...