|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 14, 2021 5:34:39 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 14, 2021 8:25:46 GMT 9.5
The Man Who Saw It Coming Eamon Whalen 2021 Sep 06/13, pp 15–19 The Nation (Available @ TheNation.com, I think)
Industrial agriculture causes pandemics. Covid-19 is merely the latest. Strongly recommended.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 15, 2021 1:37:16 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 24, 2021 3:00:29 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 25, 2021 1:29:22 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 25, 2021 2:24:56 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Nov 23, 2021 11:28:24 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Nov 27, 2021 4:33:46 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Dec 29, 2021 9:53:38 GMT 9.5
A Growing Revolution Dean Kuiper 2021 Dec 27 The Nation Pages 26 ff
No link as I have the print edition. About small co-ops producing survival for family organic farms in the USA, including urban ones.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jan 18, 2022 12:55:50 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jan 20, 2022 8:55:27 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 2, 2022 9:02:17 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 5, 2022 18:41:22 GMT 9.5
Climate change has likely begun to suffocate the world’s fisheries... Phys.org... Not enough oxygen at mid-depths. Don't be worried by this article, the deep ocean is not suffocating yet. On the contrary, global warming only significantly affects the " mixing layer", the top 200 m or so of the oceans that wave action reaches, mixing heat, CO2 and oxygen absorbed from the air. As this layer warms, its buoyancy increases, further isolating the deeper ocean from the atmosphere. The deeper ocean occasionally reaches the surface in upwellings such as the La Niña, but mainly is turned over by the " Southern Pump" in the Southern Ocean, where the roaring forties and fifties draw the deep water up and northwards into all three major oceans. By the time it reaches 40° S, it has subducted again under the global mixing layer. The turnover time used to be about a thousand years, but soon the increasingly fierce westerlies are expected to reduce that to as little as 300 years. Phys.org is populist, not peer-reviewed, so readers should check any "fact" that seems worth noting. In this case the article is referring to a letter reporting on some modelling, predicting when a deoxygenation signal might be detected in the depths. The modellers don't explain the models used or justify their extrapolation to depth, so may not be accounting for the processes of ocean turnover. The journalist is confusing the mixed layer, where the fish live, with the unmixed layer immediately below, where their "faecal detritus" accumulates and deoxygenates the locality.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 6, 2022 1:09:29 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 6, 2022 10:23:25 GMT 9.5
The [research] paper... appeared in Geophysical Research Letters, hence peer reviewed. Yes, the modelling reported in Geophysical Research Letters would have been peer-reviewed. However phys.org, where the article interprets it, is not peer-reviewed. If you compare the two documents, you will see a wide discrepancy. The modellers predict a detectable signal, whereas the journalist predicts a collapse of the world's fisheries. You may notice that he has failed to identify himself, which would have been needed for accountability.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 6, 2022 10:48:01 GMT 9.5
The [research] paper... appeared in Geophysical Research Letters, hence peer reviewed. Yes, the modelling reported in Geophysical Research Letters would have been peer-reviewed. However phys.org, where the article interprets it, is not peer-reviewed. If you compare the two documents, you will see a wide discrepancy. The modellers predict a detectable signal, whereas the journalist predicts a collapse of the world's fisheries. You may notice that he has failed to identify himself, which would have been needed for accountability. The report in Phys.org is clearly labeled as written by “the American Geophysical Union”, i.e., some anonymous individual in the organization PR department. When ariticles are written by the staff of Phys.org the individual is given credit. That is my understanding, in any case.
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 8, 2022 12:38:27 GMT 9.5
Climate change has likely begun to suffocate the world’s fisheries BNC policy requires that any questionable statement in the blog be backed up by a peer-reviewed paper. You have propagated an assertion from phys.org, about the world's fisheries being threatened, unsupported by the underlying peer-reviewed paper (Emerging Global Ocean Deoxygenation Across the 21st Century), which says nothing of the sort. Phys.org is questionable, no doubt about it, so don't trust it. Please desist from quoting from that source unless you have read the underlying peer-reviewed paper to confirm the content. The freelancing journalist hides his identity under an illusion of respectability – there is no "The" in "American Geophysical Union". AGU is a respected scientific publishing house with many general and specialist publications (more than 60). They would have no reason to associate with a disreputable medium like phys.org, and every reason to stay away from it. Not least because it tolerates a series of scientific whoppers that no AGU staffer would make.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 9, 2022 5:42:19 GMT 9.5
Roger Clifton, the report cited was, as clearly indicated at the very last line, provided by the American Geophysical Union. In that report, the paper lead author and also another oceanographer are quoted as mentioning fisheries. The underlying peer-reviewed paper in Geophysical Research Letters doesn’t mention this deduction about damage to fisheries since it is obvious to any expert reading the paper, such as the quoted oceanographer Lang.
If you follow the link to the AGU provided at the end of the report cited, you will discover another link to precisely this same content. The only text added by Phys.org was that last line. The rest of us appreciate having the report and its deduction brought to our attention. Peace.
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 9, 2022 15:33:01 GMT 9.5
The underlying peer-reviewed paper... doesn’t mention this deduction about damage to fisheries since it is obvious to any expert I think we are disagreeing on whether an article on phys.org should be used to back up a significant statement made on BNC. According to the BNC policy, any such reference should be peer-reviewed, which phys.org is not, so does not qualify. Phys.org does have editorial standards, which this article (that I contest) largely meets: It came with a suggestive picture, purports to be based on a peer-reviewed paper, has a highly informative headline, is easy to read, intrigues the reader, and appears to summarise the paper's results. With as many as 98 articles on many fields published every day, it is easy to see that phys.org would have accepted the article without checking the science. The journalist was confident that phys.org would not check the reasoning, and he or she was confident that the reader would not check either. We are then misled for the sake of clickbait. The reader does not have to be an expert to see that the world's fisheries (in the top 200 m of the ocean) would not be threatened by not-yet-detected changes in the deoxygenated layer (200 m - 1500 m) below it. Yet he confidently draws that sensationalist headline, unsupported by the compulsory peer-reviewed paper that it is ostensibly based on. I could pick the same fault with many other phys.org articles that have been quoted on BNC. If an article in phys.org looks interesting, instead of posting a link to the article, by all means post the link to the peer-reviewed paper it is based on, with your analysis of its contents. Then we would have a basis for an ongoing intelligent discussion.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 10, 2022 3:39:22 GMT 9.5
Of course the report in question contains a link to the paper in Geophysical Review Letters. For most, the word of two oceanographers that the temperature change at depth will affect fisheries suffices. For others, a review of some basics which I picked picked up over the years but I assume are part of Oceanography 101 are contained in the following Wikipedia articles, certainly well referenced: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diel_vertical_migrationwhich I learned about under the older name of Diurnal Vertical Migration which occurs for, especially, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krilla food source for a wide variety of species, just notably whales. Krill live on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copepodwhich largely undergo diel migration, as do most krill. Of course there are some fished species which directly eat copepods and indeed, I discover, krill themselves are harvested for human consumption. Therefore, as the two quoted oceanographers noted, the thermal change will impact ocean fisheries.
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 10, 2022 16:51:37 GMT 9.5
the word of two oceanographers that the temperature change at depth will affect fisheries suffices. Except that they didn't specifically say that. The basis for the article, the peer-reviewed paper didn't say that either – and it provides no support for the nightmare that the journalist wants us to believe. Thank you for the link to diurnal vertical migration. It describes how invertebrates such as krill migrate daily below the thermocline, to escape the fish, which do not go below the thermocline. The Wikipedia entry goes on to explain how their migration significantly increases the biological oxygen demand (deoxygenation) immediately below the thermocline. But that process of deoxygenation has always been there, with re-oxygenation occurring later, when the deepwater is turned over in the Southern Ocean.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Feb 11, 2022 4:21:03 GMT 9.5
Roger Clifton, the so-called-by-you journalist was the report writer of the American Geophysical Union. I believe your complaint is specious but the correct place to take it is not here, not Phys.org, but the AGU.
Everybody else sees the implications clearly enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Edited to add the following quotation from the end of the Plain Language Summary in the Geophysical Research Letters paper: The trend of rapidly declining oxygen concentrations with ongoing global warming can greatly affect fisheries and other marine resources.
|
|
|
Post by Roger Clifton on Feb 13, 2022 10:28:31 GMT 9.5
from the end of the Plain Language Summary in the Geophysical Research Letters paper: The trend of rapidly declining oxygen concentrations with ongoing global warming can greatly affect fisheries and other marine resources.Thank you for referring to the underlying, peer-reviewed paper. This is where any discussion on BNC should start.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Apr 26, 2022 6:04:46 GMT 9.5
Managing UK agriculture with rock dust could absorb up to 45% of the atmospheric carbon dioxide needed for net-zero 2022 Apr 25 Phys.org phys.org/news/2022-04-uk-agriculture-absorb-atmospheric-carbon.htmlPresumably that is net of the additional CO2 produced in the mining and comminution of the required basalt. Could start right away as this would be a valuable soil amendment.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on May 29, 2022 12:25:39 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on May 31, 2022 10:29:59 GMT 9.5
Israel Proves the Desalination Era Is Here Rowan Jacobsen & Ensia 2016 Jul 16 Scientific American www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the-desalination-era-is-here/Despite the claims here, agricultural water is quite expensive compared to other places, such as California. On a PPP basis Israel domestic water is about as expensive as in Southern California. However, this is certainly a fine accomplishment.
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jun 7, 2022 3:10:18 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by huon on Jun 20, 2022 16:14:48 GMT 9.5
Can farms produce to the max and still reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Kristen Molly Dean, Argonne National Laboratory 17 Jun 2022 Phys.org phys.org/news/2022-06-farms-max-greenhouse-gas-emissions.htmlIt is possible, simultaneously, to "increase carbon in the soil, improve farm profitability and mitigate more GHGs."
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Jul 10, 2022 5:46:10 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by David B. Benson on Sept 9, 2022 3:25:22 GMT 9.5
|
|