The Big, Bad, Wildfires of 2012

According to the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), and NASA, 2012 was, “an extraordinary year for wildfires.” While this was already a known fact of mine as I have blogged about it previously in the year, the statistics of just how popular wildfires were this year are interesting. As of December 2012, NIFC statistics showed that over 9.1 million acres of land have burned this year- which is the 3^rd highest total in history since data has been recorded in 1960.  Although the number of wildfires itself for 2012 was low (56,000), along with the number of acres burned being extremely high, the average size of fires in 2012 is the highest recorded in history.

            Along with the NIFC recording and researching fire data, NASA researchers also maintain records of the amount of area burned per year as a part of the Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED). According to NASA scientist Louis Giglio, the intensity of wildfires in 2012 will also break the GFED record. So why is this data important? Well, after the shocking drought that the U.S. and many other parts of the world have been faced with, this information will become very useful in planning and mitigation efforts to areas prone to these fires. Giglio stated in an interview that, “This type of long-term fire monitoring will only become important as the climate changes and certain regions prone to fire become drier.”

            By looking at records and other data that has been collected over time, researchers can begin studying these wildfire trends and start predicting which regions need to be better managed and prepared to prevent the spread of wildfires. To read more about wildfires in the past year, visit my blogs, “Conditions For Fire Favorable In Wisconsin,” and “Firenado Hits Australian Outback.”

For more information on this story, visit:

2012 Marks Extraordinary Year For U.S Wildfires

NASA Earth Observatory- U.S Wildfires

NASA- 2012 And The Future Of Fire

The Fountain Of Youth Gets A Run For Its Money

            A new study led by researchers at Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) shows that the life expectancy in the United States from the years 2000-2007 has improved in 545 counties. In this time duration, the life expectancy in these counties increased 0.35 years. So what’s to thank for this increase in life-expectancy? According to research, it may be the environmental laws and regulations put in to place that is responsible for the research found in this study.

             According to lead author of the study, Dr. Andrew Correia, “Despite the fact that the U.S. population as a whole is exposed to much lower levels of air pollution than 30 years ago—because of great strides made to reduce people’s exposure—it appears that further reductions in air pollution levels would continue to benefit public health.” This study in particular focused on the effect on health due to fine particulate matter. There have been other studies done that show associations between chronic and acute exposure to fine particulate air pollution, cardiopulmonary disease and death, so this study helps show the importance of continuing to decrease this pollution in our society. Past studies have also shown that reducing air pollution can also reduce health effects and increase life expectancy, just as this study has justified as well.

            So with laws and regulations on air quality control in place, and hopefully more to come, it will be interesting to see if this increase in life expectancy continues to grow and have a direct correlation with the amount of air pollution in our society. Though there are skeptics of this idea, if people want to help reduce air pollution for a reason other than a 0.35 year increase in life expectancy, maybe they can do it for planet earth, and the future generations that will occupy it.

For more information on this story, visit:
Improvements In Air Quality Add Years To Life Expectancy In U.S

Harvard School of Public Health

             

A Not So Happy Holiday

With the holiday season right around the corner, many warnings are being released regarding the purchase of children’s toys. After the major Mattel recall made in 2007, where over 900,000 toys were recalled, the CDC is reminding adults to use caution when purchasing children’s toys. In a recent news release, the CDC reminds consumers of the health hazards associated with lead and other toxins.

Lead is a colorless and odorless gas which can be found in the paint and/or plastic of toys; and it can be nearly impossible to detect being that it is invisible to the naked eye. A child can be exposed to lead simply from normal handling of a product. Being that children’s nose, mouth and ears are in close proximity to these toys, it makes lead paint and/or dust exposure easy.  

Although lead poisoning can sometimes be hard to detect, and many people may have high amounts of lead in their blood without showing any symptoms, there are many symptoms to look for in children that may indicate exposure to lead. Signs and symptoms of lead poisoning in children may include the following: irritability, loss of appetite, weightlessness, fatigue, abdominal pain, vomiting, constipation, and learning difficulties.

Being that the only way to be positive a child was not exposed to lead, is a blood test, physicians advise that children see their doctor for a test if they come in contact with a recalled toy.  

 For more information on this story, visit:

CDC: Lead Hazards In Some Holiday Toys

Learn more about lead and it's health effects at:

CDC: Lead

To learn about the Mattel recall of 2007, visit:

Mattel Issues Massive Toy Recall

New York Has Voted And The Results Are In

According to a recent poll taken by the Siena Research Institute of Loudonville, NY, the results show that the vast majority of New York voters believe that Hurricane Sandy demonstrated the effects of climate change. According to this poll, 69% of voters tied not only this superstorm, but tropical storms Irene and Lee (last year) to global climate change. On the contrary, the poll found that only 23% of New York voters believe that these storms were isolated events.

 

Considering the timing of Hurricane Sandy, which may or may not have played a significant role in this year’s presidential election, these results are staggering. While 8 in 10 Democrats said the storms demonstrated climate change, Republicans were more split on the issue. 46% of Republicans believe these storms were linked to climate change while 44% believe these events were isolated. Being that President Obama and Governor Romney had varying views on the subject of climate change, these storms could have very well played a big part in the election- with 69% of New York residents linking these events to climate change.

Along with this, according to this recent poll which was conducted last Monday through Thursday, it seems that the majority of people were pleased with the way in which Hurricane Sandy was handled, unlike the preparedness of Hurricane Katrina a few years back. Siena Research Institute found that 67% of voters said Governor Andrew M. Cuomo did an excellent or good job handling the storm, 61 percent approved of President Obama’s performance, and 53 percent were pleased with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Siena Research Institute, 2012).

This poll was interesting to me, and I would have to agree that the way in which this storm was handled seemed very appropriate. The mitigation acts that were in place and the preparedness of the affected areas without a doubt were much better than what we have seen in recent years; for example, as compared to Hurricane Katrina.

 
So what does this say for our future? Will we start hearing more about climate change and policies/plans to save our environment? I will continue to follow this topic to see how the issue of climate change revolves in recent news.

For more information on this recent poll, visit:

NY Times: Most New Yorkers Tie Hurricane Sandy to Climate Change, Poll Finds

Siena Research Institute