The Unnatural Kingdom

Scientists are coming up with new methods that can save endangered species, due to advancements in technology. One method was the collar system that was tested on The Sierra Bighorns species which is an endangered species. The Sierra Bighorns was hunted by Lions and in one point in time their population decreased to about 100. Back in the day people would fire net guns from helicopters to capture Bighorns, and gave them collars with GPS and VHF radio transmitters. Professional hunters used these collars to track and dart almost every Lion in the area. After this occurred, Biologists watch the Bighorn’s movements and whenever a Lion killed multiple bighorns in a short period of time, the hunters used VHF radio waves and a special bred Lion Hounds to find the Lion and kill it.

Another method was the relocation of pregnant sheep, which allowed the species diverse genetics to be introduced to other species in another area. Introducing new genes to the "gene pool," caused an increase in diversity and population. Relocating an animal is not as effective as putting collars on the animals to track their every movement. By placing animals in new random areas to increase their population, doesn't affect the animals’ natural aspect as much. But putting animals in a different location may affect them psychologically in the beginning, due to the fact that they are taken out of their habitat and put in an unfamiliar area. However, as time goes on the animal will eventually adapt to its surroundings. But, conservationists would most likely move these animals to an area that is similar to the area that they were in before.

Restored populations of Big Horn Sheep will have less genetic diversity than they did 200 years ago because the current population of Sheep has been created by the same small species of Sheep, causing a low gene pool to be created. These restored populations should still be considered wild because they haven't been domesticated, and they live in the wild still. I believe that the collar system would be more efficient. I think this because it’s easier to monitor and manage.

IFAP topic 1: public health

IFAP systems are very harmful to workers, people who live nearby, also those who live far away from the systems. They are harmful because they produce a lot of air pollution and water pollution. Workers and people who live nearby the IFAP systems go through more problems that affect their ability to breathe clean air. People who work in the IFAP systems can bring nasty diseases into their homes, which causes the disease to spread and eventually can affect a whole community population. This disease that the meat carries causes the human body to form a resistance against it. Then when there’s a time where you need assistance with something minor, the antibiotics most likely won’t work because your body has created a resistance to it because you’ve been around the meat with the disease. In the end appropriate treatment of great amounts of waste needs to occur or it will result in contamination in close waters. This will cause the water to have very harmful levels of toxins, such as viruses and nasty bacteria.




Source:




http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/news-room/press-releases/2008/04/29/pew-commission-says-industrial-scale-farm-animal-production-poses-unacceptable-risks-to-public-health-environment


Image:

EROI Hw

Which energy source should we extract and use first, oil shale or tar sands? Why?

•  We should extract oil from tar sands first. We should do this because they have a higher EROEI than oil shale does.

Describe one similarity between the process used to get oil from tar sands and the process used to get oil from oil shale.

• Both tar sands and oil shale must be heated in order to obtain the oil from it.

Describe one key difference between the process used to get oil from tar sands and the process used to get oil from oil shale.

•  A key difference between the process used to get oil from shale and tar sands is when they collect it. Tar sands are mined while oil shale is drilled. Drilling is less intruding than mining is. Rock containing oil shale has to be heated to take the oil. Tar sands is extracted then heated in water, which is less energy consuming than heating oil shale.

Explain, in terms of EROI, why the author believes "off-shore oil drilling may be a smart way to actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the long run".

• When it comes to off-shore drilling there is a higher EROI and consequently you get more oil and also have to use less fossil fuels to acquire.  In the long run, this means we produce more oil without having to use as much oil or fossil fuels to get it. This causes lower rates of CO2 pollution in the air.

Use EROI/Best First Principle to explain one decision that you have made in your day-to-day life. This could literally be anything, but I am looking for new examples other than the energy resources we have been studying. In other words, you should provide an example of how EROI influenced a decision at your individual level rather than the societal level.

• When tests come up I don't study the night before. So the day of the test I have a lot more energy to actually take the test because I wont be tired from studying.