Alpine's Profile
Reputation: 12
Good
- Group:
- Members
- Active Posts:
- 65 (0.09 per day)
- Most Active In:
- Environmental Studies (19 posts)
- Joined:
- 08-May 10
- Profile Views:
- 4,754
- Last Active:
Apr 24 2012 05:22 AM- Currently:
- Offline
My Information
- Member Title:
- Thinking
- Age:
- 17 years old
- Birthday:
- February 5, 1995
- Gender:
-
Male
- Location:
- Earth
- Interests:
- Everything
Contact Information
- E-mail:
- Click here to e-mail me
Converted
- Biography:
- One of the most temperamental person on the planet
- Location:
- Planet Earth, Solar System
- Interests:
- Thinking
- Occupation:
- Student
Latest Visitors
-
DFINITLYDISTRUBD 
17 Feb 2012 - 12:07 -
JMJones0424

09 Oct 2011 - 07:57 -
Essay 
11 Jun 2011 - 22:24 -
Syniurge 
07 May 2011 - 17:17 -
Qfwfq 
12 Feb 2011 - 06:32
Topics I've Started
-
The Defamed Prius
23 April 2012 - 09:57 AM
For a long time I have been noticing people saying things about Toyota Prius which can only be viewed as a negative review. I strongly suspect if most of the people have actually driven one but that's not my concern as of now. I've been told that Toyota's Prius is not environmental friendly. I'm not sure whether to believe it or not and hence I come here seeking some hardcore facts and science.
People claim that the production of Toyota Prius is one of the most non-eco-friendly production ever. There are some questions being raised if the car itself is environmental friendly. I've also been told that TopGear did the math on all of this and proved that Prius is not as eco-friendly as it is claimed to be.
So, I leave it to you all science folks to prove whether or not Toyota Prius is an environmental friendly car or not (by which I mean that it's production is to be taken under consideration as well).
Thank You
Alpine -
A Song For Christmas
23 November 2011 - 07:58 AM
Hello World, it's almost Christmas season so I thought I should lighten up the mood a little. I would like to share this song I heard last year which unfortunately didn't make it to the charts since most of the recording companies thought it wouldn't do good for their sales. Hopefully it will make it to the charts this year though. So, this is for a merrier Christmas. The Florin Street Band's - My Favorite time of Year.
http://youtu.be/H10f2w7T5CU
Please view it and share it and enjoy the holidays.
Regards ( & Happy Holidays to you all)
-
Not Ice-Nine
11 November 2011 - 10:24 AM
Hello World.
As always I wasn't sure where to make this thread but I suppose Chemistry fits it well. According to "Discovery Channel's Planet Earth" a fourth phase of water has been found or will be found.
To quote Discovery Channel's post on Facebook
Quote
Super cool new water form found
Now to quote the article
Quote
Besides vapor, ice and liquid, a fourth form of water may exist, but don't worry, Kurt Vonnegut fans, it's not ice-nine, the dangerous, solid at room temperature substance from the book Cat's Cradle. Unlike the fictional ice-nine, which melted at 114 degrees Fahrenheit, this new form of H2O likes it cold, about 54 degrees below zero Fahrenheit.
Liquid water usually freezes into ice at 32 Fahrenheit, but under the right conditions, like the high pressure at the bottom of the ocean, water stays liquid below 32 Fahrenheit.
Water's fourth form, or phase, may be a liquid with some of the properties of both ice and regular liquid water. But laboratory equipment isn't sensitive enough to observe the rapid transformation from regular liquid water to the fourth form.
Researchers Pradeep Kumar and H. Eugene Stanley used a computer simulation to model the elusive liquid. They found that at about 54 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, the local structure of water seems to become extremely ordered, like ice, while undergoing sharp but continuous structural changes and remaining liquid.
Oddly, at this temperature the water also became more conductive of heat, the opposite of what happens with regular liquid water and ice, as anyone living in an igloo will tell you.
The strange behavior of water at low temperatures is what led Stanley and Kumar to believe that their results support the idea that water has a fourth phase.
Of course the article isn't correct in scientific terms but whoa this is exciting. A new form! Any thoughts on this one?
Also before logging off I'll just throw this around, IF IT EXISTS, then which state of matter will this new phase come under? Solid? Liquid? Gaseous? Or Bose-Einstein Condensate? Or maybe a completely new state?
Link to the website: http://news.discover...l#mkcpgn=fbdsc6 -
Kelp, Peat Moss & Eutrophication
30 August 2011 - 08:56 PM
Hello World
Like always it's time for my science projects and like previous year I'm continuing my work on Kelp forest but this time I've taken the liberty to expand the project a bit by including moss into it.So here it goes.
In one of my books (biology) I cam across as sentence which read, "Mosses help control soil erosion." and that made sense since they form almost a layer over the soil which would prevent the soil from running away with the agents of erosion. But the question is, if mosses do prevent soil erosion and if we know that they do then why don't we take advantage of this unique property of them? They can be used near the river banks to help delay soil erosion to a great extent. But still we don't use them?
Although I've no idea why we don't I upon thinking about it I now have a few questions regarding mosses (P.S Fo the project I plan on using Peat Moss (Sphagnum).
1) If peat moss or any other moss is grown near river bank (or lakes) is there any risk of eutrophication? (Same question applies for kelp)
2) As we know that the mosses form a layer over the soil to prevent soil erosion, but does this effect the exchange of gasses that takes place in and out of soil (for e.g nitrogen gets absorbed by the soil)?
3) Is the fungal infection that can be caused by mosses serious? Is there any moss which does not posses the same threat?
Now, apart from these question which may even hold the answer to why mosses aren't used/cultivated to prevent soil erosion it seems like mosses have plenty of uses. Please refer to these links to know them (http://en.wikipedia....raditional_uses) & (http://en.wikipedia....i/Sphagnum#Uses). Aside from that I think (I'm not sure) that mosses are also autotrophic so they are useful for preventing climate change to. So is there no way that we can somehow get rid of the dangers it posses and use it to somehow prevent various environmental threats?
Now coming to Kelp forests, I know their uses but what I'm not much aware of are it's disadvantages; Red tide being one of them (which is I suppose a form of eutrophication). Are there any other potential threats that Kelp forests may cause? And also is there any way to prevent the red tide or excess multiplication of the kelp?
That's all for now. Thank you
-
Oceans In Distress Foreshadow Mass Extinction
21 June 2011 - 12:23 AM
Hello World, just today I read an article on Yahoo! titled same as this thread and even though I'm not sure if what these people claim is true, there claims are shocking. I really wanted to share this article and spread some light on the urgency to take some quick actions. Here's the article:
Quote
Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned.
Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top ocean experts.
Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.
These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that scientists now call the Earth system.
All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.
"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."
Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming, acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as hypoxia.
Up to now, these and other impacts have been studied mainly in isolation. Only recently have scientists began to understand how these forces interact.
"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said. "That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."
Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.
The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.
Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.
But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately all life on Earth -- depends.
"The rate at which carbon is being absorbed is already far greater now than during the last globally significant extinction of marine species 55 million years ago," when some 50 percent of deep-sea life was wiped out, the report said.
That event, called the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, or PETM, may be an ancient dress rehearsal for future climate change that could be even more abrupt and more damaging, some scientists fear.
Pollution has also taken a heavy toll, rendering the oceans less resilient to climate change.
Runoff from nitrogen-rich fertiliser, killer microbes, and hormone-disrupting chemicals, for example, have all contributed to the mass die-off of corals, crucial not just for marine ecosystems but a lifeline for hundreds of millions of people too.
The harvesting up to 90 percent of some species of big fish and sharks, meanwhile, has hugely disrupted food chains throughout the ocean, leading to explosive and imbalanced growth of algae, jellyfish and other "opportunistic" flora and fauna.
"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley, head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report.
"And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

Help
Join now
Find My Content
Display name history
Comments
Essay
09 May 2010 - 22:38