Well it is still January, so I think I can still do my new year blog. It's not really resolutions though. I started this year with no real expectations or resolutions or goals, just to continue what I was doing working for Mad Science, doing online classes and looking for environmental jobs.
Before Christmas I tried to talk to a professor about grad school, but it did not go as well as I had hoped, because of my marks but I was referred to someone else for a different program. I met with her and she told me I had a good chance and should apply even though my marks are low, I have since improved and have a lot of potential. So I am applying for September, for a Masters in Environmental Sustainability at UWO, it is a one year course based program with a co-op term. I just have to write a letter of Academic Intent, I better get on that. Fingers crossed. I really hope I get in. If not, there are other options I can pursue and keep on the job hunt.
The next week, I went to an interview for a local mapping and imaging company, I wasn't really sure what they did. The interview went amazing, and I showed him a project I did that was similar to the type of mapping I would be doing, and I think that is what sold him. I was offered the job right after. Bring your portfolio, always, you never know when you might need it. I started this week. What do I do? I make maps. Well sort of, I take scans of old "Fire Maps" which are like old hand drawn maps of properties and streets, and I "geo-reference" them by putting the street layers on to the maps. I also learned this other program similar to google maps, well it uses Bing actually. It may not be an environmental job, but I like GIS, and I did take it so it is nice to finally have a job I went to school for.
I also started a new online class called Management of the Biophysical Environment, as part of my certificate in Environmental Conservation from the University of Guelph. I am excited for the topics that will be covered. It will give me a different perspective, I hope. Thats all for now. I hope I can stay on top of things now that I have a full time job, we shall see how disciplined I am.
I also wanna remain on the hunt for environmental jobs too but I have to find the time to apply. So much to do so little time.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Leaks in London
Hey. This is a post for my online class where we have to take a local environmental issue and run it through and Issue Attention Cycle of the problem, associated costs, and how people and media react to it. So here is one story that really caught my eye. I did my research and have included links below.
Issue Attention Cycle: Leaks in London
Problem Stage:
Leaks in local Shell Gas Station gasoline on two neighboring properties with historical buildings. This leak occurred in 2005, it could also be considered a post problem stage. But, the problem is that the soil and groundwater may still be contaminated. Shell bought these properties and boarded up one of the buildings. This is part of a larger problem of gasoline leaks from new or old service stations.
This is a problem because, leakage of petroleum or other products from underground storage tanks is a common cause of soil and ground water contamination (1). Contaminated sites are very often found near operating gas stations, former gas stations and other locations that store fuels in underground storage tanks (1). Between 7,500 and 20,000 underground storage tanks across Canada are thought to be leaking. Older tanks leak due to corrosion (1). The health and safety of people who live or work on or close to a contaminated site are directly at risk (1). The local natural environment is also at risk due to soil and groundwater contamination (1). Alarmed Discovery and Euphoric Enthusiasm:
The story was broke by a member of the community on his website (2), and was released by London Community News (3). The London Free Press did their own story, but it was really more of a Shell endorsement, in accordance with Ministry of Environment and the City of London (4). If the story had not broke, I wonder if they would have ever reported it to the public.
Shell has bought both properties from Murphy and Murphy Architects, in efforts to control the clean up process (4). Residents are alarmed that the sites could still be contaminated in the soil and groundwater (2). The heritage home at 777 Waterloo has been boarded up. Murphy and Murphy Architects at 775 will have to be evacuated by the end of February 2012 (3). They will be forced out of an office built in 1962, with a beautiful nature mural painted on the side (3).
Residents of the Heritage Community are concerned what effects of the soil and water means for neighboring properties, and even a school only 50 feet away. Here is a comment from the Bishop Hellmuth Community Association Facebook Page (5):
“The real order of business needs to be getting a copy of the environmental assessment to find out just how wide-spread the contamination is, what the contaminants are and what the effect will be on the kids that go to school 50 feet from the site. The health and well being of the neighbours and kids adjacent to this site is several orders of magnitude more important than building preservation issues."
The environmental concern is soil and groundwater contamination (from aquifers). Municipal, irrigation, and industrial water supplies are provided through large wells, which may withdraw water from confined or unconfined aquifers. This contamination could affect the local groundwater, London drinking water comes from Lake Huron and Erie, so that may not be a concern. Shell did tests on boreholes, which presume that aquifer contamination has occurred.
The other issue is that these are historical buildings, and once Shell puts the properties up for sale they will be at risk for demolition. Even before the sale, they are still at risk.
Residents have created a website (6) and Facebook page (5) to post news and encouraging the community to go look at the file from the London Ministry of Environment office.
Realizing the costs of significant progress:
The cost of the environmental assessment is being covered by Shell. What is unknown is what the future costs will be. Will the buyer have to maintain the site and pay for environmental assessments? These buildings are regulated under heritage permits, which allows the quality of changes made in neighbouring properties, and thus serves to protect each owner’s investment in his property. The community is really concerned. The cost of the loss of a heritage building is irreplaceable, and cause a threat to the whole heritage community.
The costs of a cleanup exceed the property’s value (1). If a site is contaminated, authorities could order anyone who has any control of the property or business to clean it up, whether or not they were responsible for the contamination (1). Anyone who has ever owned or leased the property may be ordered to participate in the cleanup, even creditors who gained possession of a contaminated property, may be required to cover some or all of the cleanup costs (1). It can be expensive and difficult to monitor the compliance of these activities. The current property owners and occupants affected by nearby contaminated sites may sue those responsible, or sue current owners who may not even have caused the contamination.
Gradual Decline of Public Interest:
Even though this leak occurred over 6 years ago, I had never head of it until now. Shell has done a pretty good job of hiding it. It has recently been getting a lot of attention due to Shell buying the properties and doing clean up. The public needs to be more informed about this issue. With the actions of the Bishop Hellmuth Heritage Community Association, I see them continuing to follow this issue and hopefully get other Londoners involved. Action from the City of London should be taken as well. I plan myself to follow this issue.
My speculation based on previous gasoline leaks across Canada. Petroleum leakages pose a threat of soil and groundwater contamination. Due to groundwater contamination, the contamination can actually spread beyond the site itself (1). This would put more properties in the area at risk, up to many city blocks to contamination (1). Leaking storage tanks at gas stations are a major source of environmental contamination (1). Environmental site assessments, the type and age of underground fuel storage tanks, leak detection and liability insurance could negatively impact the property’s environmental and economic value (1).
Due to increased awareness environmental issues, related laws and liability, if someone wants to buy these property they would require a recently completed Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments (1). Buyers will also require an accredited commercial property appraisal, a valid contamination insurance policy, and a recent tank test report (1). If contamination is detected, further levels of testing may also be required, in addition to the work being done (1).
A related story in BC explains Shell’s efforts and agreements to help buyers through the process (7). It also states that there are 20,823 sites are currently contaminated and can be found through Environment Canada’s database.
Unfortunately, like most gas leaks this will probably be added to the growing leaks list afterwards. Not sure what further action will be taken place. MOE is not required to report these. There definitely needs to be some preventative action for gas stations, rather than just a clean up the mess attitude. How do we prevent this? What sort of proactive suggestions do you have?
Links
4. http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/01/08/19216491.html#/news/london/2012/01/08/pf-19216491.html
Friday, January 13, 2012
Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Joint Review Panel Letter of Comment
There has been a lot of talk about the pipelines lately about who can have a say, who can attend meetings. Well now, we can all have a say. Please go to the website and leave your own comment. http://gatewaypanel.review-examen.gc.ca/efile/LetterOfComment4.aspx
Not sure what to say? Well there are plenty of reasons to be against the pipelines, we need to seek other fuels and energy sources other than oil, BC's temperate rainforest, fisheries, freshwater supply, leaks, salmon populations, endangered species, marine mammals, First Nations, economy, people of BC/Alberta, society, culture. Here is my comment
Not sure what to say? Well there are plenty of reasons to be against the pipelines, we need to seek other fuels and energy sources other than oil, BC's temperate rainforest, fisheries, freshwater supply, leaks, salmon populations, endangered species, marine mammals, First Nations, economy, people of BC/Alberta, society, culture. Here is my comment
I am opposed to the Enbridge Pipeline. As a marine biologist, I see the pipeline as an environmental hazard. British Columbia's temperate rain forest is so pristine, and natural it is our duty as Canadians to help protect and conserve it as well as the species within it. This pipeline is a threat to forests, freshwater, fisheries, salmon populations, marine mammals, birds, and so many other already threatened animals. Oil pipelines violate the fisheries act, for working around water, environmental assessment act, and so many other federal and provincial laws for Alberta and BC. Why are laws thrown aside, or ignored for this, and what are the benefits, besides money and will the money we get out of it be more than we put in. What happened to cost-benefit analysis? These are supposed to cover not just financial costs! Also, what about the people who live along the gateway, not only First Nations, but other people as well. Their homes, jobs, society and culture are being threatened as well. There have been 170 leaks in the last 10 years, can we guarantee the Enbridge pipeline wont leak.
Back to my marine biology background, the pipeline would cross salmon spawning grounds. A leak here would be detrimental to salmon populations, salmon die after returning to rivers to spawn, if a leak occurred here salmon eggs would be destroyed, and the salmon’s habitat would be destroyed and they would not be able to return, and therefore not be able to spawn and the population would not be able to flourish. This would really hurt the native fishery, the recreational fishery, and the commercial fishery, and inturn BC’s economy which makes millions of dollars from the fishing industry.
Please think twice about this pipeline and see if it is really worth the cost that it will to British Columbia? Or to Canada? British Columbia is a Have Province, so is Alberta, but feeding Alberta's oil industry, could cause BC to become a Have Not Province, as well as Alberta if leaks occur.
Thank you,
Karleen Sirna
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
My response to Round Table Questions
So this weeks questions for the London Round table were on continuing the MicroFIT program in London and how to improve it and how to make transportation more energy efficient.
These are my ideas:
MicroFIT
These are my ideas:
MicroFIT
The MicroFit Program is great, and should be continued. The problems with it are the initial start up or installation costs. I worked for a non-profit group, during the last provincial election, to promote Onatrio’s Green Energy Act and the FIT and MicroFit Programs. What was surprising was how many people did not know about these programs. I know not everyone can have a wind turbine, but if you live in a single detached home, you could have a solar panel. I think that there should be some sort of program that would promote solar power, or help finance it. A lot of new development in and around London are being built with solar panels on the roof this is so great. What about existing developments and homes?
I think that an incentive program for landlords, residential building developer/owners. I think that apartment buildings and multi-residential homes should be targeted. If there was an incentive for buying multiple solar panels to go on the rooftops of apartment buildings, owners would be likely to be on board, because instead of paying for power, they would actually be making money off of their solar panels. This money could then be used for other things in the buildings for the tenants. If the city provided a grant to these owners then they could be able to install panels and be able to pay it back with their earnings from selling back onto the grid.
Green Transportation
I worked at a job where I was solely reliable on my own vehicle. Now I am starting a new position downtown, and I will be taking public transportation. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if buses became more green? What about electric or hybrid buses? What if the city could get funding to make buses more green? If the LTC could get a grant from the City of London or the Ministry of Transportation, or even the Ministry of Environment since it is an environmental choice. What about awarding people for taking the bus to work, instead of validating parking passes, what if a bus pass could be validated, for vouchers to local green businesses. A lot of taxis are now hybrids. What about also providing charge stations in indoor pay lot parking, for those with electric vehicles so workers could charge their vehicles while at work. People could pay for a green parking pass and be able to charge their green vehicles.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Blog from my phone
This is just a test. Can I blog from my phone? merry Christmas everyone! I was really sick about 2 weeks before Christmas! I finished my Mad Science session, never made it to my potluck. I remained sick for about 5 days. I had a few good visits with my friends over the holiday and exchanged gifts. It was nice. My dad and I went to Costco to exchange a shirt for cam and we were hit and run on the wellington and roxborough intersection dont ask me how but we were backed into. We did our annual 23rd Chinese food tradition for the family and cam's gf Jaime. Christmas eve was just relaxing then went to my mom's cousin heather to visit with her family and her sister who was home from Florida. For Christmas eve went to grandma sharon's for dinner with my aunt and uncle and a few cousins good family time. On Tuesday we went to TO to see my uncle aunt and their kids the ride up was rainy but not bad. The food was good the visit was great it was still early but we decided to head home. It was an awful ride glad I was not driving. Yesterday was my dads 50 th birthday we had a birthday dinner and cake and he opened his gifts very surprised I got him the lethal weapon movies and a wii game. My mom got him an air supply cd but inside was tickets and hotel for them how nice. Today not much tomorrow is new years eve no real plans but excited for a new year to start!
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Where does our food come from? How do reduce your footprint from food intake.
In Our Ecological Footprint, food is included in the land use matrix along with the amount of land for the energy required to produce it, garden space, and crops. Food is listed in the Footprint calculations, and it should be but there are associated energy and economic costs that must be considered. Wackernagel and Rees say “tomatoes have footprints” and suggest that if we grow tomatoes in greenhouses it would be “7-9 times more productive, but 10-20 more ecological footprint per kilogram of tomatoes than open field grown tomatoes. “
Where does our produce come from? That is seriously important. Organic food may cost more, but it’s not just because it is more natural, free of pesticides, how it’s grown. Pepsi discovered that the largest chunk of the footprint of its Tropicana orange juice was not in production (squeezing oranges) or in distribution (shipping heavy liquids is fuel-intensive), but in growing the oranges with natural-gas-based fertilizer (1).
One of the easiest ways you can reduce your own footprint is buy eating locally. According to Get Local BC: “The average North American meal travels 2,400 km to get from field to plate and contains ingredients from 5 countries in addition to our own – that’s a lot of “food miles”” (2). The David Suzuki Foundation has eating locally grown food as one of the top 10 ways to reduce your ecological footprint (2).
Studies have shown that if people replaced enough imported food items with locally grown items they can actually reduce household GHG emissions by a quarter of a tonne (2). This can get tricky due to our seasons, and food availability. However there is a seasonal chart that you can download that I have attached it is for BC, be nice if we could find one for Ontario.
There are programs in place for Sustainable Seafood. I am very glad that Canada, and stores and restaurants are on board this ship. You can print out a card and take it shopping or out to eat with you (3). I have attached the chart. This chart tells you what fish is safest to eat, which you should be concerned with and which to avoid. It also tells you how the fish was caught and if it was caught using a sustainable method. I am not an avid seafood eater, due to my lack of fish growing up but as I’ve grown older I do like it, but I am picky because I don’t know what it is. The card suggests asking 3 questions: What type of seafood is this? Where was it fi shed or farmed? How was it caught or farmed?
Wouldn’t it be great if we knew where all are food came from. There should be similar efforts for produce and meat and dairy products as well. Sustainable shouldn’t stop at seafood, or cutting out meat products.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Do you believe in magic? Magic is not sustainable.
Magical Thinking
After talking about optimism and pessimism, I was reminded of an essay that my friend wrote about “magical thinking”. He defined this as the opposite of critical thinking which relies solely on evidence, magical thinking, therefore is only seeing the evidence we want to see (1). Magical thinking is something that we have trouble getting away from, it has perverted our lives and society(1). As magical thinking is only seeing what we want to see, it is no doubt that we can’t see it for what it really is, a delusion (1). Unfortunately the delusion has become politically sustainable.
Both Plan B and Our Ecological Footprint, can come off as “depressing” or “pessimistic” to “optimists”. But maybe optimists, are actually magical thinkers. Magical thinking, is to see only what we want to see, well, we don’t want to see that our world is in danger. So if we can blame something else or see nothing wrong rather than admit the problems then this magical thinking will continue. I posted an article about the Athabasca river and the Tar Sands, how scientists insist nothing is wrong with the river, when in actuality there is a lot wrong and instead of proper monitoring, they used an industry monitoring program, that keeps concluding nothing is wrong, because they don’t do proper monitoring (2).
This is a familiar tune we’ve all heard it before, DFO with Atlantic cod, scientists did stock assessments and told the government to shut the fishery down before it collapsed. But there was money in fishing and no “evidence”, but the government chose to believe what they could see fish made money, so they allowed/promoted it. Climate change, we’ve been ignoring it for too long, because we don’t want to believe the cold hard facts, or glacier melting facts if you will.
Anyone read about Koyoto these last few days? Canada’s Environment minister refuses to admit if Canada is backing out on the agreement. According to Adam Scott, Green Energy Program Monitor “Canada has consistently shown that it doesn’t take fighting global warming seriously, nothing could be more attractive than walking away. Without binding international rules, countries like Canada could continue to pollute without penalty as we slide past the point of no return” (3).
This type of thinking needs to be stopped! We need a wake up call, no more magical sugar coated thoughts, no more turning a blind eye, we have to see the evidence for what it is, not what we want to see. The world is in trouble.
1) Cody Wicks. http://heresynews.com/?p=17
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)