The following is from an email from the Wiltshire Bee keepers Association
SILVER SPOON BEET SUGAR compared to SILVER SPOON CANE SUGAR
It is reported that neonicotinoid pesticides are being widely used in the spraying of English sugar beet crops. If you plan to feed sugar syrup to your bees this autumn then you might want to check that the sugar you are using is cane sugar and not beet sugar, at least until such time as this latest pesticide concern has been further investigated.
Neonicotinoids have been widely blamed for killing huge numbers of bees and may well be a significant contributory factor to CCD, if not the cause.
Part 2
Several people have asked me for more information about neonicotinoidpesticides and how to avoid them. Google will reveal extensive informationon this topic, and to save you some time, I have compiled some of the moreuseful-looking material into a library at http://www.biobees.com/library/?dir=pesticides_GM_threats - feel free todownload anything from here.
A number of people have asked if they should use organically grown sugar. As a supporter of organic farming, I would love to say an unequivocal 'yes', but apart from the considerable extra cost, I have yet to see any really'white' organic sugar - it always seems to have a slightly brown tinge,which may indicate the presence of residues that may cause digestiveproblems to the bees. I don't know the answer to this one, but whenconsidering feed, we have to remember that we are trying to mimic nectar,which essentially comprises sucrose, glucose and fructose in variedproportions, plus a sprinkling of trace minerals. Refined, white cane sugarmay be as close as we can get at reasonable cost.
Finally, consider this warning from a German beekeeper, in a statement tothe Apimondia gathering in Freiburg. (Clothianidin is another neonicotinoid,closely related to Imidacloprid):"In Germany clothianidin is used since 2004. It is used as seed protectionfor sugar beets and corn. As well as for fumigation of barns and stables. Itaccrues as decomposition product of other pesticides.Already in some regions the concentration in the soil is that high, thatbee-keeping is not possible any more in such regions. It's alarming thatbutter-flies, hoverflies, chrysopids and many other beneficial insects areeliminated or respectively almost eliminated."Read the full text here: http://www.biobees.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1711
There is a growing movement to have the neonicotinoids banned in the UK, asis the case in several other European countries. They are extremelydangerous to bees and all other insects, and thus the birds and otheranimals that rely on insects for food. I urge you to take this threatseriously: only by acting in unison can we counteract the massive financialvested interests behind the promotion of these poisons.
Sunday 21 September 2008
Thursday 18 September 2008
Food's carbon footprint
There is an excellent article in the current issue of New Scientist on the carbon footprint of food - Dinner's Dirty Secret.
Using research mainly from the States the report reveals that greenhouse gas emissions from food account for twice that from travel (8.1 tonnes pa compared to 4.4 tonnes pa per average US household).
Switching to a vegetarian diet from meat would save 1.5 tonnes of CO2 pa per person.
On average consuming organic food compared to conventional food produces only 77% of the greenhouse gases.
When it comes to the debate over whether it is better to eat wild or farmed fish the debate is more complex. However the world's fishing fleet uses 1.2% of global oil consumption (along with over fishing) and the emissions from this are equivalent to the Netherlands annual emissions. However farmed fish requires fish meal is is energy intensive to produce and can cause pollution.
Finally the report addresses whether local food is really green. Their conclusion is controversial - local food only reduces CO2 emissions by4%. However if wider factors are taken into account e.g. the need to prepare for an oil free world (peak oil / transition movement debates) then local food will be a major advantage.
So putting all this together, means that by changing our diets (particularly in the West) we can substantially reduce our carbon footprint. If we assume that the average family is 2.2 people - then by converting to being an 'organic vegetarian' who buys locally the 8.1 tonnes per average family can be cut to 2.6 tonnes - an overall reduction of 68%.
Food for thought!
Using research mainly from the States the report reveals that greenhouse gas emissions from food account for twice that from travel (8.1 tonnes pa compared to 4.4 tonnes pa per average US household).
Switching to a vegetarian diet from meat would save 1.5 tonnes of CO2 pa per person.
On average consuming organic food compared to conventional food produces only 77% of the greenhouse gases.
When it comes to the debate over whether it is better to eat wild or farmed fish the debate is more complex. However the world's fishing fleet uses 1.2% of global oil consumption (along with over fishing) and the emissions from this are equivalent to the Netherlands annual emissions. However farmed fish requires fish meal is is energy intensive to produce and can cause pollution.
Finally the report addresses whether local food is really green. Their conclusion is controversial - local food only reduces CO2 emissions by4%. However if wider factors are taken into account e.g. the need to prepare for an oil free world (peak oil / transition movement debates) then local food will be a major advantage.
So putting all this together, means that by changing our diets (particularly in the West) we can substantially reduce our carbon footprint. If we assume that the average family is 2.2 people - then by converting to being an 'organic vegetarian' who buys locally the 8.1 tonnes per average family can be cut to 2.6 tonnes - an overall reduction of 68%.
Food for thought!
Old growth forests as carbon sinks
The traditional wisdom (see papers here) has been that forests sequester CO2 from the atmosphere during their active growing phases (up to year 80 in most broadleaf species) but once maturity has been reached CO2 is no longer absorbed but simply stored.
Now a paper has been published in Nature (2008) which shows that old growth forests accumulate carbon over the centuries not just the active growth phase.
30% of the planet's surface is covered by old growth forests and this research suggests that between 0.8 and 1.8 billion tonnes of CO2 is stored annually.
These forests were also excluded from calculations in the Kyoto protocol. It is now clear that ancient forest sinks need to be included in carbon balance calculations.
It doesn't mean than ancient forests will save us from catastrophic climate change - it does mean that if we don't protect them properly even more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere than we originally thought.
Now a paper has been published in Nature (2008) which shows that old growth forests accumulate carbon over the centuries not just the active growth phase.
30% of the planet's surface is covered by old growth forests and this research suggests that between 0.8 and 1.8 billion tonnes of CO2 is stored annually.
These forests were also excluded from calculations in the Kyoto protocol. It is now clear that ancient forest sinks need to be included in carbon balance calculations.
It doesn't mean than ancient forests will save us from catastrophic climate change - it does mean that if we don't protect them properly even more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere than we originally thought.
Why is the current weather out of kilter with climate change predictions
The UKCIP climate prediction model for Devon suggests that by 2080 summer temperatures will have risen by 4.5 degrees and summer rain will have declined by 52%.
This seems to make no sense when we have just had two summers of exceptional rain accompanied by lower summer temperatures.
Although this contradiction is not fully understood it is tied in with the jet stream. This is a high level stream of air which affects the weather in Western Europe. In normal years the jet stream comes in from North American crosses the Atlantic at around 12km and ends up in Scandinavia and Iceland and with it brings wet cool weather.
The reason Britain has been so wet over the last two summers is because the jet stream has been forced south and instead of the wet summer weather going to Iceland it has ended up here.
It is thought that one of the major reasons that the jet stream has been pushed south is due to a phenomenon occuring in the Pacific La Nina. This is part of the ocean atmosphere phenomenon known as El Nino. El Nino has two phases La Nina and El Nino - we are currently in the later phase and it is thought that once it switches back to La Nina the jet stream will head north once again.
When El Nino is prevalent heavy rain is experienced in South America, when itis reversed to La Nina then heavy rain is experienced further afield. For more details see the BBC Weather Centre.
This seems to make no sense when we have just had two summers of exceptional rain accompanied by lower summer temperatures.
Although this contradiction is not fully understood it is tied in with the jet stream. This is a high level stream of air which affects the weather in Western Europe. In normal years the jet stream comes in from North American crosses the Atlantic at around 12km and ends up in Scandinavia and Iceland and with it brings wet cool weather.
The reason Britain has been so wet over the last two summers is because the jet stream has been forced south and instead of the wet summer weather going to Iceland it has ended up here.
It is thought that one of the major reasons that the jet stream has been pushed south is due to a phenomenon occuring in the Pacific La Nina. This is part of the ocean atmosphere phenomenon known as El Nino. El Nino has two phases La Nina and El Nino - we are currently in the later phase and it is thought that once it switches back to La Nina the jet stream will head north once again.
When El Nino is prevalent heavy rain is experienced in South America, when itis reversed to La Nina then heavy rain is experienced further afield. For more details see the BBC Weather Centre.
Friday 5 September 2008
British Sea Power
The Guardian recently published an article about a new type of underwater tidal power electricity generator being developed by a team from Oxford University.
The new turbine will be around 60m by 10m and if sited in the right place around the coast could generate 12Mw of power - enough to supply energy for 12,000 homes.
A much better and less environmentally threatening idea than a barrage across the Severn?
The new turbine will be around 60m by 10m and if sited in the right place around the coast could generate 12Mw of power - enough to supply energy for 12,000 homes.
A much better and less environmentally threatening idea than a barrage across the Severn?
The hurricane season
The Caribbean and the US are currently being threatened by a tightly packed series of hurricanes and tropical storms. New Orleans has just narrowly escaped a further catastrophe, but the current storms are still massing in the Gulf of Mexico.
A recently published paper in Nature by Professor Elsner concludes that warming oceans are driving stronger hurricanes. In a 2007 Nature paper he concluded that climate change was also increasing the frequency of hurricanes.
The recent hurricane even affected the Democratic Convention where one of the debating topics was the call for increased off shore oil drilling. Ironic in a week when the price of oil dropped significantly because the off shore drilling rigs already in operation in the Gulf of Mexico were spared damage by the hurricane.
Peak oil will cause dramatic oil price hikes - the increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico will cause the same phenomena
A recently published paper in Nature by Professor Elsner concludes that warming oceans are driving stronger hurricanes. In a 2007 Nature paper he concluded that climate change was also increasing the frequency of hurricanes.
The recent hurricane even affected the Democratic Convention where one of the debating topics was the call for increased off shore oil drilling. Ironic in a week when the price of oil dropped significantly because the off shore drilling rigs already in operation in the Gulf of Mexico were spared damage by the hurricane.
Peak oil will cause dramatic oil price hikes - the increased frequency and intensity of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico will cause the same phenomena
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
