Hydraulic fracking in California

This shows a brief summary of the hydraulic fracturing process.

Article name: http://www.npr.org/2012/12/20/167712186/next-in-line-for-a-fracking-boom-california-looks-at-the-rules, author Lauren Sommer,

Title: Next In Line For A Fracking Boom, California Looks At The Rules

Summary: This article talks about hydraulic fracking, which is when we receive many resources that are useful by drilling into the ground. Hydraulic fracking is very controversial and many people believe it should be stopped. It has caused a oil boom is PA, TX. The oil companies in Texas have been spending 1 billion dollars a month on drilling. The arguments people have to why it is bad, is because it can cause health problems to the people that live in the area. California could be the next big area for fracking and companies would have to test before and after fracking. Drillers are not required to tell the state that they are fracking in and area, but with the new laws placed in California they would have to tell where and when they are fracking. 

Opinion/ Reflection: I believe hydraulic fracking should continue, if companies take care of the areas they are fracking in. We need to get our resources some how and we will eventually run out of oil etc., so we should receive as much of that resource as possible. It is a very controversial topic and people have different opinions based on moral and religious views, but I think we should keep fracking. This topic will be a big environmental issue and it reminds me of the controversial topic of offshore drilling, which is  still being discussed, and people still argue whether or not we should continue off shore drilling. I believe as long as we get what we need, we should continue with getting our oil etc., but we need to monitor the companies to make sure that they are being as environmentally friendly as possible.  

Questions: Should we stop hydraulic fracking? Why or why not? 

Is hydraulic fracking an important issue to you? Why or why not? 

Do you believe Pennsylvanians should be worried about health problems in there area from hydraulic fracking? Why or why not?

Picture: This show what kind of label you would see on your food if it was labeled to let you know it has a GMO in it or it does not.
The Labeling of GMO's on Food Products
By: Liz Milbourne
Sources:http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/GMO-label-shutterstock-300x228.jpg
http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/04/gmos-gmos-label-label/

A GMO is a genetically modified organism. They are in about 60-80% of the packaged food you buy. Most people want a label on their food informing them if their is a GMO in there food. If their is a label on their food letting them know it contains a GMO the price of their food will get higher. In other countries like Australia, Japan, and China there was a law passed that makes them label all of their GMO food. Other than that law passed in those countries, there has been a push to get get GM food labeled. Most people think that they deserve to know what is in there food. There are a few projects and associations pushing to have our food labeled on not labeled. Overall the issue is that people defied to go on eating what they are eating with no information on what’s in it or they know what’s is in and decide if they will eat it or not.

Opinion: I think we should know what is in our food. Personally I don't they are benifiting us in a healthy way. Also I do not think the labeling of GMO's should increase price. They already labeling the ingredints and a GMO is practically one. I think labeling them will keep us aware of how many of these chemicals we are putting into our body. 

Questions:

1. Do think GMO's should be labeled on a food? 

2. Do you think if they are labeled do you think the purchase of the products will go down.

3. If they decided that GMO's will not be labled and that was the final decision, do you think there would be any effects of that? 

GM Crops

Source:http://www.naturalnews.com/038139_organic_farmers_GMOs_crop_contamination.html

This picture shows corn getting new genes placed into it

The United States Department of Agriculture have made it so farmers have to buy the genetically modified crops themselves.The USDA wants the farmers to have part of the financial burden if all of the crops are ruined by accidental GM drift. GM drift is when organic plants that are near GMO's are infected by the GM plant. "Of particular concern in the report is the recommendation that organic and non-GE conventional farmers pay to self-insure themselves against unwanted GE contamination," said a recent statement issued by the National Organic Coalition. "This proposal allows USDA and the agricultural biotechnology industry to abdicate responsibility for preventing GE contamination while making the victims of GE pollution pay for damages resulting from transgenic contamination.". Farmers have had to deal with GM drift for a long time and usually the corporation that paid them would pay for the crops, but now the USDA wants the farmers to pay for it.

Questions -

1. What is GM drift?

2. Do you think farmers should pay for the ruined crops?

3. Do you think the USDA should be the ones to decide this?

Factory-Farming

Factory-Farm Workers Face First-Ever Felony Cruelty Charges

By: RaeLeann Smith

URL: http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/02/factory-farm-workers-face-first-ever-felony-cruelty-charges/

 

 

 Summary: After an undercover investigator from the PETA visited a factory-farm that holds chickens and turkeys, three of the workers there were convicted and charged of animal cruelty. The investigator witnessed the workers brutally punching and stomping on the birds for practically no reason. They also saw the workers beating down the birds with pipes and boards, and in some cases twisting the birds necks. All of these cruel actions on the poor helpless birds hasn't just been witnessed this once. These incidents have been seen countless times from many other undercover PETA investigators visiting these factory-farms. Even if the birds are not being abused by the workers there, they still suffer greatly. The turkeys and chickens spend five to six months tightly compact living among each other in almost complete darkness. To prevent any pecking or clawing among the birds, a process is used where their toes and a portion of their beak are cut off. Living in their own waste, the birds breath in ammonia fumes which can lead to the burning of their eyes and lungs. Antibiotics are put in the food fed to the birds to prevent these ammonia's from taking affect but lead to even greater problems. These drugs cause them to increase in size over a short period of time, and the birds eventually cannot support their own weight. Broken leg bones are the product of this weight increase and birds have been seen using their wings to crawl to food and water. After this cruel life in these factory-farms, they are finally then sent to the slaughterhouse.

Opinion/Reflection: Personally, hearing about the harsh living conditions for chickens and turkeys in these factory-farms is very nauseating just to think about. The fact that we actually put innocent animals through that much pain and suffering leading up to the death of them is terrible in my opinion and I wouldn't see why anyone else wouldn't agree. Even the idea of the birds being tortured by workers for no practical reason in such a brutal manor is just unbearable for me. I hope to see changes made in the way things are done on these factory-farms as it is simply just sick how they are treated. After thinking about how many chickens or turkeys I have eaten before without knowing about how they got to my dinner plate is really upsetting.

Questions:

Do you think something should be done to change the ways of raising these animals on the factory-farms?

How do you feel about the ways of the factory-farms and their methods of raising the animals?

Should laws be made about how the workers at the factory-farms treat the animals?

 

 

 

 

Reuse, Reduce, Recycle! http://epa.gov/recycle/recycle.html, November 14, 2012

http://epa.gov/recycle/images/pie_chart_2010.jpg
 

Picture: This picture shows what happens to the things that we throw away. More than half of the things we throw away are landfilled and only about one-third of them are recycled. 11.7% of the stuff that we throw away ends up being combusted for energy.

Summary: Recycling is the process of collecting and processing materials that would otherwise be thrown away as trash and turning them into new products. Recycling can benefit your community and the environment. Recycling helps reduce the amount of waste we send to landfills and incinerators, helps conserves natural resources such as wood, water, and minerals and it saves energy. Recycling helps prevent pollution and reduces greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change. Recycling can also help keep the environment for future generations. Some common household items that are recycled are newspapers, plastic/aluminum cans and water bottles. The best way to reduce waste is not to create it at all. Making a new product requires a lot of material and energy, raw material must be taken from the earth and the product must be made and then transported. Some things that can be reused are cloth, books, and shopping bags and some things that can be reduced is water use, fertilizer use and etc. The reduce, reuse, recycle method is the most effective way to save natural resources, protect the environment and save money.                                    




Opinion/Reflection: I always recycle plastic bottles, cereal boxes and magazines but I never thought what I am doing is this important to the environment and the world. My family recycles a lot and we constantly reuse cloth, jars and baby toys. We try to shut off water when were not using it and turn off the light if it is not needed. I feel really good that I was doing it without knowing because now I will continue to do this and perhaps recycle, reuse, and reduce more. I think people that don't reduce, reuse and recycle should start doing it because they are helping the environment and they are also helping themselves. 


 Questions:
1. From the reduce, reuse, recycle method, which one do you think is the most important?
2. Do you think there should be strict laws about recycling?
3. Do you believe that the reduce, reuse, recycle method is important?