Brad Plumer

You are currently browsing articles tagged Brad Plumer.

“We Actually Use Less Water Now For All Purposes Than We Did Back In 1970”

November 5, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

It seems almost impossible that the United States uses less water than it did 45 years ago, but that’s the finding of the Pacific Institute. Growing population and villages of computer servers that need constant cooling would suggest we’re thirstier than ever, but in addition to improved conservation methods, globalization and outsourcing have played roles in the apparent reduction. From Brad Plumer at Vox:

“The US economy keeps expanding and the population keeps growing. But we actually use less water now for all purposes than we did back in 1970. That includes freshwater for our showers and toilets. It includes farm irrigation. It also includes withdrawals of both fresh and saline water to cool our fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.

The underlying data comes from a new report by the US Geological Survey, which notes that water for power plants (45 percent) and irrigation (33 percent) still made up most water withdrawals in the US as of 2010. But use in both of those areas has been declining over time.

Some of the credit goes to major efficiency gains: Power plants have implemented more efficient cooling systems that either recirculate water or use ‘dry’ cooling. More and more farmers are turning to drip irrigation and other efficient watering methods (though this is far from universal). Inside homes, toilets and showers have become much more efficient. And recycling of wastewater has become more common in some cities.

But that’s not the whole story: The USGS also notes that some manufacturing facilities that once used a fair bit of water for industrial purposes have moved overseas.”

Tags:

“I’m Actually Not A Big Fan Of The Term ‘Sixth Extinction'”

June 12, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

At Vox, Brad Plumer interviews Duke biologist Stuart Pimm about his new paper on the acceleration of extinctions in the time of human beings. But he didn’t publish only about what will perish–he believes there’s also the option for us to avoid destroying diversity and perhaps our own species. An excerpt:

“Vox:

So extinction rates are higher now that humans are around. Why? What are we doing?

Stuart Pimm:

There are four big factors here. The first one, which is overwhelmingly important, is habitat destruction. We’re destroying the habitats where species are. About two-thirds of all species on land are in tropical rainforests — and we’re shrinking those rain forests.

In the Americas, the greatest numbers of species on the brink of extinction are in the coastal forests of Brazil and the northern Andes and Ecuador. If you look at the coastal forests of Brazil, east of Rio de Janeiro, something like 95 percent of all forest has been destroyed. So it’s not surprising that that part of the world has an unusual number of endangered species.

Second, we’re also warming the climate, and as it gets warmer species either have to move toward the poles or up mountains. This could be a big one in the future.

Third, we’ve been incredibly careless about moving species around the world. I’m in the Florida Everglades, where there are an obscene number of Burmese pythons slithering around, which can not do any good. So invasive species is a third.

Finally, particularly in the oceans, there’s just overharvesting. We’ve depleted the oceans by fishing and more fishing and yet more fishing, and driving species to the very brink of extinction.

Vox:

So the historical record shows that there have five mass extinction events in the Earth’s history. And lots of people keep suggesting we’re on the verge of a sixth. But what’s the criteria for this? How would we know?

Stuart Pimm:

I’m actually not a big fan of the term ‘sixth extinction.’ But we are certainly seeing a highly accelerated rate of extinction.

If that continues — and continues for many decades — then by the end of the century we are going to lose one-third or one-half of all species. And that kind of loss in biological diversity hasn’t been seen in 60 million years. The last time we lost that many species was when an asteroid plowed into the Yucatán in Mexico. So if trends continue, then yes, we are going to lose a large fraction of species.

But what the paper is about mostly, is ways in which we can avoid that. So yes it’s bad, but the paper is full of important news about how we can make a difference.”

Tags: ,

“Many Of Those Technologies May End Up Restricted”

December 27, 2012 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

Brad Plumer at the Washington Post reports on a question I’ve wondered about: In the future, what are we going to smuggle? He collects info from Wikistrat’s crowdsourcing project to predict what will be desired contraband in 2050. I don’t agree with most of the list, but it is fun. Two entries:

“– Experimental health enhancers. The future could bring a whole host of new technologies, from ‘software to create pleasurable sensory overloads’ to ‘biotechnology allowing the creation of (truly) perfect babies,’ says Wikistrat. Many of those technologies may end up restricted. For instance, schools and communities may decide to bar cognition-enhancing drugs because they give certain students unfair advantages. In that case, they may thrive on the black market, much as steroids do.

– Rare species. Scientists are already warning that millions of species could become extinct by 2050 because of human activity and climate change. Some useful species that are already dying out — those mysteriously vanishing honeybees, perhaps? — could be a hot black market commodity by mid-century.”

Tags: