Smog-Eatting Tiles Gobble Up Air Pollution

Author: Teo Kermeliotis
Published: May 8, 2012
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/04/tech/smog-eating-tiles-california/index.html

Ths photo deminstrates how the tiles work to reduce the pollution.

Summary

Can the roof over our heads do more than provide shelter? The answer is yes. The Boral Roofing Company is one of the first in the US to offer these interesting smog eating roofing tiles. The tiles are coated with titanium dioxide, a chemical that can oxidize harmful air pollutants caused by fossil fuels. The roof breaks down the emissions into harmless calcium nitrate and the roof also help to fertilize the soil when it rains because of the runoff. A study done in Los Angeles, one of the most ozone-polluted cities in the U.S., showed that these tiles help reduce the amount of air pollution. It has also been estimated that 2,000 sq/ft. of tiles can reduce the emissions that are equivalent to driving 10,000 miles a year in a car.  Air pollution is a huge problem in cities, and these tiles are now available to be used in construction with the hope of reducing the amount of air pollution released into the atmosphere every day.

Opinion/Reflection

I really think that these tiles have a huge potential to reduce the amount of air pollution. I think it is a great idea because it doesn't have extremely harmful environmental effects, like other air pollution reducing ideas. I think air pollution is something that people need to start focusing on because if we don't do something soon the problem may become too big to handle. I think these tiles are a start to reducing the air pollution. I like reading about the different way, ideas, and options there are to reduce air pollution because it shows that we are getting closer to eliminating the amount of pollution being released. This affects me because air pollution is becoming a bad problem and the tiles would help make the air cleaner for me and those with respiratory problems.

Questions
1) Do you think this chemical could be used on other things to help reduce are pollution?
2) What is your biggest concern about these tiles? Why?
3) The tiles are way more expensive than regular tiles sometimes being up to $1,000 more. Are these tiles worth the price?
4) Who benefits the most from these smog eating tiles?


This is a house that uses the air pollution reducing tiles, which you might have seen on some local houses.

California's Golden Set of Rules

Article Published February 13, 2012 written in the New York Times. Check it out here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/opinion/californias-clean-car-rules.html?_r=1&ref=airpollution

Picture 1: I don't know about you,

but this image makes me want to get on
the next plane over to the Golden State of
California! Surf, sun, celebs...and even
better air qulaity!

Picture 2: But seriously, check this out!

A catalytic converter!!! When California

started to use these in their cars, everything

quickly changed for the better! What a cute

catalytic converter...that's a tongue twister,

isn't it?!

Summary: California's Air Resources Board created state rules to help improve their air pollution. These new set of laws will decrease greenhouse gases, less smog-causing pollutants, and hopefully, influence automobile industries to develope more emission free vehicles. California was allowed to create thier own set of rules, along with getting a waiver from the federal government. Hopefully their rules get approved, because these new rules will only been beneficial to California! The laws include, reducing nitrogen oxides and more smog-forming emissions from cars by 2025, and creating zero-emission vehicles that are powered by hydrogen or batteries. They believe this will help reduce the states' greenhouse gas by 80 percent. Hopefully, the federal government will soon grant the waiver, allowing these rules to take place! It is almost certain that the waiver will be granted...and improvemens will take place.

Opinion/Reflection: I personally enjoyed this article so much! I've never been to California, but hope to travel there in my future! And now knowing that these new air pollution laws are possibly in the making, it makes me want to fly over there as soon as possible, you know, for the clean breathable air...and the cute boutiques, stars, the Ellen show, the Hollywood sign...I mean, yeah, the air! I hope that other states get influenced by California, and start creating new laws for themselves. Just image, every state with zero-emission vehicles, that will quickly decrease nitrogen oxides and smog-causing pollutants. How lovely. I hope that where we live, in Pennsylvania, we start to develope laws to help our air pollution. We all live on this Earth, breathe this air...we should try to make it clean, right?! Go California!

Questions:

1. Should the federal government approve of California's new rules? Why or why not?

2. What could be a negative effect of a car that is powered by hydrogen or batteries? Would you drive that type of car (when you get your license that is!)?

3. Do you think California's set of rules will make a large improvement to their air quality/pollution? Or will it not really make a large impact...just a little bit?

4. The article mentioned President Obama, how so? What did he approve of?

Now what do you say guys?! How about us "Out of the Blue'' bloggers get some plane tickets to California to breathe some wonderful air!...then go shopping.  :)



Liar liar pants on fire
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/16/air-pollution-biggest-threat-china
By: John Watts
Summary
Many people know that China has a vast amount of factories thanks to most of the one percent of american people who basically own all the money. Well back to China the government is saying that the air pollution is getting better while the truth is that it is getting worse. Dr. Zhang has said that there has been a 10% increase in smog every year. There have also been an increase in PM2.5 and that could increase their chance of getting lung cancer by 2 or 3 times more than normal. Its so bad that they have to wear face masks and can not excersise in their own out doors. During the Olympic games in Bejing the air pollution went down about 10% but after the games were over that 10% was quickly refilled by the air pollution they make. The good Dr. Zhang says that if they dont fix their ways than the air pollution will effect their water and food to the extreme.

Opinion/Reflection
I know that to protect the people sometimes you need to hide it from them but lying about what people can tell is going on is just so stupid. Why would you lie to your people if that same thing that you are saying could potentially kill all of your people. I mean if your going to say something like that then you should be wearing a shirt and hat saying I'm stupid. You should also be hiring people who are working in that field. Not just lie about it like some psycho maniac who is going to kill his people and himself. I think that the government is not going quit its old ways with their lying and hiding. They had said a month before this article the Chinese government is going to be more open. With all that pollution and the increase of dieses what can they do about it I mean yeah they would quit using fossil fuels but all that pollution would stay there for a long time and it would probably take 20 to 50 years for all that pollution to go away.

Questions
1. What would you do diffrently than what the Chinese government? Explain why?
2. What kind of alternative resource should China use? Explain why?
3. Where would you start to make changes in China with there air pollution problems?

Air Pollution Can Reduce a Child's IQ

Written by David Gutierrez

http://www.naturalnews.com/028094_air_pollution_intelligence.html

Picture: Air pollution in NYC is at the lowest level then it's ever been at, but something still needs to be done to stop the spread of PAH. 

Summary: 

According to researchers who conducted an experiment on pregnant, non-smoking women living in New York City, air pollution can affect the child's IQ level. During the womens' pregnancies they wore air monitors so that accurate data could be given on the amount of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that they were exposed to.  After the children were born they were to take an IQ test at the age of 5. The test showed evidence that air pollution does affect a child's IQ level. The children of mothers with high PAH levels were scoring a signifigantly lower score, about 4.31-4.61 lower than average. Research before this had already shown that PAH exposure can lead to cancer and damage the neurological and reproductive systems.

Opinion/Reflection

I was really surprised. If I were a mother I would never want such thing to happen to my kid because of air pollution. I would do anything to stay away from that so that my kid did not have to live with neurological disabilities. In another way, I think this is all based on where people live. If someone is living in a much more urban area, then these chances are definitely a lot more likely, but for people living in rural areas it's probably less likely to have as much of an effect on their children. Again, I am just basing that off the fact that this experiment was done on 2 women who live in NYC. Living in a city, I can see why their children have suffered this, because there are much more fumes from cars, industries, etc. After all, the leading cause of the pollutant PAH is exhaust from automobiles.

Questions:

1.) Are there any other possible side effects on the children who are exposed to PAH?

2.) How could mothers stop this from being so likely when living in a city?

3.) How often does it occur that kids have lower IQ levels when exposed to PAH?

4.) Is there a way to stop this from happening to even more families in the future?

The Best Part About Global Warming
Charles Finch
March 2, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/04/opinion/sunday/the-best-part-about-global-warming.html#

When hearing about global warming, concern and fear comes to mind, but do you know what the best part about global warming is? It actually is that there has been hardly any cases of influenza during this mild winter. This past winter is the fourth warmest ever recorded in the United States, which proves the progression of the global warming considering the winter before brought blizzards and snowstorms frequently. Even though this is a scary occurrence, there are short term perks! Only 3 children have died do influenza, which is 119 less than last winter, and 345 less than in the overwhelming outbreak of it in 2009-2010. Hospitals and doctors feel such relief this season, because before there was such an extreme number of influenza cases that they were considering rationing out ventilators. Since it has been scientifically proven that the flu virus prospers and thrives in cold weather and low humidity. This explains why the virus is common in winter months more than any other time of the year, which means that if global warming continues, the flu viruses would not occur. On the other hand, some scientists are worried that after a few mild winters our bodies will become vulnerable to the flu even more than before because it is not as common. While much more research needs to be done, children, the elderly, the sick, and pregnant women will not be complaining. Thank global warming for the warm winter and less flu cases!

This shows an image of what we can expect more of, a warm winter!

Reflection: I found this article to be very interesting, considering most articles about global warming are warnings and show concern. This was a refreshingly positive outlook on something inevitable! I do love the snow and cold weather that comes along with the winter season, so this article has its pros and cons for me. However, of course everyone's health has to come before enjoyment, and I liked seeing that something that beneficial came out of this, especially when it comes to kids dying from the flu. It also does present some worrisome initiatives, such as that our bodies could be come more vulnerable to influenza. I think that this article celebrates some of the affects of global warming now, but shows some negative future outcomes, which worried me even more than I already was to begin with.

1. Did this article make you more worried or more relieved about global warming?
2. Do you think that the flu will eventually "die out" like other illnesses that were common in the past?
3. Will you miss the winter weather or do you find the warmer weather better?
4. How long does it take for the body to become more vulnerable to a virus it was once immune to?

Who Knew? Upcycling the Dog Poo 

 by Joanna M. Foster

April 4, 2012

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/04/who-knew-upcycling-the-dog-poo/


This is an example of a composting plant, where all of the fertilizer is processed.


Summary: I know this article sounds a little crazy, but if you think about it, it makes so much sense. In Ithaca, NY, a project was started in 2009. Their mission was to use their local dog part as a way to help the environment, as suggested by many citizens. The dog park obviously was a place for dogs to "go", which could be used for compost. They originally thought of selling the collected compost if it was free of pathogens. Normally, dog waste would be put into plastic bags, and often left on the streets, which end up as litter or in landfills. It is also a public health and environmental risk if it was left on the streets. So, the park provided corn-based compostable bags for the locals to use, and the waste was picked up weekly by a local composting company to be processed and composted. In just 18 months, 12 tons of of compost was produced! Although a lot, they didn't feel it was enough to sell, but it was found that the new compost was completely pathogen free! The park used the compost for fertilizer to plant trees on Earth day this year. Donations keep this park poo project up and running, needing $5,000 annually for the poo bags and the cost of the compost labor. This revolution is becoming public and widely known worldwide!

Reflection: I thought this was such an interesting, relatable article. I take my dog to the dog park fairly often, and I think that our local park should start a project like this. I think our locals would definitely be up for fundraising and donating to something like this. There is a dog park in Horsham, and maybe the compost made from the park could go hand and hand with the Jarrett Nature Center. It would be great to use this healthy fertilizer on the trees and pants there. I also was extremely surprised that the lb tests showed that the compost was pathogen-free, considering where it was coming from. This just goes to show how something that is so common and seemingly useless can start and green revolution. I also never though about how just leaving dog poo on the streets could be so harmful. This idea is innovative, inexpensive, and safe!

Questions:
1) Would you originally think that the waste would be unsafe for use? Were you surprised to hear that it was safe?
2) Do you think that investing this type of idea would be worth it to our community?
3) How long does the processing and composting of this waste take?
4) What kind or environmental impacts can dog poo have other than taking up space in land fills?

Note: For the link above with the article, a video is also included at the bottom of the article! Feel free to watch :)

Why Aren’t G.M.O. Foods Labeled?

Check out the article, "Why Aren’t G.M.O. Foods Labeled?" written by Mark Bittman on February 15th, 2011 here: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/why-arent-g-m-o-foods-labeled/?ref=geneticallymodifiedfood.

This image is almost a play on words of GMO's, they show a picture of corn, along with the GMO's that are placed inside the food. The article pushes for foods like this to be labeled, allowing consumers to be aware of the GMO's that are within the food source.

Summary: GMO's, or Genetically Modified Organisms, are genitically engineered food that is sold on store shelves, and are currently lacking a label. A reason why the F.D.A will not include a label on food with GMO's is because they don't want their product to seem "different," even those they do contain potenial harm to consumer's health. The article implies that food containing more than .9% GMO's must be labeled. Genitically Engineered foods are argued to grow faster, decrease stress on land and be more profitable for farmers, but, they are real dangers to humans and can provoke allergic reactions. Its not shocking that the biotech industry spent over half a billion dollars on G.M.O. lobbyists in the last decade! The majority of Americans think that GMO's are unsafe, and 87% of them want them to be labeled. GMO's are a health hazard, and must be labeled, on behalf of our health.

Opinion/Reflection: First of all, I've only breifly ever heard about GMO's. I knew that they were bad for our health, and not good in general. I had no idea where they came from or what G.E, gentically engineered foods, were either. After reading this article, I also agree that products containing GMO's should be labeled, so that we are aware of what we are eating. The majority of our food, and including the food I've already eaten, contain GMO's. It is really crazy how these genetically engineered foods may be easier for farmers, and allow them to make more money, but in the end it just comes back around and is not healthy for the consumers. All in all, I fully agree that GMO's should be labeled, for my health and for everyone all over the world!

Questions:
1. Do you feel as if products with GMO's in them should be labeled? Why or why not?
2. The article mentioned "cross-breeding," how do you feel about this topic?
3. What is one method to persuade the F.D.A to add labels to products containing GMO's?
4. Do organic foods contain GMO's? If yes, what is the law limit of the amount of GMO's they must contain?

Slowing Deforestation Rates May Net Billions

Slowing Deforestation Rates May Net Billions
July 13, 2008
Author: Jo Hartley

http://www.naturalnews.com/023623_deforestation_carbon_emissions.html

This is a picture of what deforestation is doing to the Amazon.

Deforestation is taking a major effect on our economy. If the process of deforestation were slowed, then so much money could be generated to help fight against climate changes that are hurting us. When farmers cut down the trees to clear land for their farming, this alone is creating up to 20% of our world's greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, there was a UN climate conference held. During this conference they discussed ways to motivate and reward countries for decreasing their deforestation. One way would possibly be by making factories pay to emit carbon dioxide. They have rewarded places for such hard effort in decreasing the deforestation rates in their countries, the ones with the highest rates have decreased excessively. If this issue becomes more publically known, then there is a chance for other countries to lower their rates too. It's not only helping the environment and bringing back animal's habitats, but it's saving more money. So what's the better choice?

Opinion/Reflection
I loved this idea of motivating and rewarding countries for decreasing their deforestation rates! I think that would actually get people thinking because who doesn't want to be rewarded? It's also crazy that so much greenhouse gas has accumulated from deforestation. I never thought it was a big deal, and just didn't understand why this was a problem. Making factories pay to emit carbon dioxide was a great idea. I know I would definitely not want to pay all that money for that. I hope people, especially farmers, come to the realization of what deforestation is doing to the environment. Places like the Amazon are suffering and that is a perfect example.

Questions
1.) What is another idea to motivate countries to decrease deforestation?
2.) How is deforestation affecting animal's habitats?
3.) How could places be rewarded for the decrease in deforestation?

13 year old genius little boy

Summary    http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=16548
What does a 13 year old boy have to do with our lithosphere. Well it just so happens to be that this 13 year old has found a better way of using solar energy. It all starts out with one December afternoon when this boy was looking up at the trees. He was wondering what was making the trees be able to absorb so much sunlight. Then the boy had found out that some certain places use solar energy to power buildings. That is when the boy starting ideas with the trees and the solar panels and did an experiment. He found out if you use the  Fibonnacci sequence then you could use so much energy. With this experiment he found out that by using this "tree" you could get 20% more energy than the flat plane solar panels used so far. It could also get 2 1/2 more hours of energy than the regular solar panels. It was also found out that the "tree" could collect 50% more in the winter time than the flat panels.

Reflection/ Opinion
I thought that this article was very interesting for a 13 year found a better way than a bunch of scientist who had alot more time than he did. I also found it interesting that no one has ever thought of this until now. If I knew I could just stick some solar panels to a tree. Then I would have just ditched school and make some profit on that. I think that scientist should go with this idea and companies should switch to this greener, and more energy collective energy source. I also find it funny that trees were all around us and that we knew that trees collect energy but we never thought of it that way.

Questions
1. Do you think that more people should be like this boy and help find ways to improve our current alternative energy sources? Why or Why not?
2. Do you think that it will be bad for our environment if we have all those "trees" around us? Why or Why not?
3. Do you think if this was how we get solar energy then will more people use these "trees"? Explain?

Africa Sows Seeds of a Green Revolution

By Alec RussellPublished December 27, 2011Link http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9806e84a-f655-11e0-86dc-00144feab49a.html#axzz1tYShONQv

Summary            It’s no surprise that agriculture in Africa is limited because of the harsh weather patterns and poverty that has struck the nation. But for Africans there is still hope that they will be able to provide their own agriculture with a green revolution. A green revolution is when efforts are made to bring thriving agriculture to an area or country. The hope of the green revolution is to provide food for Africans that is grown in Africa. Today most of the food in Africa is imported from other countries.  Not only will African’s benefit from their own food, but money wouldn’t need to be spent importing food. This isn’t the first green revolution to take place. A previous green revolution took place in Asia and it proved to be successful. Though the green revolution was successful once before, there are many challenges that will need be overcome, and there is not telling what the results of the green revolution in Africa will be.



Opinion/Reflection            I never heard about a green revolution before, and I was surprised to learn what it was all about. At first, I thought the green revolution would be a worldwide effort to recycle and go green, but it wasn’t. I think the green revolution could be successful, but I don’t know if it will be worth all that time and money. Conditions in Africa are too harsh for agriculture, but they are also harsh in Asia and that revolution had positive results. I like the idea of providing Africans with their own food and I think this is a problem that could easily be solved. Having to pay for food to be imported is also a factor in Africa’s poverty. The green revolution impacts me because without it, food would need to be imported, and that means that some farms are providing for more than one country. I definitely think the green revolution is worth a try!



Questions1.      What are some ways to make the land in Africa suitable for farming?
2.      Should there be more awareness around the green revolution? Why or why not?
3.      What would happen if the green revolution was not successful?
4.      How does the green revolution impact other parts of the world?

The green revolution would bring agriculture to Africa. This effort has already started in some parts . This is a picture of  a farm that already started growing crops.

 
 

Close those Wallets and Turn on the Faucets!

The first picture shows what we Americans use every single day: the water bottle. The second image shows water we could be drinking from (the faucet!) to save cash and our environment. I personally love the faucet image because the water droplet is shaped as a globe, and shows that plastic water bottles ruins the world that we love so dearly.
I read the article Bottled Water News by Bill Marsh from the New York Times. Read this awesome article here: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/water/bottled_water/index.html
Summary: This article begins with stating that it will only cost Americans roughly 49 cents per year if we drink out of the tap. However, we'd rather "live large" (we are known to do so, aren't we?), and spend $1,400 per year on bottled water. Just out of common sense, which route seems smarter economically? Yes, the tap water! Not only does tap water allow us to save up on our money but it improves our environment too. Oil is used for shipping, the plastic itself and refrigerating the water bottles and by the end, everything just ends up in landfills. Dr. Allen Hershkowitz, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council is currently researching water bottles that can be made from plants. We should either improve the water bottle itself to help rescue our planet or drink tap water (because it is perfectly fine).
Reflection: I certainly agree with this article! Unfortunately, I know for a fact that my family purchases water bottles for us to use in school and for lunch. However, it would be so much smarter to reuse one water bottle and just refill it with tap water everyday! Or even buy a portable cup (for what, $5?) and drink tap water from it, instead of spending tons of money on pre-bottled water. I've realized from reading this article how terrible the plastic is for our environment and how drinking from the faucet can greatly improve our Earth. By connecting this to class, we did a lab on tap water and I discovered that the tap water from my house is certainly safe and completely drinkable! I believe Americans should save cash and our world by turning on those faucets!
Questions:
1) How can the plastic from water bottles harm our environment?
2) What can we do with the extra money saved from using tap water instead of bottled water? (stated in the article) How can this plan be useful?
3) Do you think Americans will listen and stop buying water bottles? Why or why not?
4) What is a good campaigning method to spread the news about drinking tap water instead of water bottles?
Thanks for reading and commenting! Excuse me, I now need to tap into some wonderful water! :)

Eutrophication

http://www.lakescientist.com/learn-about-lakes/water-quality/eutrophication.html
Summary

In this article it talks about how eutrophication works in lakes. Eutrophication is defined as an increase in the rate of supply of organic matter in an ecosystem. In the lakes the supply is given to the sediment. Then what happens is that the sediment starts to build up until the sediment has taken up all the space like in the picture below.  Not only that but the algal begins to turn the lake into an icky green color. The article also talks about how humans are speeding up this process. They are speeding up the eutrophication by letting more nutrients into the lakes. If the process is sped up then it could hurt the habitat of many fish. In the article they also talked about an experiment they did to a lake. On one side of the lake they did not phosphorus but added nitrogen, and carbon to the lake. On the other side they did the same except they added the phosphorus. The amazing thing is that the side they added the phosphorus had algal all over. They then concluded that if all three nutrients were added then the lake will definately grow algal. The lakes would have to go through this eventually but this rate of the eutrophication could be dangerous.

Reflection

This topic and the article were very interesting for I did not even know about eutrophication. I also found it interesting that lakes got smaller and turned a sickly green. I hope that we are able to have nice clean water and yet not cause lakes to disappear from our planet. I forgot to mention this but in the article the sickly green color is algal. It helps keep the nutrients away so that the lake can maintain itself. I found that to be funny for its seemed like the lakes are going through natural selection. For the lake only does that when too much nutrients are added and not at any other time. I really do hope though that the lakes turn out to be better.

Questions

1. What is algal? Also can it harm fish?

2. What is a watershed?

3. Can it be dangerouse to have algal in our water?

Safe Drinking Water Act

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/business/energy-environment/08water.html?pagewanted=all 

Article by: Charles Duhigg

December 7, 2009

This picture just shows plain ordinary water. Water that we drink every single day though, it's a necessity in our lives so why not take a stand for SAFE drinking water. 

Summary:

As said before, water is a necessity. We need it to stay healthy. But what happens when the water we drink has started to become contaminated by bacteria that causes many illnesses? Then we have a huge problem. Some of the bacteria that contaminates the water, can cause illnesses like cancer which can obviously be deadly. We need to take a stand for this, and that is exactly what law officials were starting to do. The part that really irritates most people though is the fact that we are being given bad water and the companies responsible for this have not been punished. Many complain about the Environmental Protection Agency, E.P.A., because they have the ultimate responsibility for enforcing standards. Which, in this case they need to do something about it, because these UNSAFE water conditions are highly unhealthy for us, especially for those in areas that are affected by it the most. This was how the Clean Water Act was enforced. It regulates pollution into the waterways. However, violations of the Clean Water Act still occurred putting thousands of people in danger yet again. There's been yet another increase in cancer every year due to the water and bacteria, viruses, etc in it. If something is never done to prevent this from happening, no one really knows where we will stand. 

Opinion:

I really liked this article because I found it as something that really hits close to home. I thought to myself as I read it, am I drinking contaminated water? How safe is the water I drink? It really made me think. This kind of thing really scares me personally because I drink water EVERY day, and to think that something that everyone thinks of as such a healthy thing to drink could actually make us sick really worries me.I hate how the companies responsible are not being fined as they should be. Action should be taken to make sure this stops happening, but it doesn't seem like much of a topic that people really care too much about unless it affects them or someone close to them. I would do anything to stop this, because I definitely don't want to see  someone close to me die from water. 

Questions:

1.) What other actions could be taken to stop this from happening?

2.) How would you know if you were drinking contaminated water?

3.) How could you stay on the safe side to make sure you are not affected?

4.) What is contaminating the water that makes it so bad in certain areas?

5.) How else could you warn people about the Safe Drinking Water Act?

Coral Reef Bleaching

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/warming-coral.html
Author: Sean Markey
May 16, 2006

Here is what bleaching is doing to our coral. UGLY!
 http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&biw=1525&bih=741&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=kIEkFzwDiRMAhM:&imgrefurl=http://www.thinkglobalgreen.org/coralreefs.html&docid=j2mcDigzFXsvLM&imgurl=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKXK85GWZJBXAIy5X6nsETIWN28LsUcx8bJnxiiCXc1wDEmtUN4CPGvhtnskP3A6cJI6dXu3kYySou5p_ZPClWlV-WqsBoNAJyV1ui53UmAf-7665-bgMBLU9INEt3Wz2ySF5rQZeOPKLP/s400/051025_bleach_hmed_11a_h2.jpg&w=400&h=274&ei=VXdqT7-wBqTa0QGlvuzNBg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=1219&vpy=81&dur=342&hovh=177&hovw=253&tx=240&ty=54&sig=107991398418601293496&page=1&tbnh=154&tbnw=205&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:17,s:0

Summary:This article shows how even since bleaching was the cause of one coral reef to die off, it is still an issue. Reefs are still unable to recover from it's harmful affects, despite scientist's efforts. Because of this, the diversity of the fish populations in these affected areas are decreasing. This is yet another issue that is coming from bleaching. This occurs when temperatures get too high, and the reefs their algae, causing the coral to turn a white color, rather than it's normal colorful self. It is still an issue, and 16% of our world's reefs were lost in one year alone. Also, in some oceans, like the Indian Ocean, they are loosing up to 90% of the colorful reefs to bleaching, and are left with ghostly colored ones that are affecting it's fish.  Some fish are even becoming locally extinct, which could affect the food chain, and eventually lead to decreasing numbers in other fish in a coral bleaching area. We need to reduce greenhouse grasses and take actions towards global warming to prevent these high temperatures and all together, bleaching. 
Opinion: The reason I chose this was because I always heard about bleaching, but I never really knew what it meant. Now that I saw these images and heard the descriptions, I am in shock. I love the look and vibrant colors of normal coral, and this honestly makes me sad. The fact that so many reefs were affected this way within one year makes me nervous to think of the future. After many years of this, I wonder how much longer coral will be around since they are not bouncing back so easily. Also, knowing from class the importance of certain species and biodiversity, it worries me because many other organisms rely on this species. Also, fish diversity is decreasing, so the whole sea is being impacted. This means a lot to me because water is 2/3 of our Earth, and I can't imagine what it would be like without beautiful colors and many types of fish!
Questions: 
1) What types of fish are experiencing decreasing populations? Are these reliant on coral reefs?/
2) How long does it take for reefs to go from colored to white?
3) What efforts are scientists making to prevent this from happening to other reefs?
4) After a reef turns white, how can it be revived?
5) Do you think we should put funding into protection of reefs near us?