First-of-Its-Kind Map Details the Height of the Globe’s Forests

By Thomas C. Davis Jr | July 28, 2010

ScienceDaily (July 21, 2010)

Using NASA satellite data, scientists have produced a first-of-its kind map that details the height of the world’s forests. Although there are other local- and regional-scale forest canopy maps, the new map is the first that spans the entire globe based on one uniform method.

The work — based on data collected by NASA’s ICESat, Terra, and Aqua satellites — should help scientists build an inventory of how much carbon the world’s forests store and how fast that carbon cycles through ecosystems and back into the atmosphere. Michael Lefsky of the Colorado State University described his results in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

The new map shows the world’s tallest forests clustered in the Pacific Northwest of North America and portions of Southeast Asia, while shorter forests are found in broad swaths across northern Canada and Eurasia. The map depicts average height over 5 square kilometers (1.9 square miles) regions), not the maximum heights that any one tree or small patch of trees might attain.

Temperate conifer forests — which are extremely moist and contain massive trees such as Douglas fir, western hemlock, redwoods, and sequoias–have the tallest canopies, soaring easily above 40 meters (131 feet). In contrast, boreal forests dominated by spruce, fir, pine, and larch had canopies typically less than 20 meters (66 feet). Relatively undisturbed areas in tropical rain forests were about 25 meters (82 feet), roughly the same height as the oak, beeches, and birches of temperate broadleaf forests common in Europe and much of the United States.

Where’s the Carbon?

Scientific interest in the new map goes far beyond curiosities about tree height. The map has implications for an ongoing effort to estimate the amount of carbon tied up in Earth’s forests and for explaining what sops up 2 billion tons of “missing” carbon each year.

Humans release about 7 billion tons of carbon annually, mostly in the form of carbon dioxide. Of that, 3 billion tons end up in the atmosphere and 2 billion tons in the ocean. It’s unclear where the last two billion tons of carbon go, though scientists suspect forests capture and store much of it as biomass through photosynthesis.

There are hints that young forests absorb more carbon than older ones, as do wetter ones, and that large amounts of carbon end up in certain types of soil. But ecologists have only begun to pin down the details as they try to figure out whether the planet can continue to soak up so much of our annual carbon emissions and whether it will continue to do so as climate changes.

“What we really want is a map of above-ground biomass, and the height map helps get us there,” said Richard Houghton, an expert in terrestrial ecosystem science and the deputy director of the Woods Hole Research Center.

One of Lefsky’s colleagues, Sassan Saatchi of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, has already started combining the height data with forest inventories to create biomass maps for tropical forests. Complete global inventories of biomass, when they exist, can improve climate models and guide policymakers on how to minimize the human impact on climate with carbon offsets.

More immediately, said University of Maryland remote sensing expert Ralph Dubayah, tree canopy heights can be plugged into models that predict the spread and behavior of fires, as well as ecological models that help biologists understand the suitability of species to specific forests.

Seeing Lasers through the Trees

Lefsky used data from a laser technology called LIDAR that’s capable of capturing vertical slices of surface features. It measures forest canopy height by shooting pulses of light at the surface and observing how much longer it takes for light to bounce back from the ground surface than from the top of the canopy. Since LIDAR can penetrate the top layer of forest canopy, it provides a fully-textured snapshot of the vertical structure of a forest — something that no other scientific instrument can offer.

“LIDAR is unparalleled for this type of measurement,” Lefsky said, noting it would have taken weeks or more to collect the same amount of data in the field by counting and measuring tree trunks that LIDAR can capture in seconds.

He based his map on data from more than 250 million laser pulses collected during a seven year period. That may sound like an enormous amount of data, but each pulse returns information about just a tiny portion of the surface. Overall, the LIDAR offered direct measurements of 2.4 percent of the Earth’s forested surfaces.

To create his global map forest height map, Lefsky combined the LIDAR data with information from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), a satellite instrument aboard both the Terra and Aqua satellites that senses a much broader swath of Earth’s surface, even though it doesn’t provide the vertical profile.

“This is a really just a first draft, and it will certainly be refined in the future,” said Lefsky.

Fusing the two sets of data proved difficult, and Lefsky spent years honing quantitative techniques to make the combination possible. Part of the difficulty was that the LIDAR data Lefsky used came from an instrument aboard ICESat, a mission optimized to study the topography of ice sheets, not vegetation.

The next generation LIDAR measurements of forests and biomass, which will improve the resolution of the map considerably, could come from NASA’s Deformation, Ecosystem Structure and Dynamics of Ice (DESDynI) satellite, proposed for the latter part of this decade.

“We’ve never been able to look at a map and say here’s how tall the canopy is before,” said Dubayah, one of the DESDynI project scientists. “This map is a big step forward, and it really helps set the stage for DESDynI and shows what’s possible.”

Topics: General | No Comments »

Bisphenol A - Political Hell Freezes Over

By Thomas C. Davis Jr | January 31, 2010

Jan-27-2010

April Scott

The FDA’s credibility has no validity, as they have seemingly accepted a myriad of corporate bribes allowing food manufacturers and chemical companies to corner the market on the poisoning of America.

Bisphenol_A Courtesy: en.wikipedia.org

(SALEM, Ore.) - On January 16th, The US Food and Drug Administration finally hopped ship in a last ditch effort to save what’s left of their sinking vessel. It was hardly a rush to reckless abandonment in the wake of mounting toxic bisphenol glaciers shining brightly as beacons in the night.

Both the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health and the FDA announced they “have some concern about the potential effects of bisphenol A on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and young children.” fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm064437.htm

Bisphenol A (BPA) is an industrial chemical that has been present in many hard plastic bottles and aluminum food and beverage cans since the 1960’s (FDA). What they are not telling you is that BPA is also a synthetic estrogen and notable endocrine disrupter.

As the boiling pot of controversy has mounted, so have the growing cries of our scientific community outside their handful of economically influenced lackeys.

Log onto ourstolenfuture.org to view the following notable scientific studies:

Experiments with mice show that exposure during pregnancy to very low doses of bisphenol A scrambles the chromosomes of their daughters’ fertilized embryos, ie., the pregnant females’ grandchildren.

Experiments with rats demonstrate that low level exposure to bisphenol A during fetal growth causes breast cancer in adults.

Thirty-eight of the world’s leading scientific experts on bisphenol A have warned policy-makers of potential adverse health effects of exposure to the widespread molecule used to make plastics and food can lining.

Low level BPA exposure stimulates rapid reproduction of breast cancer cells. Watch it happen: youtube.com/watch?v=N3_cYZKksvI

Slowly, our FDA has been backed into a corner of admission and submission. The mountains of substantiated evidence of BPA’s adverse health affects can no longer be ignored behind self serving lobbyist dollars and political shanties.

A group of chemical manufacturers, toymakers and retailers sued the city of San Franciso after the city’s Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a 2006 ordinance prohibiting the sale, distribution and manufacturing of children’s products containing BPA, along with other dangerous chemicals.

Other plaintiffs were the American Chemistry Council, California Retailers Association, California Grocers Association and Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association. Corporate dollars once again took precedence over public health.

Approximately 7-8 billion pounds of BPA are produced annually. BPA can be found in almost all Americans. FDA released estimates saying they suspect 100 percent of Americans are exposed due to vast use of BPA plastics in everything from coating for children’s teeth to prevent cavities, metal food can liners, plastic food containers, baby bottles, water bottles, juice, milk and water containers, microwave “safe” ovenware and eating utensils and much, much more. Revenue from BPA based products is estimated to be over $700,000 per hour*. It’s your money and your life.

Note what FDA did not say. They did not make any statement to suggest any exercise of federal power over manufacturers or distributors by way of a ban. They simply made a cautionary announcement to inform the public of this “concern”.

Can we agree that it will take years, if not generations to clear the product base from the store shelves and warehouses? Note the lack of FDA effort to make an official stance where it counts. They’ve been aware of the scientific data for decades. They are giving manufacturers ample opportunity to move their toxic product, while they spend countless more years and public funds to research and attempt to invalidate what they already know to be true.

The poisoning of Americans has become evident and justified through free choice and free flow of the almighty dollar. Business has become blind to the needs of the consumer; we no longer have a face, nor their respect. Your dollar is their power. Your knowledge is your defense. Every time you make a purchase you cast a vote.

Think about it. Are you going to assist them in moving their toxic products during the government stall to meaningful legislation?

Cancer is a corporate by-product. I’m tired of hearing people say it. I can always predict by the look on their face… “Oh well, everything gives you cancer.” It’s the corporate cop-out. That’s what they want you to say. Your purchases prove that they can sell you anything. They know you don’t care where your food comes from. They know that you don’t want to know. Just feed me. It’s the epoch of instant gratification.

For those of you who haven’t surrendered yourselves to such atrocities, there are some viable alternatives like:

* Get rid of all of your plastic containers, especially containers imprinted with the recycling number 7, as many of those contain BPA. You can put them to good use storing non-food items. Replace your plastic with clear glass. Made in the USA glass is safest due to lead, mercury and cadmium contaminates found in some foreign glass. There are several BPA free options available in stores if you must harbor plastic. Look for the label “BPA Free”.

* Stop heating plastic in the microwave! I see this at work all day long. The BPA leaches into your food. Use glassware whenever possible.

* Stop eating out of cans, at least until manufacturers get the picture that they’re not allowed to poison their customers. You can help by contacting them and voicing your concerns about BPA in their products. Your favorite products have a phone number on the label. Call them. Tell them it’s only 2 cents more (we’ll pay four!) to manufacture non-BPA canned products according to Eden Foods who marketed the first canned foods without BPA. The exception to this is tomato sauce. Tomato based products emit the highest levels of BPA due to their acidic nature. Manufacturers have yet to utilize BPA-free packaging of canned tomato-based products. I purchase all of my tomato and marinara sauces in glass jars. Depending on the type, you can spice it up to create any of your favorite red sauce dishes.

* Love your kids. Pack their lunch. Remember, most school lunches come in cans. At first, yes, there will be some resistance for you and for them, but you will quickly recognize behavioral and physical improvements in your children when you begin to cleanse their diet of chemical toxins. It’s worth the time!

* Be sure your child’s plastic toys, especially infant toys say “BPA Free” on the label. Again, the FDA has some concerns about bisphenol A’s affects the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and young children.

As recent as 2008 the FDA claimed BPA was safe, but gave consumers tips on how to reduce exposure. The FDA panel’s unbiased opinions were called into question when reports surfaced in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the head of the panel took a $5 million donation from a manufacturer who maintains BPA is safe.

The FDA’s credibility has no validity, as they have seemingly accepted a myriad of corporate bribes allowing food manufacturers and chemical companies to corner the market on the poisoning of America. It is a false sense of security to place trust in government regulation to protect your health. The FDA appears to serve the corporate dollar even as the Titanic is sinking. Their recent jump into the lifeboat of admission only reveals how dire the situation must be.

Topics: Ecological Science | 4 Comments »

IS Planet Earth Expanding? “EARTHS EXPANSION; GLOBAL WARMING”

By Thomas C. Davis Jr | January 8, 2010

Topics: Environment | 1 Comment »