a2jfreak.net

Thursday, September 18, 2008

In the lead-up to the 2008 Canadian federal elections much speculation was made about environmental issues and initiative, with various parties maneuvering to claim some portion of the green mantle. But it was the Liberal party which first brought a full-blown policy to the public.

In the months since the Green Shift initiative was brought forth, the political pundits and activists have both talked about this year as the first election where the environment would be a major issue on the minds of voters, and possibly a decisive one for the electorate.

It’s indeed true the environment ranks very high in minds of voters across the country, particularly among young voters. One national survey of Canadians between 18 and 25 finds the environment is the top issue. A poll of all voters found it to be the third most important single issue over all, behind the economy and health care, but the poll suggested that no one issue has really caught the attention of the electorate with many issues gaining similar attention.

The parties themselves seem indecisive, trying to claim a focus on environmental issues but rarely making specific proposals or promises, with the notable exception of the Liberals whose platform has been targeted by opponents and commentators as “wildly experimental” and “doesn’t go deep enough” by turns.

Examining the platforms of the New Democratic Party regarding air pollution and global warming as available on their website, one is struck by a lack of substance. Reference is made to C-377, the Climate Change Accountability Act, which the NDP calls “Layton’s Kyoto-Plus Bill”, which was passed in 2006. The party believes Canada can achieve its Kyoto requirements by 2012, though no mention is made of how a Layton government would do so.

In June of 2008 the Liberals tabled a plan, the Green Shift, which they claim would reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions 20% under 1990 emissions – well below the 6% required by Canadian law when Canada ratified the Kyoto Accord – by 2020, which is rather after the 2008-2012 phase-in period required by that same law. The method of performing this reduction would be to shift the Canadian tax system, reducing income and revenue taxes by replacing them with taxes on greenhouse gas emissions. The plan generated considerable discussion and opposition, and the party has back-pedaled in some portions and added on in others, as well as announcing a couple of separate initiatives to soften the effects for farmers, homeowners, and fishermen among others.

A more diverse approach than solely a “Carbon Tax” is proposed in the Green Party’s platform, which presents an almost holistic approach of adherence to the Kyoto obligations, “Cap and trade” of carbon emissions, industry development with both green technology R&D and regulation as well as consumer subsidies, and their own version of a carbon tax. Alone of the parties they specifically mention the role of international diplomacy/trade as a part of their approach.

Such an approach appears to be anathema to the Conservatives, whose mantra since their election has been that Kyoto cannot be complied with without forcing an economic recession on the country, and used the Throne Speech of 2007 to reiterate that position. They have opposed cap-and-trade schemes in the past, but their platform for this election states their plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions includes emissions caps for “four air pollutants commonly associated with smog and acid rain,” as well as “tough emission reduction targets”.

In contrast to the laundry-list of unconnected initiatives on the Conservative’s website, the clean platform pamphlet created by the Bloc Québécois makes a simple and apparently heartfelt statement on the environment:

La lutte aux changements climatiques est devenue un enjeu fondamental pour l’humanité et le Québec est déterminé à apporter sa contribution, à sa façon. À Ottawa, c’est le Bloc Québécois qui mène la lutte en faveur de l’application du protocole de Kyoto dans le respect des choix du Québec.

Tackling climate change has become a fundamental issue for all of humanity and Québec is determined to make its contribution, in its own way. In Ottawa, the Bloc Québécois, respecting Québec’s choices, is leading the fight to enforce the Kyoto Protocol.

Just how they plan to enforce the Kyoto obligations is not stated, though they do discuss a carbon market, and tax incentives for home heating upgrade and transportation.

There seems to be a wide if somewhat shallow interest in the electorate as to just what each party is offering on the environmental file. But with sketchy platforms regarding environmental issues, it’s no wonder some of the parties have turned to the subject of economics in recent days.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Giving a cow a name and treating her as an individual with “more personal touch” can increase milk production, so says a scientific research published in the online “Anthrozoos,” which is described as a “multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of people and animals”.

The Newcastle University‘s School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development’s (of the Newcastle University Faculty of Science, Agriculture and Engineering) researchers have found that farmers who named their dairy cattle Ermintrude, Daisy, La vache qui rit, Buttercup, Betsy, or Gertrude, improved their overall milk yield by almost 500 pints (284 liters) annually. It means therefore, an average-sized dairy farm’s production increases by an extra 6,800 gallons a year.

“Just as people respond better to the personal touch, cows also feel happier and more relaxed if they are given a bit more one-to-one attention,” said Dr Catherine Douglas, lead researcher of the university’s School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. “By placing more importance on the individual, such as calling a cow by her name or interacting with the animal more as it grows up, we can not only improve the animal’s welfare and her perception of humans, but also increase milk production,” she added.

Drs Douglas and Peter Rowlinson have submitted the paper’s conclusion: “What our study shows is what many good, caring farmers have long since believed. Our data suggests that, on the whole, UK dairy farmers regard their cows as intelligent beings capable of experiencing a range of emotions.” The scientific paper also finds that “if cows are slightly fearful of humans, they could produce [the hormone] cortisol, which suppresses milk production,” Douglas noted. “Farmers who have named their cows, probably have a better relationship with them. They’re less fearful, more relaxed and less stressed, so that could have an effect on milk yield,” she added.

South Norfolk goldtop-milk producer Su Mahon, one of the country’s top breeder of Jersey dairy herds, agreed with Newcastle’s findings. “We treat all our cows like one of the family and maybe that’s why we produce more milk,” said Mrs Mahon. “The Jersey has got a mind of its own and is very intelligent. We had a cow called Florence who opened all the gates and we had to get the welder to put catches on to stop her. One of our customers asked me the other day: ‘Do your cows really know their names?’ I said: I really haven’t a clue. We always call them by their names – Florence or whatever. But whether they really do, goodness knows,” she added.

The researchers’ comparative study of production from the country’s National Milk Records reveals that “dairy farmers who reported calling their cows by name got 2,105 gallons (7,938 liters) out of their cows, compared with 2,029 gallons (7,680 liters) per 10-month lactation cycle, and regardless of the farm size or how much the cows were fed. (Some 46 percent of the farmers named their cows.)”

The Newcastle University team which has interviewed 516 UK dairy farmers, has discovered that almost half – 48% – called the cows by name, thereby cutting stress levels and reported a higher milk yield, than the 54% that did not give their cattle names and treated as just one of a herd. The study also reveals cows were made more docile while being milked.

“We love our cows here at Eachwick, and every one of them has a name,” said Dennis Gibb, with his brother Richard who co-owns Eachwick Red House Farm outside of Newcastle. “Collectively, we refer to them as ‘our ladies,’ but we know every one of them and each one has her own personality. They aren’t just our livelihood, they’re part of the family,” Gibb explained.

“My brother-in-law Bobby milks the cows and nearly all of them have their own name, which is quite something when there are about 200 of them. He would be quite happy to talk about every one of them. I think this research is great but I am not at all surprised by it. When you are working with cows on a daily basis you do get to know them individually and give then names.” Jackie Maxwell noted. Jackie and her husband Neill jointly operate the award-winning Doddington Dairy at Wooler, Doddington, Northumberland, which makes organic ice cream and cheeses with milk from its own Friesian cows.

But Marcia Endres, a University of Minnesota associate professor of dairy science, has criticized the Newcastle finding. “Individual care is important and could make a difference in health and productivity. But I would not necessarily say that just giving cows a name would be a foolproof indicator of better care,” she noted. According to a 2007 The Scientist article, named or otherwise, dairy cattle make six times more milk today than they did in the 1990s. “One reason is growth hormone that many U.S. farmers now inject their cows with to increase their milk output; another is milking practices that extend farther into cows’ pregnancies, according to the article; selective breeding also makes for lots of lactation,” it states.

Critics claimed the research was flawed and confused a correlation with causation. “Basically they asked farmers how to get more milk and whatever half the farmers said was the conclusion,” said Hank Campbell, author of Scientific Blogging. In 1996, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs provided for a complex new cattle passport system where farmers were issued with passport identities. The first calf born under the new regime were given names like “UK121216100001.”

Dr Douglas, however, counters that England doesn’t permit dairy cattle to be injected hormones. The European Union and Canada have banned recombinant bovine growth hormone (rGBH), which increases mastitis infection, requiring antibiotics treatment of infected animals. According to the Center for Food Safety, rGBH-treated cows also have higher levels of the hormone insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1), which may be associated with cancer.

In August 2008, Live Science published a study which revealed that cows have strange sixth sense of magnetic direction and are not as prone to cow-tipping. It cited a study of Google Earth satellite images which shows that “herds of cattle tend to face in the north-south direction of Earth’s magnetic lines while grazing or resting.”

Newcastle University is a research intensive university in Newcastle upon Tyne in the north-east of England. It was established as a School of Medicine and Surgery in 1834 and became the “University of Newcastle upon Tyne” by an Act of Parliament in August 1963.

The School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development is a school of the Newcastle University Faculty of Science, Agriculture and Engineering, a faculty of Newcastle University. It was established in the city of Newcastle upon Tyne as the College of Physical Science in 1871 for the teaching of physical sciences, and was part of Durham University. It existed until 1937 when it joined the College of Medicine to form King’s College, Durham.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has announced its first national authority for scientific research (NASR) to coordinate and fund scientific research in the country.

The national authority for scientific research was announced on March 7 by Shaikh Nahyan bin Mubarak Al Nahyan, UAE minister for higher education and scientific research. NASR will begin with an annual budget of AED100 million (approximately US$27.2 million). The authority hopes to receive additional contributions from the public and the private sector.

NASR will look to fund research projects in various fields, including engineering, technology, medicine, water and agriculture, proposing specific projects to be competed for by researchers at universities and private research institutes.

“Projects are going to be selected to help promote scientific research and the growth of UAE society and we will compare them with international scientific research criteria,” Gulf News quoted Al Nahyan as saying at the launch.

NASR will also train scientists and develop programmes for promoting public science awareness. It will also coordinate with government authorities on the issue of intellectual property rights, by providing advice on how companies and research centres should go about protecting their discoveries in the form of patents or licenses. It will also provide scholarships for researchers in the UAE to work on international research programmes, and organise national scientific conferences. NASR forms part of the UAE’s strategic plan to improve higher education and scientific research.

Zakaria Maamar, associate professor at the College of Information Technology at Zayed University, UAE, told Science and Development Network (SciDev.Net) that, “This initiative is another boost to the research and development activities that are carried out in the UAE. It will definitely provide researchers with the appropriate funds to sustain such activities and promote best practices in the community.”

Said Elnaffar, assistant professor at the college of information technology at the United Arab Emirates University, told SciDev.Net that, with this initiative, the UAE is taking the lead and setting a good example by building a strong development infrastructure founded on knowledge discovery and research.

This article is based on UAE launches national authority for scientific research by scidev.net (Wagdy Sawahel) which has a copyright policy compatible with our CC-BY 2.5. Specifically “CC-BY-2.0 UK“

Monday, December 29, 2008

The Green Bay Packers defeated the Detroit Lions on Sunday evening by a final score of 31–21, effectively ending the Lions’ season with an 0-16 record. The game was played at Lambeau Field in Green Bay, Wisconsin and was televised by Fox in the United States. Kickoff was at 1:00 p.m. EDT. The Lions became the first National Football League franchise to complete an “imperfect season” (without a victory) since the introduction of the 16-game schedule in the 1978 NFL season. The winless season comes just a year after the New England Patriots did the reverse, accomplishing the NFL’s first “perfect” 16-0 regular season.

After trailing the game 14–0 entering the second quarter, Detroit rallied back to tie the game at 14 by the end of the third quarter. The Packers took a 10-point lead halfway through the fourth quarter with a field goal by kicker Mason Crosby (Green Bay 17 – Detroit 14) and then a touchdown pass from quarterback Aaron Rodgers to fullback John Kuhn (Green Bay 24 – Detroit 14). The Lions fought back with a rushing touchdown by Kevin Smith which left Detroit within three points of tying the game. However, just 11 seconds later, the Packers took possession and Aaron Rodgers completed a 71-yard touchdown pass to wide receiver Donald Driver (Green Bay 31 – Detroit 21). The Packers held on to the lead for the remainder of the game to seal their sixth victory on the season.

Lions quarterback Dan Orlovsky was 22-of-42 for 225 yards with two touchdowns and two interceptions. Calvin Johnson led the Lions in receiving with 102 yards and touchdowns. Kevin Smith led the Lions in rushing with 92 yards and one touchdown.

For the Packers, quarterback Aaron Rodgers was 21-of-31 for 308 yards and three touchdowns, and running backs Ryan Grant and DeShawn Wynn rushed for 106 yards each. Wide receivers Donald Driver and Greg Jennings led the Packers in receiving, both tallying over 100 yards.

Prior to the Lions’ loss on Sunday, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were the only franchise since the 1970 AFL–NFL merger to finish a season without a victory or a tie. The 1976 Tampa Bay Buccaneers finished their season with a 0-14 record. It was the Buccaneers franchise’s first season in the NFL. Tampa Bay also lost the first 12 games of the 1977 season, and the team’s 26-game losing streak is still the longest in NFL history. The 1982 Baltimore Colts were the most recent NFL team to not win a game in their respective season, failing to win in the strike-shortened 1982 season, posting an 0-8-1 record.

The Lions’ loss was closely watched by some members of the 1976 Buccaneers team, including defensive end Pat Toomay. Toomay told reporters, “I would like the torch to be passed…At the same time, you don’t want to wish that on anybody.” Toomay also pointed out that although the Buccaneers lost every game in their inaugural season, the team reached the NFC Championship Game in their fourth season (1979).

Steve Spurrier, the quarterback for the Buccaneers in the 1976 season, voiced his support for the Lions in their quest to win their first game of the season, hoping that only the Buccaneers would hold the distinction of finishing an “imperfect season.”

“I want that record,” Spurrier said. “I’m pulling for them, sure,” Spurrier added. “That’s the American thing to do, isn’t it?”

Entering the game, the Lions were 10½-point underdogs against the Packers in spread betting. Lions tackle Gosder Cherilus likened the team’s chance to avoid the 0-16 finish as a championship game. “It’s our Super Bowl,” Cherilus told reporters on Friday, December 27.

The Lions surpassed the 1980 New Orleans Saints with their 15th consecutive loss on December 21 to become the first team in NFL history to lose the first 15 games of the season. The 1980 Saints lost their first 14 games, but won their 15th game against the New York Jets.

The closest margin that the Lions came to within victory was two points, which came against the Minnesota Vikings on October 12. Minnesota won the game by a score of 12–10. The 1976 Buccaneers suffered five shutout losses (in which they did not score a single point) in their winless season. The closest that the Buccaneers came within victory was a 23–20 loss to the Miami Dolphins on October 24, 1976.

Prior to the regular season, the Lions won all four of their games in the exhibition season, which do not count in regular season standings or totals.

While the loss didn’t come without a fight from the Lions, players from the team knew that they would be forever remembered as possibly the worst team in NFL history. “I’ve got to live with this,” Lions center Dominic Raiola said. “I’ve been here eight years. This is on my résumé.”

“I don’t ever want to be a part of this again,” Lions quarterback Dan Orlovsky said. “We haven’t won since, November of ’07, maybe? I don’t even know the last time we won a game.” The franchise’s last victory in the regular season was on December 23, 2007 against the Kansas City Chiefs.

Packers players were just as eager for a victory. Green Bay’s quarterback Aaron Rodgers said while their own season was disappointing, they didn’t want to be forever remembered as the team that lost to the 0-15 Lions in the final game of the season. “We didn’t want to lose, no, we didn’t,” Rodgers said. “But really it’s not on your mind once the game starts. I didn’t even think about it until the fans started chanting in the fourth quarter. They played hard, they really did.” Packers fans in attendance at Lambeau Field began to chant “0-16” late in the game.

With their victory, the Packers finished their 2008 season with a 6-10 record. With the loss, the Lions finished their 79th season since their inception as the Portsmouth Spartans in 1929. It was the Lions’ 75th season in Detroit, Michigan. The franchise also secured the first-overall selection in the upcoming 2009 NFL Draft, a spot reserved for the NFL team with the worst record from the previous season entering the upcoming season.

After the game, Lions head coach Rod Marinelli declined to comment on his future with the team. Since being hired in 2006, the Lions have had a 10-38 record under Marinelli. The Lions have averaged 11 losses per season since 2001 and now have lost 23 of their last 24 games. The 0-16 record could be a lasting testimony to the Matt Millen era. With Millen as president of the team from 2001 until he was fired on September 24, Detroit won only 31 games. Millen was widely criticized for his handling of the Lions organization, and Lions fans rallied to have him relieved of duties for years.

Monday, October 31, 2005

Kansas has been denied permission to use two key documents commonly used in the writing of science education standards for states, the National Science Education Standards (published by the National Research Council) and Pathways to Science Standards (published by the National Science Teacher Association). The respective organizations argued that they could not grant the state of Kansas permission to use these documents in the current form of the Kansas Science Educational Standards, as these overemphasize controversy between the scientific theory of Evolution and the argument of Intelligent Design. Moreover, the organizations criticize that the standards in their current form distort the definition of science. The American Association for the Advancement of Science has expressed its support for the decision to deny Kansas the use of copyrighted material, as “the proposed standards misrepresent both the content and the standing of evolution as a scientific organizing principle”.

Proponents of Intelligent Design have characterized the refusal as “an effort to censor the discussion of scientific criticism of Darwinian theory by intimidation and threat”.

This is likely to further delay the ratification of the final vote on the Kansas Science Educational Standards as they will have to be rewritten either to not violate any copyright restrictions or modify their account of evolution and outlook on science. According to University of Kansas professor Steve Case, rewriting the standards will be very difficult, as “there is copyrighted material on every page” of the current document.

This is the second time that Kansas was denied the right to use copyrighted materials in their state standards, following the case in 1999, when Kansas included Creationism, a precursor of Intelligent Design, into the school curriculum. A later school board overturned that directive.

The dispute in Kansas has brought nationwide responses, ranging from a rebuke by the American Association for the Advancement of Science to the creation of internet-sensation Flying Spaghetti Monster mythology (which is lobbying the Kansas School Board to give equal time teaching their creationism theory as well.)