Olean and the FDA

Olean, the brand name for Olestra, is a fat-substitute produced by Proctor & Gamble, which is apparently fat, calorie, and cholesterol free.  The substance works to prevent the body from accumulating fat from the food it is on or cooked with in two ways.  Primarily, the molecule is too large to be digested by the human body, through normal processes; also, it apparently accelerates the digestive system.

Consequently, it was hailed the salvation to obesity; unfortunately, not without serious side effects.  Numerous cases of stomach pain, uncontrollable diarrhea, and a loss of essential nutrients, soon made Olean a product to be avoided.

In my opinion, the FDA failed again and probably profited in some way through its interaction with Proctor & Gamble.  Not only was Proctor & Gamble able to produce and release a product without sufficient testing, but the FDA allowed the product to persist in the marketplace, in spite of continuously mounting evidence that it was not good for the body.  Additionally, when sales of products containing the ingredient nose-dived, the FDA threw its full support behind Proctor & Gamble, deciding that it was no longer necessary to warn the public of the negative side effects.  

This situation is yet another piece of evidence that corporate America and the FDA work side-by-side, and not always in the interest of the consumer.

• Olean Review.  Diet Spotlight. [article online] 2009.  Available from http://www.dietspotlight.com/olean-review/ Accessed 2009 Dec 11
• Wow!  What Stinks?  Originally published by the Boulder Weekly. [article online] 2002.  Available from http://www.hansbjordahl.com/columns/wow.html .  Accessed 2009 Dec 11.

A few thoughts on Hydrogen

Hydrogen fuel is probably one of the best untapped natural resources available to modern man but remains largely ignored in favor of fossil fuels.  Additionally, certain disadvantages apparent when compared to fossil fuels have slowed the implementation of this mostly safe and clean burning fuel.

Hydrogen fuel use in the internal combustion engine produces less horsepower, as well as a decreased driving range.  For many car owners, this is not an acceptable trade-off.  The gas also has less energy density, requiring larger storage facilities.1  

As a highly volatile gas, larger storage facilities increase the risk of disaster, and present numerous logistical problems with transport to distribution centers.  Though it is the most common element in the universe, it is difficult to generate, store, handle, and distribute.2

The benefits of the use hydrogen outweigh all of the disadvantages though.  Primarily, the waste product is nothing more dangerous than water; as well, no carbon, means no carbon dioxide.  Overall mechanical inefficiencies are reduced or eliminated, because there is no transfer of power, as with a combustion engine.  Run-time is limited by the amount of fuel available, creating scalability to nearly any application.3 Probably the second biggest benefit is energy security for the future, since it is the most common element in the universe.

Ultimately, hydrogen would enable independence from massive utility infrastructures, and a greater self-reliance.  The cost and environmental savings, from more the more localized attributes of hydrogen fuel generation and distribution, pays for itself in reduced maintenance and new construction costs of traditional fossil fuel facilities.3 Hydrogen is indeed, the best alternative.

1. Hydrogen Fuel Source.  Alternative Fuels.  [article online] 2004.  Available from http://www.altfuels.org/backgrnd/altftype/hydrogen.html .  Accessed 2009 Dec 6.
2. Snyder, Andrew.  Hydrogen Internal Combusion. Columbia University.  [article online]  2003.  Available from http://www.columbia.edu/~ajs120/hydrogen/web-pages/h-fuel-cell-how.html .  Accessed 2009 Dec 6.
3. Advantages & Benefits of Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technologies.  Fuel Cell Markets.  [article online] 2009.  Available from http://www.fuelcellmarkets.com/fuel_cell_markets/5,1,1,663.html .  Accessed 2009 Dec 6.

... originally written for Chemistry & Society

Chemistry Effects on Caves & Karst Ecosystems

Abstract

Caves are the alpha and omega of all of ecosystems. It is where humanity first took refuge from the elements, and began its rise up to the great societies that now populate the earth. Like the Neanderthal, clinging to Gibraltar, caves may also be our only refuge from future events. This fragile, yet persistent, and constantly evolving ecosystem directly influences many basic human needs. However, population pressures, and human mistreatment through misunderstanding are putting a strain on this natural resource. Damage to these systems can be irreversible, and the scope felt through all systems. Caves and other karst terrain are extremely sensitive to outside influences, as well as changes in climate, and can be keen indicators of changes in environmental conditions on the surface of the earth. They are a little recognized, but essential aspect of continued human existence and it is imperative that appropriate conservation efforts actually preserve this resource, not just conserve it.

The Cave Environment

The underground chambers found within the earth form in various ways. While there are some similarities in geology and biology, caves sometimes host their own unique ecosystem. The one characteristic that they all share is in their formation, which is dependent upon not just hydrology, but also the chemistry of the internal and surface environment. As water travels through atmosphere, and percolates down through the layers of soil, it absorbs carbon dioxide (CO2), making it slightly acidic. As it works its way through fractures in the rock layers below the soil, it begins to dissolve certain types of rock, like limestone, and the cave begins to form. CO2 is not the only substance that water picks up in its journey through this system, towards its base line, which is typically sea level, or the level of the surrounding aquifer.1

While the soil above does filter out some substances, high concentrations of any one substance can enter a cave system and permanently alter its environment. Evidence of this appears in the various formations typically found in caves. Stalactites, stalagmites, columns, and flowstones form from calcite precipitated by evaporation of water with high concentrations of calcium and bicarbonates. Recent breakthroughs in molecular technology have shown that bacteria and various other microorganisms are also contributors to this process. In Lower Kane Cave, Wyoming, bacteria produce sulfuric acid that dissolves the rock, producing pockets in the rock, where other microorganisms attached themselves. Some of these microorganisms can also promote calcium carbonate precipitation, which further dissolves surrounding rock.2

These recent discoveries have awakened researchers to the potential of external influences on these systems. Certain bacteria and fungi that are not normally present within caves can continue their existence there, if accidentally introduced. Escherichia coli (E. coli), normally found in the digestive tract and feces of warm-blooded animals, can survive and in some instances intensify. E. coli is just one of several bacteria considered Human Indicator Bacteria (HIB), bacteria resulting from human contact, or contact with processes, which have been in contact with humans. Its introduction into a cave system can permanently alter the environment and crowd out other usual types of bacteria, which other life within the cave depend upon for survival.3

Cave Populations

The inhabitants of the cave that rely upon naturally occurring bacteria and funguses are troglobites and troglophiles. Troglobites live their entire life cycle in the cave, while troglophiles may also exists outside the cave, in the soil or under rocks. The species consists of a myriad of mites, spiders, worms, blind salamanders, and eyeless fish. They survive on stagnant, low-oxygen air for months on end, thanks to an extremely slow metabolism. Loss of vision aids in this precarious struggle for survival; many troglobites have supersensitive nerve centers that can detect the slightest change in air-pressure or temperature. These things are not enough to survive life in the cave; more often than not, troglobites have no other source of food, but one another. This is not surprising in an environment containing an unusual overabundance of predators and scavengers.4

 
Feeding only on what trickles down, and the other species that have fed on the same substance and one another, species often suffer the effects of biomagnifications and bioaccumulation. One of the most these type of common troglobite/troglophiles is the Springtail, a tiny insect about 2 mm in size. The Springtail feeds on bacteria and funguses found among organic litter within the cave and consequently, are very susceptible to HIB, which is perhaps the reason that the Fountain Cave Springtail (Pseudosinella Fonsa) is “G2 imperiled,” which means that there are only 20 possible sites throughout the world, where they exist, and only in caves with very limited human activity.5

 
Another troglobite in peril from human activity is the cavefish. In Cave Springs Cave, Arkansas, there has been a 30% decline in the cavefish populations, attributed to infiltration of Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), used primarily in the production of poly-vinyl chloride (PVC). This material accumulates in the soft tissue of fish and causes reproductive damage and reduced fertility. Upon investigating the source of this pollutant, resident crayfish were to found to contain significant concentrations of the compound; additionally, high concentrations of nitrite, total coliform and E. coli further suggested that bacteria from leaking septic systems or direction application of animal waste as fertilizer to the land above, was having an extremely negative impact on the entire system. As the primary source of food for the cavefish, it is easy to ascertain the cause of the reduction in associated populations.6

 
Mercury (Hg) and Monomethylmercury (MeHg) are also a huge concern for cave systems. These elements are naturally occurring, but human activity has created a toxic overabundance of these materials, due to atmospheric emissions from coal-fired power plants, as well as negligent methods of industrial waste disposal. Limited exposure can be damaging enough; however, long-term exposure to these elements produces damage to the heart, lung, kidneys, reproductive systems, and neurological disorders. One study done to measure the quantities of these substances in Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, revealed frightening results. Bat guano sampled from beneath gray bat colonies contained quantities of Hg and MeHg sufficient to produce adverse effects in humans.7

Bat colonies can be an early indicator of trouble beneath the surface. They belong to the group of cave residents referred to as the Trogloxene, organisms that use caves, but do not necessarily complete their life cycle there; other trogloxenes include cave crickets, ants, wood rats, and bears. Influenced by conditions within the cave, the lifestyle of the trogloxene also influences conditions within the cave. Wherever they roost, their dung, guano covers the floor of the cave, sometimes in enormous piles, and is home and sustenance to a variety of cave flora and fauna. If the bat dung diminishes, or becomes contaminated, the entire system is affected.9

Insectivorous bats are the most common, and feed on the variety of insects found along rivers and lakes; consequently, they are extremely susceptible to biological amplification of substances like pesticides. Populations of the Mexican Free-Tailed bats declined dramatically, from 8.7 million in 1936 to only 200,000 in 1973 primarily from the use of the pesticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), used extensively on cotton in the nearby Pecos River Valley. Numbers remain low to this day, likely due to the persistent use of DDT in Mexico. Dieldrin, a chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide, and neurotoxin metabolite of Aldrin, an organo-chlorine insecticide, destroyed two maternity populations of gray bat in Missouri during the late 1970s. Originally developed as an alternative to DDT, Aldrin proved an extremely persistent organic pollutant that does not break down, and biomagnifies along the food chain. At least three other caves in Missouri have lost gray bat colonies after the use of this pesticide. The effectiveness of this pesticide is so good that in one instance local public health authorities in Panama used the substance to fumigate a cave intentionally, to remove bat colonies.10

Massive disruption of the food chain, sometimes wiping out an entire cave ecosystem, is the result of the use pesticides and herbicides. Nutrients are sparse within a cave. There are extraordinarily few organisms perceived to be plants; fungi and mold are the primary organisms at work in this place that sees little to no sunlight. In this system, anything with any nutritional value is fair game. The dung pile beneath colonies is the richest in nutrients. Primarily composed of insect matter, it can also contain pollen and other organic substances.11 The dung pile within a cave also contains decaying matter, originating from within the cave. Bats, snakes, trapped animals, and other organisms may fall, die, and decay in the dung pile. All of these elements go in to producing a plethora of nutrients for the bacteria, mold, and fungi that grow in this massive heap of decaying matter, which provides home to and feeds the troglobites and troglophiles. Humans also use guano, because it has such a high concentration of nitrates, and is excellent fertilizer. As has been demonstrated, this fertilizer also contains various levels of other less desirable substances that have infiltrated not just the digestive tract of the bats and other organism, but anything else that has infiltrated the confinement of the dung pile.

Caves and the Human Factor

The most dramatic effects are those imposed by humans and are the biggest threat to the biodiversity of caves. William Elliott, one of the most respected cave biologists in the United States, identifies the most significant human pressures on cave life as; “1) hydrological threats, 2) land development, 3) killing, over-collecting, and disturbing bats and other species, 4) sedimentation and contaminants, and 5) nutrient loss and enrichments.”10

Hydrological threats include damming, changes in drainage patterns due to development in drainage basins, and over-pumping of aquifers. Obviously, damming causes the inundation of some caves. Appropriate precautions, prior to inundation, preserves and protects endangered species from extinction. Banksula melones was rescued and transplanted to a nearby mine in the 1970s, when one of only two known habitats for this troglobite was inundated by the construction of the New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus River in California. Development near and in drainage basins decrease the quality of water in caves too. A 1990 study at Mammoth Cave National Park demonstrated a strong correlation between water quality and surrounding agricultural use, urban influences, and oil and gas exploration. Water exploration is another contributing factor. In portions of the southwestern United States, extensive groundwater pumping has caused the water levels of many aquifers to recede, past their ability to recharge. In Texas, over-pumping is causing spring failures and encroachment of salt water in to the system, which translates to death for many cave species dependant upon fresh water, including five currently endangered.

 
Land development factors have adverse effects on cave life, especially when done without appropriate planning. In a recently discovered cave beneath Georgetown, Texas, areas below the slab foundations of houses eliminated moisture and growth of any species of fauna. Fortunately, many species found refuge in passageways that were under the street and yards, which received water from leaking street gutters and lawn irrigation systems. Other development activities, such as tourism, quarrying, and mining can have negative consequences, as well. Opening a secondary entrance to Marshall Bat Cave in Texas to remove guano, the entire population of Mexican Free-Tail bats vacated, because meteorological conditions within the cave were no longer ideal. Without the bats, there was no more guano; cave systems lost their source of nutrients and human industry lost its source of capital.10 Onyx Cave in Missouri, recently witnessed the possible extinction of the Missouri Cave Lichen, a nutrient for many forms of cave bacteria, due to similar circumstances, when it became a tourist attraction in 1990.12

Nutrient losses have a profound effect on cave life, especially when contributed to by human activity. Citizens concerned about youth entering Shelta Cave in Alabama caused the evacuation of a large colony of gray bats, when they gated the entrance to the cave. Without the bats, there was no guano; nutrients levels dropped and aquatic systems within the cave dependant upon the guano decreased significantly. Meanwhile, continued development nearby caused the infiltration of the insecticide Heptachlor Epoxide. Likely used to treat nearby foundations, infiltration of this substance nearly decimated the Alabama Cave Shrimp population, resulting in its addition to the endangered species list in 1988.10

Nutrient loads in excess of the carrying capacity of the cave choke out life, while promoting the growth of more damaging organisms. Pig and cattle farms, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides threaten many cave water supplies, which are sometimes also the source of water for humans. Deep-well injection of wastewater and solid waste dumped in to dry caves near Mérida, Mexico resulted in an overabundance of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), which contaminated the drinking water, affecting not only the local human population, but also the endangered jaguar and the threatened Morelet’s crocodile. Indiscriminate sewage disposal resulted in huge numbers of red tubificid worms, or “sewage fungus,” which nearly destroyed the troglobite community at Hidden River Cave in Kentucky.10 However, a new sewage treatment facility eliminated the flow of sewage in to the cave in 1989 and by 1995, the original community had reestablished itself and today, visitors enjoy ecological tours of the cave, demonstrating the effects.13

Chemical pollution is by far the most damaging to cave systems, and the most widely ignored, until recently. The most recognized poison to caves is carbide from acetylene lamps used by cavers through the 1960s. The calcium hydroxide in these spent carbide cartridges is highly toxic to cave fauna. Typically discarded or buried in caves, the toxin can leak in to the soil and water for hundreds of years. Modern technology has not improved the situation very much. Mercury used in batteries for cave lighting continues to be a concern for the cave environment, mostly due to accidental or careless action by individuals exploring caves.

Accidents are the dominant factor in cave pollution though. One of the most massive destructions of cave biota was only an accident. A pipeline break near Dry Fork Creek, Missouri dumped 80,000 gallons of ammonium nitrate and urea fertilizer in to Maramac Spring, the third largest in the state. 10,000 of the rare Salem Cave Crayfish and 1000 of the Southern Cavefish died because of elevated ammonium and nitrate nitrogen concentrations. Slower movement of toxins in the environment can have equally devastating effects. Leaking diesel fuel, from a service station storage tank, decimated the crustacean population of Wildcat Saltpeter Cave in Virginia.10

Human activities undoubtedly leave a mark on cave systems; the simple presence of a human can dramatically alter these fragile environments. Ignorance is most often a major contributing factor. Unfounded fear of vampire bats in Mexico has led to the destruction of many bat colonies in the country; indeed, the practice of extinguishing bat colonies in Central and South America continues even today. Science has also contributed to the decline of certain cave populations. One biologist, D.C. Culver admitted that his methods of collection had resulted in a severe decline in populations of cave isopods. Additionally, early attempts to track bats using banding caused torn wing membranes and injured their fragile bones, affecting their populations. Today, the preferred method of tracking uses tiny radio transmitters, glued to the fur, which has helped to provide a better understanding of bat habits, the factors that influence them, and their diminishing populations. It is extremely important to understand these factors too, because without the bat, there is no guano; in most instances, without guano, there is no cave life; without cave life, no organisms exist to help filter the water indicative of these environments, which humans depend greatly upon.10

The Solution for Caves

The most obvious solution is careful attention to all of the factors that can influence cave structures. There are many different theories on best practices. The most popular are: isolation, ecological surveys, cave gating, and restoration or transplantation of species, when possible.

 
Some perceive that isolation of cave and karst areas is the ultimate solution and can be in some instances. However, while this method of protection can aid to restore some level of normalcy to a cave, inattentiveness to contributing factors can further damage these systems. In one case, a quarry near Inner Space Cavern in Texas could be the cause of the destruction of several caves in the area, since 1963. While the caves are isolated, the quarry creates an artificial barrier to the natural flow of nutrients in the water supply to the caves, while causing excessive sediment deposition. As demonstrated previously, this can dramatically alter nutrient levels, which ultimately affects the biodiversity of the cave.10

Cave gating is an excellent way of preserving the ecosystems within, if special attention is devoted to ensuring that maximum levels of access are not inhibited. When designed properly, gates can protect cave resources and limit the ability of intruders to inflict damage, while at the same time permitting the various trogloxenes and troglophiles to move in and out of the cave, unimpeded. Unfortunately, improper gating can disrupt airflow, cause variations in nutrient levels, and sometimes inhibit the free movement of creatures dependent upon the entrance of the cave.14 However, even the most perfectly planned gate will have unintended effects. Extremely particular about obstructions in the openings of their caves, in certain instances gray bat colonies have evacuated even the most appropriately gated cave. With so very few caves suited to hosting this endangered species, even the most careful attention could induce a massive decline in population.

 
Removing trash and other materials not normally found in caves can help in restoring the ecology; however, care not to remove items that might cause excessive stress in the cave community, is extremely important. Rotting wood sometimes infiltrate the environment of the cave. While not normally found there, when it is, large populations of cave invertebrates take advantage of the decaying matter. Removing the wood suddenly could wipe out an entire species, while gradual removal permits these creatures to take refuge in other parts of the cave. Foreign algae and moss growing on cave features can be eliminated using special bleach solutions, though as with many other chemicals, can be disruptive to other organisms.10

One of the most experimental concepts in cave preservation is ecological transplantation. As previously mentioned, this method did rescue a species of cave life, threatened by inundation by the New Melones Reservoir. However, transplanting sensitive and sometimes endangered cave species, which rely heavily on specific environmental conditions, is probably a good emergency measure at best. Caves have their own natural community. If the species introduced does not already exist there, is the relocation effort sustainable? If the effort is sustainable, the species will be in peril from competition within the existing ecosystem. Even if all of these efforts are sustainable, and the species is able to persist, alterations to the two communities may irreversible. In the case of McLean’s Cave, at the New Melones Reservoir, other problems have recently presented themselves. The mine requires a regular stock of wood to maintain the appropriate level of nutrients, for the species transplanted there. Additionally, a lack of commitment in funding for long-term monitoring, could ultimately lead to neglect of the transplanted species. Ironically and fortunately, after the relocation of this species, researchers discovered 18 caves in the area containing the same species previously thought endangered.10

Landowners are the primary protectors of caves though and help and support is readily available through local conservation agencies. Immediate solutions for landowners actually cost very little and are rather simple practices to implement. Preserve wooded areas around caves and maintain a forest path 100 feet wide to, and along local streams for bats and other trogloxene. Owners should deny access to caves during the bats summer roost, as well as during their winter hibernacula. Avoid burning any sort of material near the cave entrance, and most importantly, eliminate or reduce the potential for infiltration of compounds easily dissolved in the soil and water. (MoDoC)

With so many species influenced by all of the processes of the earth, living within these formations on earth, it is essential that caves remain protected. Damage to these systems can have a wide impact on nearly every aspect of human life. Contamination of caves leads to the contamination of any species dependent upon the life that the cave nurtures, as well as those elements that are only passing visitors to the cave, like water. In the United States, caves and karst formations influence nearly 25% of the drinking water consumed. (Christopherson) If development continues with disregard for this system, the effects may not be immediately apparent; however, long-term repercussions over successive generations will be witnessed, and in certain instances, may be unrecoverable.

References

1. Plummer, Charles C Plummer & McGeary, Effects of Ground-Water Action on Caves, Sinkholes, and Karst Topography. Physical Geology, 3rd Ed. Dubuque: William C. Brown Publishers, 1985. 222-223
2. Barton, Hazel A. Barton & Northup, Diana E. Geomicrobiology in cave environments: Past, Current, and Future Perspectives. Journal of Cave and Karst Studes, v.69, no 1; [article online] 2007. http://www.caves.org/pub/journal/PDF/v69/cave-69-01-163.pdf . 163-178.
3. Lavoie, Kathleen H. Lavoie & Northup, Diana E. Northup. Bacteria as Indicators of Human Impact on Caves. National Cave and Karst Management Symposium. [article online] 2005. http://www.nckms.org/2005/pdf/Papers/lavoie-bacteria.pdf
4. Krajick, Kevin, “Discoveries in the Dark,” National Geographic. [article online] 2007. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/09/new-troglobites/new-troglobites-text
5. Lewis, Julian J. Lewis. Conservation Assessment for Fountain Cave Springtail (Pseudosinella Fonsa). USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region [article online] 2002. http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/ca-overview/docs/insect_Pseudosinella_fonsa-FountainCaveSpringtail.pdf
6. Brown, Arthur V., Graening, G.O., & Vendrell, Paul Vendrell. Monitoring Cavefish Population and Environmental Quality in Cave Springs Cave, Akransas. Arkansas Water Resources Center Publication No. MSC-214. [article online] 1998. http://www.uark.edu/depts/ecology/docs/ANHC1999Report.PDF
7. Helf, Kurt Lewis Helf. Mercury and Methylmercury in the South Central Kentucky Karst: Its Transportation, Accumulation, and Potential Effects on Vulnerable Biota. National Cave and Karst Management Symposium [article online] 2003 http://www.nckms.org/2003/pdf/HELF.pdf
8. O’Shea, T.J. & Botan, M.A. Monitoring Trends in Bat Populations of the United States and Territories: Problems and Prospects. USGS Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR—2003-0003 [article online]. 2003. http://www.caves.org/pub/journal/PDF/V66/v66n3-Book_Reviews.pdf
9. Baker, Gretchen. Field Guide to Cave Life. A Guide to Cave Life in Great Basin National Park. [article online] 2008. http://www.nps.gov/grba/naturescience/upload/Field%20Guide%20to%20Cave%20Life.pdf
10. Elliott, William R. Conservation of the North American Cave and Karst Biota. An electronic preprint from Elsevier Science’s Subterranean Biota [article online] 1998 http://www.utexas.edu/tmm/sponsored_sites/biospeleology/preprint.htm
11. Darntan, Michael. Making a Study of Bat Droppings. Microscopy UK [article online] 1995. http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/indexmag.html?http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artapr99/bdbat.html
12. Low, Jim. Species of Concern: Missouri Cave Lichen. Missouri Conservationist; 2009
13. Lynn, Jessica. Kentucky Cave Restored: Hidden River Cave and American Cave Museum. Associated Content [article online] 2007 http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/316671/kentucky_cave_restored_hidden_river.html
14. Roebuck, Brian, Vakili, Ahmad & Roebuck, Lynn. Cave Gate Airflow Disturbance – A Qualitative Study. National Cave and Karst Management Symposium. [article online] 1999. http://www.nckms.org/pdf/roebuck.pdf
15. Care and Maintenance of Missouri Bat Caves. Missouri Department of Conservation [article online] 2004. http://mdc.mo.gov/nathis/mammals/batcave/
16. Christopherson, Robert W. Karst Topography and Landscapes. Geosystems, 6th ed. New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2006. 412-418

Nuclear Waste Disposal Thoughts

Nuclear waste, whether from a reactor or a discarded missile, is as sensitive a political topic as the means by which the waste was generated.  Whether the disposal concerns low-level or high-level waste, the consensus is that nobody wants the waste disposed of anywhere near them.  Therein lies the problem of what do with the waste.  Should it be stored on-site, or should all nuclear waste be disposed of in one central location.

A large, centralized stockpile of nuclear waste has the potential to be a hazard greater than permanent local storage.  Should an incident occur at the storage, the effects could be farther reaching than currently understood.  Even today, scientists are not completely aware of the full extent and long-term repercussions of seepage of waste into any particular ecosystem.

Low-level radioactive materials should definitely be stored locally, at the site of production.  Dissipation of radioactivity can be measured in terms 10-50 years with this type of radioactive material, and containment of the waste is achievable by current methods.1

High-level radiation is a different issue.  Out of sight, out of mind, creates more problems than are solvable.  On-site storage would undoubtedly cause those responsible for the waste to be more conscious of the continuing growth in scope of their problem.  Indeed perhaps, it would be the impetus for advancement in disposal methods.

• Nuclear Waste Disposal.  Rochester History Resources. [article online] 2009.  Available from http://www.history.rochester.edu/class/EZRA/index.htm.  Accessed 28 Nov 2009

Polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs)

Polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs) were manufactured as a man-made chemical beginning in the 1920s and are part of a group of compounds called congeners.1  

Produced globally for use in various industrial and commercial applications, they were favored for their unique characteristics.  Non-flammability, stability, and electrical insulating properties, PCBs were included for use in electrical manufacturing, hydraulics, plastics, paint, and rubbers.2

After several decades of use, it was discovered that PCBs aggressively enter the food chain during their manufacture and use, as well as spills and leaks from industrial accidents, or from damage or destruction of the material they were used in.   The high capacity for bioaccumulation in lower reaches of the food chain, made them extraordinarily hazardous to humans.  Typically collecting in sediments, they are ingested by fish, their prey, and so on, until finally entering the human food supply.1

Health effects associated with exposure to PCBs are primarily concerned with damages to prenatal conditions; predominantly, the disruption of thyroid hormone systems, which can complete stop, alter or inhibit human brain development.  Excessive exposure to PCBs in postnatal situations can affect brain, eye, heart, immune, kidney, liver, skin, reproductive systems, and could lead to cancer.1

1. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBS):  Detox Campaign Fact Sheet. [article online] 2005.  Available from http://assets.panda.org/downloads/fact_sheet___pcbs_food.pdf .  Accessed 2009 Nov 21.
2. PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls).  Pollution Issues.  [article online]  2009.  Available from http://www.pollutionissues.com/Na-Ph/PCBs-Polychlorinated-Biphenyls.html .  Accessed 2009 Nov 21.

Presidential Green Chemistry Award

The Presidential Green Chemistry Award is an effort to recognize innovative developments in chemistry, which decrease environmental impact.  Initiated in 1996, the awards are distributed among five categories: Greener Synthetic Pathways Award, Greener Reaction Conditions Award, Designing Greener Chemicals Award, Small Business Award, and an Academic Award. 1

In 2008, Dow AgroSciences took home the Designing Greener Chemicals Award, for enhancement of their widely used biopesticide Spinosad.  Used to control insects primarily on vegetable crops, it is not very effective against fruit insects, which required many farmers to apply a separate pesticide to cure problems with fruit insects.  One such product, Azinphos-methyl, is considered 1000 times more toxic than the new product developed, Spinetoram. 2

Issuing the award, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicated that Spinetoram is less persistent in the environment, less toxic to non-target insect species.  Additionally, because much less of the product is required for comparable effects to similar products, the results will undoubtedly induce a reduction of risk throughout the entire supply chain.1 Indeed, it is estimated that Spinetoram will replace 1.8 million pounds of insecticides currently applied to fruit and nut trees, during the first five years of use.

 Supporting data is scant on the product; the PAN Pesticides Database, only provides scant information on its potential for ground water contamination.3   Those numbers seem to bear out the suggestions of the EPA, though only time will tell.

1. The Presidential Green Chemistry Award.  [article online] 2009.  Available from http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/pubs/pgcc/presgcc.html .  Accessed October 21, 2009.
2. Spinotoram:  Enhancing a Natural Product for Insect Control.  2008 Designing Greener Chemicals Award.  US Environmental Protection Agency.  [article online] 2008.  Available from http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/pubs/pgcc/winners/dgca08.html . Accessed October 21, 2009.
3. Spinetoram.  PAN Pesticides Database [article online] 2009.  Available from http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC41693 .  Accessed October 21, 2009.

Caves as Interlocking Eco-Components

Abstract

Caves are the alpha and omega of all of ecosystems.  It is where humanity first took refuge from the elements, and began its rise up to the great societies that now populate the earth.  Like the Neanderthal, clinging to Gibraltar, caves may also be our only refuge from future events.  This fragile, yet persistent, and constantly evolving ecosystem directly influences many basic human needs.  However, population pressure, and mistreatment through misunderstanding are putting a strain on this natural resource.  Damage to these systems can be irreversible, and the scope felt through all systems.  Caves and other karst terrain are extremely sensitive to outside influences, as well as changes in climate, and can be keen indicators of changes in environmental conditions.  They are a little recognized, but essential aspect of continued human existence and it is imperative that appropriate conservation efforts actually preserve this resource, not just conserve it.

The Cave Environment

The underground chambers found within the earth form in various ways.  While there are some similarities in geology and biology, caves sometimes host their own unique ecosystem.  The one characteristic that they all share is in their formation, which is nearly always through some means of hydrology.  As water travels through atmosphere, and percolates down through the layers of soil, it absorbs carbon dioxide (CO2), making it slightly acidic.  As it works its way through fractures in the rock layers below the soil, it begins to dissolve certain types of rock, like limestone, and the cave begins to form.  CO2 is not the only substance that water picks up in its journey through this system, towards its base line, which is typically sea level, or the level of the surrounding aquifer.¬ (Plummer)

While the soil above does filter out some substances, high concentrations of any one substance, can enter a cave system and permanently alter its environment.  Evidence of this appears in the various formations typically found in caves.  Stalactites, stalagmites, columns, and flowstones form from calcite precipitated by evaporation of water with high concentrations of calcium and bicarbonate.  Additionally, recent breakthroughs in molecular technology have shown that bacteria and various other microorganisms are also contributors to this process.  In Lower Kane Cave, Wyoming, bacteria produce sulfuric acid that dissolves the rock, which produces pockets where other microorganisms attached themselves.  Some of these microorganisms can also promote calcium carbonate precipitation, which further dissolves surrounding rock.  (Barton)

The recent discoveries of various molecular biology in cave structures have awakened researchers to the potential of external influences on these systems.  Certain bacteria and fungi that are not normally present within caves can continue their existence there, if accidentally introduced.  Escherichia coli (E. coli), normally found in the digestive tract and feces of warm-blooded animals, can survive and in some instances intensify.  E. coli is just one of several bacteria considered Human Indicator Bacteria (HIB).  Its introduction into a cave system can permanently alter the environment and crowd out other usual types of bacteria, which other life within the cave depend upon for survival.  (Lavoie)

Cave Populations

The inhabitants of the cave that rely upon naturally occurring bacteria and funguses are troglobites and troglophiles.  Troglobites live their entire life cycle in the cave, while troglophiles may also exists outside the cave, in the soil or under rocks.  The species consists of a myriad of mites, spiders, worms, blind salamanders, and eyeless fish.  They survive on stagnant, low-oxygen air for months on end, thanks to an extremely slow metabolism.  Loss of vision aids in this precarious struggle for survival; many troglobites have supersensitive nerve centers that can detect the slightest change in air-pressure or temperature.  These things are not enough to survive life in the cave; more often than not, troglobites have no other source of food, but one another.  This is not surprising in an environment containing an unusual overabundance of predators and scavengers.  (Krajick)  Unfortunately, feeding only on what trickles down, and the other species that have fed on the same substance and one another, species often suffer the effects of biomagnifications and bioaccumulation. 

One of the most common troglobite/troglophiles is the Springtail, a tiny insect about 2 mm in size.  The Springtail feeds on bacteria and funguses found among organic litter within the cave and consequently, are very susceptible to HIB, which is perhaps the reason that the Fountain Cave Springtail (Pseudosinella Fonsa) is “G2 imperiled,” which means that there are only 20 possible sites throughout the world, where they exist, and only in caves with very limited human activity.  (Lewis)  

Another troglobite in peril from human activity is the cavefish.  In Cave Springs Cave, Arkansas, there has been a 30% decline in the cavefish populations, attributed to infiltration of Di (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), used primarily in the production of poly-vinyl chloride (PVC).  This material accumulates in the soft tissue of fish and causes reproductive damage and reduced fertility.  Upon investigating the source of this pollutant, resident crayfish were to found to contain significant concentrations of the compound; additionally, high concentrations of nitrite, total coliform and E. coli further suggested that bacteria from leaking septic systems or direction application of animal waste as fertilizer, to the above land was having an extremely negative impact on the entire system.  As the primary source of food for the cavefish, it is easy to ascertain the cause of the reduction in populations.  (Brown)  

Mercury (Hg) and Monomethylmercury (MeHg) are also a huge concern for cave systems.  These elements are naturally occurring, but human activity has created a toxic overabundance of these materials, due to atmospheric emissions from coal-fired power plants, as well as waste from other industrial practices.  Limited exposure can be damaging enough; however, long-term exposure to these elements produces damage to the heart, lung, kidneys, reproductive systems, and neurological disorders.  One study done to measure the quantities of these substances in Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, revealed frightening results.  Bat guano sampled from beneath gray bat colonies contained quantities sufficient to produce adverse effects in humans.  (Helf)

Bat colonies can be an early indicator of trouble beneath the surface of the ground.  They belong to the group of cave residents referred to as the Trogloxene, organisms that use caves, but do not necessarily complete their life cycle there; other trogloxenes include cave crickets, ants, wood rats, and bears.  Influenced by the conditions within the cave, the lifestyle of the trogloxene also influences conditions within the cave. Wherever they roost, their dung, guano covers the floor of the cave, sometimes in enormous piles and is home and sustenance to a variety of cave flora and fauna.  If the bat dung diminishes, or becomes contaminated, the entire system is affected.  (Baker)

Insectivorous bats are the most common, and feed on the variety of insects found along rivers and lakes; consequently, they are extremely susceptible to biological amplification of substances like pesticides.  Populations of the Mexican Free-Tailed bats declined dramatically, from 8.7 million in 1936 to only 200,000 in 1973 primarily from the use of DDT, used extensively on cotton in the nearby Pecos River Valley.  Numbers remain low to this day, likely due to the persistent use of DDT in Mexico.  Dieldrin, a neurotoxin metabolite of Aldrin, destroyed two maternity populations of gray bat in Missouri during the late 1970s.  Originally developed as an alternative to DDT, Aldrin proved an extremely persistent organic pollutant that does not break down, and biomagnifies along the food chain.  At least three other caves in Missouri have lost gray bat colonies after the use of this pesticide.  The effectiveness of this pesticide is so good that in one instance local public health authorities used the substance to fumigate a cave intentionally, to remove bat colonies in Panama.  (Elliott)

Massive disruption of the food chain, sometimes wiping out an entire cave ecosystem, is the result of the use pesticides and herbicides.  Nutrients are sparse within a cave.  There are extraordinarily few organisms perceived to be plants; fungi and mold are the primary organisms at work in this place that sees little to no sunlight.  In this system, anything with any nutritional value is fair game.  The dung pile beneath colonies is the richest in nutrients.  Primarily composed of insect matter, it can also contain pollen and other organic substances.  (Carrion)  The dung pile within a cave also contains decaying matter, originating from within the cave.  Bats, snakes, trapped animals, and other organisms may fall, die, and decay in the dung pile.  All of these elements go in to producing a plethora of nutrients for the bacteria, mold, and fungi that grow in this massive heap of decaying matter, which provides home to and feeds the troglobites and troglophiles.  Humans also use guano, because it has such a high concentration of nitrates, it is excellent fertilizer.  As has been demonstrated, this fertilizer also contains various levels of other less desirable substances that have infiltrated not just the digestive tract of the bats and other organism, but anything else that has infiltrated the confinement of the dung pile.

Caves and the Human Factor

The most dramatic effects are those imposed by humans and are the biggest threat to the biodiversity of caves.  William Elliott, one of the most respected cave biologists in the United States, identifies the most significant human pressures on cave life as; “1) hydrological threats, 2) land development, 3) killing, over-collecting, and disturbing bats and other species, 4) sedimentation and contaminants, and 5) nutrient loss and enrichments.”  (Elliott) 

Hydrological threats include damming, changes in drainage patterns due to development in drainage basins, and over-pumping of aquifers.  Obviously, damming causes the inundation of some caves.  Appropriate precautions, prior to inundation, preserves and protects endangered species from extinction.  Banksula melones  was rescued and transplanted to a nearby mine in the 1970s, when one of only two known habitats for this troglobite was inundated by the construction of the New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus River in California.  Development near and in drainage basis decreases the quality of water in caves too.  A 1990 study at Mammoth Cave National Park demonstrated a strong correlation between water quality and surrounding agricultural use, urban influences, and oil and gas exploration.  Water exploration is another contributing factor.  In portions of the southwestern United States, extensive groundwater pumping has caused the water levels of many aquifers to recede, past their ability to recharge.  In Texas, over-pumping is causing spring failures and encroachment of salt water in to the system, which translates to death for many cave species dependent upon fresh water, including five currently endangered.  

Land development factors have adverse effects on cave life, especially when done without appropriate planning.  In a recently discovered cave beneath Georgetown, Texas, areas below the slab foundations of houses eliminated moisture and growth of any species of fauna.  Fortunately, many species found refuge in passageways that were under the street and yards, which received water from leaking street gutters and lawn irrigation systems.  Other development activities, such as tourism, quarrying, mining can have negative consequences, as well.  Opening a secondary entrance to Marshall Bat Cave in Texas to remove guano, the entire population of Mexican Free-Tail bats vacated, because meteorological conditions within the cave were no longer ideal.  Without the bats, there was no more guano; cave systems lost their source of nutrients and human industry lost its source of capital.  (Elliott)  Onyx Cave in Missouri, recently witnessed the possible extinction of the Missouri Cave Lichen, a nutrient for many forms of cave bacteria, due to similar circumstances, when it became a tourist attraction in 1990.  (Low)

Nutrient losses have a profound effect on cave life, especially when contributed to by human activity.  Citizens concerned about youth entering Shelta Cave in Alabama caused the evacuation of a large colony of gray bats, when they gated the entrance to the cave.  Without the bats, there was no guano; nutrients levels dropped and aquatic systems within the cave dependent upon the guano decreased significantly.  Meanwhile, continued development nearby caused the infiltration of the insecticide Heptachlor Epoxide.  Likely used to treat nearby foundations, infiltration of this substance nearly decimated the Alabama Cave Shrimp population, resulting in its addition to the endangered species list in 1988. (Elliott)

Nutrient loads in excess of the carrying capacity of the cave choke out life, while promoting the growth of more damaging organisms.  Pig and cattle farms, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides threaten many cave water supplies, which are sometimes also the source of water for humans.  Deep-well injection of wastewater and solid waste dumped in to dry caves near Mérida, Mexico resulted in an overabundance of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), which contaminated the drinking water, affecting not only the local human population, but also the endangered jaguar and the threatened Morelet’s crocodile.  Indiscriminate sewage disposal resulted in huge numbers of red tubificid worms, or “sewage fungus,” which nearly destroyed the troglobite community at Hidden River Cave in Kentucky.  (Elliott)  Fortunately, in 1989, a new sewage treatment facility eliminated the flow of sewage in to the cave; by 1995, the original community had reestablished itself and today, visitors enjoy ecological tours of the cave, demonstrating the effects.  (Lynn)

Chemical pollution is by far the most damaging to cave systems, and the most widely ignored, until recently.  The most recognized poison to caves is carbide from acetylene lamps used by cavers through the 1960s.  The calcium hydroxide in these spent carbide cartridges is highly toxic to cave fauna.  Typically discarded or buried in caves, the toxin can leak in to the soil and water for hundreds of years.  Modern technology has not improved the situation very much.  Mercury used in batteries for cave lighting continues to be a concern for the cave environment.  Accidental or thoughtless actions are the dominant factor in cave pollution.  One of the most massive destruction of cave biota was only an accident.  A pipeline break near Dry Fork Creek, Missouri dumped 80,000 gallons of ammonium nitrate and urea fertilizer in to Maramac Spring, the third largest in the state.  10,000 of the rare Salem Cave Crayfish (Cambarus hubrichti) and 1000 of the Southern Cavefish (Typhlichthys subterraneus) died because of elevated ammonium and nitrate nitrogen concentrations.  Slower movement of toxins in the environment can have equally devastating effects.  Leaking diesel fuel, from a service station storage tank, decimated the crustacean population of Wildcat Saltpeter Cave in Virginia.  (Elliott)

Human activities undoubtedly leave a mark on cave systems; the simple presence of a human can dramatically alter these fragile environments.  Ignorance is most often a major contributing factor.  Unfounded fear of vampire bats in Mexico has destroyed many bat colonies in the country; the practice of extinguishing bat colonies in Central and South America continues today.  Science has also contributed to the decline of certain cave populations.  One biologist, D.C. Culver admitted that his methods of collection had resulted in a severe decline in populations of cave isopods (tiny crustaceans).  Additionally, early attempts to track bats using banding caused torn wing membranes and injured their fragile bones, affecting their populations.  Today, the preferred method of tracking uses tiny radio transmitters, glued to the fur, which has helped to provide a better understanding of bat habits, the factors that influence them, and their diminishing populations.  It is extremely important to understand these factors too, because without the bat, there is no guano; in most instances, without guano, there is no cave life; without cave life, no organisms exist to help filter the water indicative of these environments, which humans depend greatly upon.  (Elliott)

The Solution for Caves

The most obvious solution is careful attention to all of the factors that can influence cave structures.  There are many different theories on best practices.  The most popular are: isolation, ecological surveys, cave gating, and restoration or transplantation of species, when possible.  

Some perceive that isolation of cave and karst areas is the ultimate solution and can be in some instances.  However, while this method of protection can aid to restore some level of normalcy to a cave, inattentiveness to contributing factors can further damage these systems.  In one case, a quarry near Inner Space Cavern in Texas could be the cause of the destruction of several caves in the area, since 1963.  While the caves are isolated, the quarry creates an artificial barrier to the natural flow of nutrients in the water supply to the caves, while causing excessive sediment deposition.  As demonstrated previously, this can dramatically alter nutrient levels, which ultimately affects the biodiversity of the cave.  (Elliott)

Cave gating is an excellent way of preserving the ecosystems within, if special attention is devoted to ensuring that maximum levels of access are not inhibited.  When designed properly, gates can protect cave resources and limit the ability of intruders to inflict damage, while at the same time permitting the various trogloxenes and troglophiles to move in and out of the cave, unimpeded.  Unfortunately, improper gating can disrupt airflow, cause variations in nutrient levels, and sometimes inhibit the free movement of creatures dependent upon the entrance of the cave.  (Roebuck) However, even the most perfectly planned gate will have unintended effects.  Extremely particular about obstructions in the openings of their caves, and in certain instances the gray bat has evacuated an appropriately gated cave.  With so very few caves suited to hosting this endangered species, even the most careful attention could induce a massive decline in population.  

Removing trash and other materials not normally found in caves can help in restoring the ecology; however, care not to remove items that might cause excessive stress in the cave community, is extremely important.  Rotting wood sometimes infiltrate the environment of the cave.  While not normally found there, when it is, large populations of cave invertebrates take advantage of the decaying matter.  Removing the wood suddenly could wipe out an entire species, while gradual removal permits these creatures to take refuge in other parts of the cave.  Foreign algae and moss growing on cave features can be eliminated using special bleach solutions, though as with many other chemicals, can be disruptive to other organisms.  (Elliott)  

One of the most experimental concepts in cave preservation is ecological transplantation.  As previously mentioned, this method did rescue a species of cave life, threatened by inundation by the New Melones Reservoir.  However, transplanting sensitive and sometimes endangered cave species, which rely heavily on specific environmental conditions, is probably a good emergency measure at best.  Caves have their own natural community.  If the species introduced does not already exist there, is the relocation effort sustainable?  If the effort is sustainable, the species will be in peril from competition within the existing ecosystem.  Even if all of these efforts are sustainable, and the species is able to persist, alterations to the two communities may irreversible.  In the case of McLean’s Cave, at the New Melones Reservoir, other problems have recently presented themselves.  The mine requires a regular stock of wood to maintain the appropriate level of nutrients, for the species transplanted there.  Additionally, a lack of commitment in funding for long-term monitoring, could ultimately lead to neglect of the transplanted species.  Ironically and fortunately, after the relocation of this species, researchers discovered 18 caves in the area containing the same species previously thought endangered.  (Elliott)

Landowners are the primary protectors of caves though and help and support is readily available through local conservation agencies.  Immediate solutions for landowners actually cost very little and are rather simple practices to implement.  Preserve wooded areas around caves and maintain a forest path 100 feet wide to, and along local streams for bats and other trogloxene.  Owners should deny access to caves during the bats summer roost, as well as during their winter hibernacula.  Avoid burning any sort of material near the cave entrance, and most importantly, eliminate or reduce the potential for infiltration of compounds easily dissolved in the soil and water. (MoDoC)

With so many species influenced by all of the processes of the earth, living within these formations on earth, it is essential that caves remain protected.  Damage to these systems can have a wide impact on nearly every aspect of human life.  Contamination of caves leads to the contamination of any species dependent upon the life that the cave nurtures, as well as those elements that are only passing visitors to the cave, like water.  In the United States, caves and karst formations influence nearly 25% of the drinking water consumed.  (Christopherson) If development continues with disregard for this system, the effects may not be immediate apparent; however, long-term repercussions will be felt over successive generations, and in certain instances, may not be recoverable at all.

End Notes

1. Plummer, Charles C Plummer & McGeary, Effects of Ground-Water Action on Caves, Sinkholes, and Karst Topography.  Physical Geology, 3rd Ed.  Dubuque:  William C. Brown Publishers, 1985.  222-223
2. Barton, Hazel A. Barton & Northup, Diana E.  Geomicrobiology in cave environments:  Past, Current, and Future Perspectives.  Journal of Cave and Karst Studes, v.69, no 1; [article online] 2007.  http://www.caves.org/pub/journal/PDF/v69/cave-69-01-163.pdf .  163-178. 
3. Lavoie, Kathleen H. Lavoie & Northup, Diana E. Northup.  Bacteria as Indicators of Human Impact on Caves.  National Cave and Karst Management Symposium. [article online] 2005. http://www.nckms.org/2005/pdf/Papers/lavoie-bacteria.pdf 
4. Lewis, Julian J. Lewis.  Conservation Assessment for Fountain Cave Springtail (Pseudosinella Fonsa).  USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region [article online] 2002. http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wildlife/tes/ca-overview/docs/insect_Pseudosinella_fonsa-FountainCaveSpringtail.pdf
5. Krajick, Kevin, “Discoveries in the Dark,”  National Geographic.  [article online] 2007. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/09/new-troglobites/new-troglobites-text 
6. Brown, Arthur V., Graening, G.O., & Vendrell, Paul Vendrell. Monitoring Cavefish Population and Environmental Quality in Cave Springs Cave, Akransas.  Arkansas Water Resources Center Publication No. MSC-214. [article online] 1998. http://www.uark.edu/depts/ecology/docs/ANHC1999Report.PDF 
7. Helf, Kurt Lewis Helf.  Mercury and Methylmercury in the South Central Kentucky Karst:  Its Transportation, Accumulation, and Potential Effects on Vulnerable Biota. National Cave and Karst Management Symposium [article online] 2003 http://www.nckms.org/2003/pdf/HELF.pdf
8. O’Shea, T.J. & Botan, M.A.  Monitoring Trends in Bat Populations of the United States and Territories:  Problems and Prospects.  USGS Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD/ITR—2003-0003 [article online]. 2003.  http://www.caves.org/pub/journal/PDF/V66/v66n3-Book_Reviews.pdf 
9. Baker, Gretchen.  Field Guide to Cave Life.  A Guide to Cave Life in Great Basin National Park. [article online] 2008. http://www.nps.gov/grba/naturescience/upload/Field%20Guide%20to%20Cave%20Life.pdf 
10. Elliott, William R.  Conservation of the North American Cave and Karst Biota.  An electronic preprint from Elsevier Science’s Subterranean Biota [article online] 1998 http://www.utexas.edu/tmm/sponsored_sites/biospeleology/preprint.htm 
11. Darntan, Michael.  Making a Study of Bat Droppings.  Microscopy UK [article online] 1995.  http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/indexmag.html?http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artapr99/bdbat.html
12. Low, Jim.  Species of Concern:  Missouri Cave Lichen.  Missouri Conservationist; 2009
13. Lynn, Jessica.  Kentucky Cave Restored:  Hidden River Cave and American Cave Museum.  Associated Content  [article online] 2007  http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/316671/kentucky_cave_restored_hidden_river.html
14. Roebuck, Brian, Vakili, Ahmad & Roebuck, Lynn.  Cave Gate Airflow Disturbance – A Qualitative Study.  National Cave and Karst Management Symposium.  [article online] 1999. http://www.nckms.org/pdf/roebuck.pdf 
15. Care and Maintenance of Missouri Bat Caves. Missouri Department of Conservation [article online] 2004.  http://mdc.mo.gov/nathis/mammals/batcave/
16. Christopherson, Robert W. Karst Topography and Landscapes.  Geosystems, 6th ed. New Jersey:  Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2006.  412-418

. . .

originally written as an end of term paper for Human Ecology

. . .

Climate Change in T minus 1 second

The earth is currently undergoing environmental changes, as it has since its formation, nearly 4.5 billion years ago.  During all of this time, there have a multitude of environments, each promoting the growth of organisms best suited to withstand the elements characteristic of those environments.  This process continues even today, as new species continue to evolve, to cope with the most recent changes to the ever-changing environment called Earth.  

Humans are no exception but no longer perceive themselves as part of this ongoing process.  Indeed, many believe that the species, as a whole, is in control of their environmental conditions.  This perception is well rooted in a long history of attempting to mask themselves from the natural environment and manipulating environments to suit their needs.  Consequently, the human species has fooled itself in to believing that it is the sole harbinger of doom for the planet; human activity is the catalyst for the earths continuing evolution, speeding up processes that have never really been truly consistent, much less predictable.

The human species is undoubtedly affecting their environment.  Their tailings can be found nearly everywhere on the planet.  As a messy and lazy species, which artificially placed itself outside of evolution, and above all others in the food chain, they have created conditions, which threaten their own existence.  

It is widely recognized that human activity over the past few hundred years has greatly reduced the sustainability of multiple ecosystems throughout the world.  They have created incidents in the process of the earth’s evolution that have temporarily marred the ability of other species to exist.  

There is no doubt that these conditions are a result of their injecting numerous ‘pollutants’ into the water, land, and air to such an extent that they will never be able to restore these resources to their original state.  Essentially, humans are drowning in their own filth and destroying every other species in the process; at the same time, they seek a scapegoat to shoulder part of the blame, because they cannot perceive that their own filth could be the cause of such widespread destruction.

Arguments attempting to support the concept that human activity alone is the cause of ‘Global Warming,’ chose carbon dioxide (CO2) as the scapegoat.  As a naturally occurring gas, CO2 has existed at various levels throughout the history of the earth.  (Shakhashiri)  Indeed, average CO2 levels have been many times higher than in all of human history.  

Unfortunately, alarmists will not offer this information; much less recognize its existence, because it tears too many holes in their theories.  For instance, during the Ordovician period of earth’s history, CO2 levels were 4,000 parts per million (ppm) higher than they are currently.  Ironically, this resulted in a massive ice age, which is associated with one of the several mass extinctions.  (Junk).  Another example can be found in the Mesozoic era, during which the dinosaurs thrived.  Recent research has shown that those times were dominated by massive climactic shifts, with relatively minor impact to the environments of the time.  

Despite these and other hard scientific evidence, CO2 levels continue to be the primary argument for ‘Global Warming.’  Popular scientists, though certainly not the majority, continually attempt to link CO2 levels directly to surface temperatures.  The fact is that the equation could never be quite that simple.  They point to glacial and polar ice cap melting, and subsequent rises in sea level, without mentioning that this phenomenon has occurred much more drastically, many times before.  

Of course, these incidents are a consequence of temperature increase, which they say is specifically caused by an increase in CO2 levels, brought on by human activity.  There is scant concrete evidence to support such claims, and many of the previous points can be easily explained away with thorough and complete scientific research and testing.  Unfortunately, for the layman, the methods used thus far have been anything but scientific, relying instead on models of presumed linear regressions and transgressions of data that is not available; but rather, guesswork and supposition.  (Idso)

Inadequate and sometimes contrived evidence, manipulation of data, and sensational claims lead to fear among a populous that has little or no control over, what is to them, an obscure an intangible substance.  One of the most respected scientists of the 20th century, Dr. Carl Sagan, warns against the type of science that is currently being used in an attempt to portray human activity as the cause of ‘Global Warming’.  

In his book “The Demon-Haunted World,” he provides all of the tools necessary to recognize the current evolution of the ‘Global Warming’ argument as pseudoscience.  In Chapter 12, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection, the third common fallacy of logic and reason that he lists is “Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavorable" decision).”  Indeed, it fails nearly every test the Dr. Sagan suggests; popular scientists refuse to allow “independent confirmation of the facts,” discourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents from all points of view,” ignore other evidence, and consistently argue against attempts and the results of duplication of their work.  They suggest the populous should accept their word as gospel, because they are “the authority.”  In the words of Dr. Sagan, “in science there are no authorities.”  (Sagan)

One argument that has received little to no attention or has been ignored completely in a most unscientific way, is the solar-magnetic effect.   Unfortunately, those in positions of “authority,” such as NASA climatologist Gavin Schmidt insist that this is unnecessary data.  When asked why solar activity is not included in his models, he states, “[T]here is no obvious need for ‘new’ or unknown physics to explain what [is] going on.”

Statements such as these beg that people take a moment to recall Dr. Sagan’s warnings about pseudoscience mentioned previously.  For as long as the Industrial Revolution has held a grip on human society, scientists have been aware that sunspot activity is correlated to cloudless skies.  Also documented, is the tie between known sunspot minimums and the ‘Little Ice Age.’  (Rawls) It would seem that this would be a more legitimate explanation.  With cloudless skies, more energy reaches the surface of the earth, inducing higher temperatures.  Conversely, with higher CO2 levels, there is more cloud cover and higher precipitation levels are observed (Ahrens).  

Certain aspects of the human impact on earth are obvious, cannot be ignored, and should be addressed immediately to create a more sustainable environment for all species.  Particulate matter dumped in to the atmosphere is making it difficult to breathe.  The water is fouled by industrial waste from chemical byproducts created to advance the species.  Heaps of decaying matter, some that will never decay, restricts the ability of any species to exist, causing disease and death.  The land has been shredded; torn, and abused for the sake of promoting human progress.  CO2 levels are changing constantly, as it works in coordination with billions of other elements to warm and cool the earth.  

It is not the sole agent of chaos.  Statistically, human activity only seems to be replacing that activity which would normally have been produced by natural biological processes; human CO2 levels are only 3.2% of the whole, natural processes create 96.8%.  (Hieb)  For some reason, those numbers never make the headlines though.  Contributing to these factors is the human societal condition.  

Human political, technological, and industrial activity generates massive amounts of heat, without considering carbon dioxide in the equation.  Heat from many activities remains trapped under a thick layer of filth in the atmosphere; dust from global agricultural activity and mining, industrial soot pumped into the air by factories and vehicles inhibit the earth’s ability to release heat.  Indeed, what of the radiation from nuclear testing, which releases massive amounts of heat into the atmosphere?

CO2 is not the problem.  There have been periods of excessive warmth and cold, as well as higher concentrations of CO2, all of which have been combined to produce the variety of species that exist today.  There is insufficient concrete evidence that directly links CO2 to global temperature increase, Humans should not be so vain as to believe they are the cause, and should immediately come to terms with the fact that elimination of CO2 will mean the end of all species.  Attempting to manipulate levels of this gas, based on inadequate data, and unscientific ravings of unqualified individuals like Al Gore, is a massive accident waiting to happen.

The real answer is preparation.  If the ‘Global Warming’ alarmists are wrong, and conditions on the planet are deteriorating because of an intentionally overlooked factor, humans will be in dire straits. Even if the alarmists are right, humans are in dire straits, unless they are physically and mentally prepared for the challenge of being reduced to instinct.  Perhaps after all, that is their greatest fear.  

The climate will change again tomorrow; there is no preventative measure that can be taken to stop it.  The climate will continue to change, with or without our interference.  The earth will warm, and it will cool.  Species will come into existence and become extinct.  This is the natural process.  If humans expect to retain their position of dominance over life on earth, they will need to do as they have done since they descended from the forest canopy; expect the worst and prepare for it.

• “Planetary Temperature and Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2)” JunkScience.com 10 June 2005, http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/historical_CO2.htm
• Professor Shakhishiri, “Carbon Dioxide” General Chemistry: Chemical of the Week, 06 February 2006, http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek/pdf/CarbonDioxide.pdf
• Dinosaurs’ climate shifted too, report shows, Science Daily 28 September 2006, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060923104311.htm
• Dr. Carl Sagan, “The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark” (New York:  Random House, 1997), 201-218.
• Alec Rawls, “Global Warming’s Omitted Variable”  Standford Review, 15 February 2005, http://www.rawls.org/Global_warming_omitted_var.htm 
• C. Donald Ahrens, Meteorology Today:  An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment.  28-35, 140-148, 230-236
• Sherwood Idso & Craig Idso, Carbon Dioxide and Global Change: Separating Scientific Fact from Personal Opinion:  A critique of the 26 April 2007 testimony of James E. Hansen made to the Select Committee of Energy Independence and Global Warming of the United States House of Representatives entitled "Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate", 06 June 2007, CO2 Science, http://www.co2science.org/education/reports/hansen/hansencritique.php 
• Monte Heib, Water Vapor rules the Greenhouse System, Global Warming:  A Closer Look at the Numbers, 10 Jan 2003 http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html 

. . .

originally written as a mid-term paper for Human Ecology

. . .

Nuclear Energy Safety

Nuclear energy is no safer than any other form of energy production, excepting the very few that leave absolutely no impact on the environment.  All other forms of energy produce a level of dangerous materials, during the production process.  Nuclear energy is currently the only form that not only produces hazardous materials during the production process but actually produces some hazard at all levels of the process, from collection to disposal.  It is likely that the only safe part of the process is the administrative preparation to produce energy. 

Probably the least recognized of hazards, is the collection of raw materials for nuclear energy, which requires the discovery and mining of low-grade Uranium.  After the ore is collected it is milled down using a solvent, typically comprised of try-n-butyl phosphate (TBP) and di(2-ethylhexyl) phosphoric acid (D2EHPA).  

These chemicals are a hazard unto themselves, and when combined with the uranium, thorium, and radium that are produced during the milling process, begin the process of hazardous-waste building, prior to any energy having been created.  This is because the tailings from the mining and milling process are of such a low-grade radioactivity, that the companies that process the ore are not required to clean up dust or accumulation that might develop.  

Unfortunately, as has been discovered recently at sites like those in Lake County, Oregon, they create a continuing hazard for environment, because these materials leech into the soil, ground water, or are carried by air to other environments.  (EIA)

After milling, the ore undergoes an enrichment process to raise the fissionable material to usable levels.  This process is expensive and for the most part is no safer than mining and milling the ore.  (Enger) After enrichment, the uranium is formed into pellets, which are encased in metal rods, and are more or less ready to produce energy.  This process is also riddled with hazard, should the pellets somehow breach their containment.  (USNRC)

Post-production use of the fuel has had the most obvious drawbacks, with incidents like Chernobyl in Russia, and Three Mile Island in the United States.  These are not just minor drawbacks though; rather, serious ecological nightmares that could change the course of an entire species, or group of species, including our own.  (Enger)

The fuel only has a limited life span.  Ultimately, it must be discarded in favor of new fuel rations with greater strength.  However, the spent fuel cannot just be thrown away.  It still maintains radioactive properties that are at levels that would pose a serious threat to any life form.  Since re-processing the spent fuel, to create new fuel is complicated by a hazardous process, the only option currently available is storage.  Unfortunately, since U-238 has a half-life of approximately 5 billion years, this means permanent and perpetual storage.  (Enger)

Finally, when considering the additional energy expended towards labor, development of machinery and facilities, transportation, and other peripheral costs, it is hard to believe that this source of fuel is an economically viable solution.  Actually, it appears that it expends more energy than it is likely to produce. 

• (EIA) Energy Information Administration, US Department of Energy, Oct 8, 2005, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/umtra/lakeview_title1.html (accessed 04FEB09)
• Enger, Eldon & Smith, Bradley, et al.  Environmental Science:  A Study of Interrelationships. 11th ed. New York:  McGraw-Hill, 2006.
• (USNRC) Uranium Enrichment, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, January 11, 2008,  http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/enrichment.html (accessed 04FEB09)

. . .

originally written as a prompt response for Human Ecology

. . .

A Missouri Cave Conservationist

William Elliott, PhD - photo borrowed from ResearhGate

Overlooked and unrecognized as critical to human sustainability, cave and karst systems have been neglected and abused, mostly out of simple ignorance of the repercussions.  It has only been in the last 50 years that scientists have come to understand that caves and karst are highly integrated, dependent, and ultimately, make serious contributions to all of the systems of the earth.  As the natural wastewater treatment facility for the earth, managing the risk to these environments has become top priority for many.

One individual in Missouri has devoted his professional career to better understanding and protecting caves, as well as the diverse biology that inhabits them.  William Elliott, Ph.D., Cave biologist of the Missouri Department of Conservation Resource Science Division and the Ozark Underground Laboratory, has made numerous discoveries, and significant progress, over the past 40 years.  He has been at the forefront of data collection, formulation of theory, testing, and developing processes and applications that have aided in better understanding and managing the risk imposed on caves, and the consequences of the damages, by human activities.  

Some of the work he has been involved with has shown direct correlation to surface activities and has shown that with very little effort, these habitats can be preserved, and use of the surrounding surface land can remain relatively unaltered.  Obviously, abuse of the surface environment is not one of those things that can remain unaltered.  His studies have shown that abuse of surface environment, as far as 100 miles away, can have as profound of an effect on this subterranean world as the incidental damage from a human simply entering the cave.

Most notable is continuing efforts in working with landowners to understand how they can continue their land use practices, while helping to preserve and defend the subterranean environments.  He was worked with others in dye tracing, airflow, underground stream current turbidity, and many other environmental variables to discover the true sources contamination from the surface.  Recently, he was helped with testing environmental variables inside caves in order to predict where grey bat populations may be located at certain times of the year.  The hope is that in discovering a trend, through careful analysis, land use and cave visitation can be planned accordingly to reduce the risks associated with both.

One article I discovered highlights many of these activities, in associate with other students and experts on karst and caves.  Written for the 2005 National Cave and Karst Management Symposium, it is an excellent example of the type of progress that can be made in this area, with a little effort. 

• William R Elliott and Thomas J. Aley, “Karst Conservation in the Ozarks: Forty Years at Tumbling Creek Cave,” National Cave and Karst Management Symposium (2005):  204-214, http://www.nckms.org/2005/pdf/Papers/elliott%20aley%20TCC.pdf 

. . .

originally written as a prompt response for Human Ecology

. . .