Environmentalists worried about dandruff polution

Professur

Well-Known Member
Bits of head in the clouds?

Thu Mar 31,10:33 PM ET

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Bits of pollen, leaf fragments and even dandruff from people and animals make up a significant portion of dusty stuff in the atmosphere but have been ignored by climate modellers, German researchers say.


Reuters Photo



Their painstaking, 15-year measurements turned up a collection of human and animal skin particles, fur, fragments of plants, pollen, spores, bacteria, algae, fungi, and viruses.


They are the right size and shape to act as nuclei for ice crystals, which in turn form clouds and rain, and thus could potentially affect weather and climate, they report in Friday's issue of the journal Science.


Overall this dust could make up 25 percent of so-called aerosols -- particles in the atmosphere that affect pollution, cloud formation and which can both reflect and absorb radiation from the sun, said atmospheric scientist Ruprecht Jaenicke of the University of Mainz.


"We collected particles, all particles from the air," Jaenicke said in a telephone interview. They collected samples from the university campus, from Russia's remote Lake Baikal, from Amazon ground stations, Antarctica, the Swiss Alps and Greenland ice cores.


"We looked into rain. We took measurements from airplanes," Jaenicke said.


They then used various microscopes to identify dead biological material by using stains that react to protein and also by visually identifying the tiny pieces.


"We counted all particles and determined their size," Jaenicke said.


They found as much as 80 percent of the particulate matter collected was biological in origin -- ranging from 15 percent over the Swiss Alps to 80 percent from the Amazon and Lake Baikal in the autumn.


On average, 20 to 25 percent of the aerosol material they collected was biological.


AIR OF MYSTERY


This is significant because atmospheric and climate scientists admit that as much as 40 percent of all aerosols are unidentified, and climate models do not fully take into account the effects of aerosols, Jaenicke said.


Other known sources of aerosols include sulphur pollution, dust and industrial emissions, smoke from fires and volcanic aerosols.


While he is not claiming that dandruff affects global warming, Jaenicke said he also ran tests that showed his particles could easily affect cloud formation.


"To form clouds you need water and particles," he said. "Each particle is a nucleus. To form rain you need certain ice nuclei which transform a droplet into an ice crystal." These then collide and form rain droplets.


Jaenicke's team was unable to say how much of this biological dust is pollen and how much is actually dandruff.


"This material is comparatively low in density," he said, adding it is small enough to travel very far.





"It is easily lifted up." For instance, it is lighter than desert sands that are carried across oceans.

"They are distributed easily around the world," he said.

Jaenicke urged other climate scientists to study the components of aerosols so they can make more accurate models for predicting weather and climate change.




Source
 
chcr said:
Cow farts! I'm tellin' ya it's all because of cow farts!
Dairy cows Monday again passed cars as the biggest source of one smog-making gas in the San Joaquin Valley.

The local air district Monday estimated that each dairy cow emits 20.6 pounds of so-called volatile organic compounds per year, an increase of more than 60% over the estimate previously used.

Dairies had ranked No. 1 until last month when the state dropped them to seventh, explaining the estimated number of cows making the emissions was too high. Now with an estimate showing more gases coming from each cow's waste, dairies again moved ahead of all other sources.

One dairy industry official called the announcement disappointing, adding that a lawsuit probably would follow if the local district adopts the estimate.

"More than two-thirds of this number is based on a guess," said Michael Boccadoro of the advocacy group Dairy Cares. "It's a disservice to the public because it means we'll be spending money chasing pollution that doesn't exist." The development was the latest in several years of controversy as public officials have tried to regulate air quality for the growing dairy industry under permit programs that hadn't applied to dairies before. The permits were required for large dairies in a 2003 law, Senate Bill 700.

The new estimate announced Monday is a result of a lawsuit the dairy industry filed last year against the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which was attempting to begin the permit program. Industry officials objected, saying the pollution estimates were based on 1930s science and badly in need of modern research.

The lawsuit was settled in September with both sides agreeing to an advisory group that would recommend a new estimate to the air district.

Health advocates believe the 20.6 pounds might be too low but praised the district's announcement anyway. They said the Valley, one of the dirtiest air basins in the country, is experiencing a health crisis and large sources of pollution need to be regulated.

"We're headed in the right direction," said Fresno respiratory therapist Kevin Hamilton, who participates in an advisory group that made proposals to the district. "Given the information to date, it's probably as close as you're going to get."

A public hearing is scheduled July 11 on the announcement from the air district. Under a lawsuit agreement, the air district must announce a final estimate on Aug. 1.

The number will be used to determine how many dairies need to obtain the same kind of air permits as oil refineries as large sources of pollution. State officials last week said they expected about 430 would need the permits, which require stringent measures to reduce pollution.

The local district's 1-inch-thick report on the new emission estimate cites 25 references, based on 15 studies, said Rick McVaigh, director of compliance.

"We did a complete evaluation, point by point," said McVaigh. "We don't think we have all the emissions yet from all the processes at dairies. We will continue to study it."

Dairy emissions have been intensely studied over the past two years, but they are a complex research problem, scientists said. The gases come from cows, waste lagoons, storage ponds and other processes.

Based on 1938 research, officials used 12.8 pounds of gases per cow as a way of determining how much pollution came from the Valley's 1.3 million dairy cows. New research began more than two years ago.

An advisory group, formed after the dairy industry and the district settled a lawsuit last year, discussed the results of the research over five months and recommended three estimates, ranging from 5.6 to almost 35 pounds.

The group had representatives from the dairy industry, health advocacy groups, environmentalists, academics and the district.
The Fresno Bee
 
Back
Top