G. Gallus Domesticus Feces

The poultry industry in Maryland is one of the nations’ largest and contributes more than $700 million annually to the Maryland economy. In this report I will talk about some of the negative aspects of the industry such as pollution to the environment, political motives/decisions, and also some alternative solutions for the vast pollution.

Since we don’t have time for a history lesson I’ll jump right into the negative externalities that the poultry industry imposes on Maryland. Agriculture, according to the EPA, is the largest single source of pollutants and sediments in the Chesapeake Bay. The main pollutant, nitrogen, is derived mostly from the 650 million pounds of chicken manure that poultry produce annually. Inevitably, some of this excess chicken manure finds its way to the Chesapeake Bay by means of runoff from storms and further pollutes the estuary. The nitrogen and phosphorous deposits can cause algae blooms to develop which in turn deplete the oxygen levels needed by aquatic life (i.e. crabs / oysters) to survive, and finally hurt the Chesapeake fishermen’s industry by means of job loss.

Why hasn’t anything been done? Simply put: Politics. As mentioned earlier, the poultry industry nets +$700 million annually, and although the pollution factors may ultimately take jobs away from the watermen, get this: for every one job added on a chicken farm, it is estimated that seven related jobs are created in slaughterhouses, construction, and trucking. Not to mention that Maryland is one of the only states where the poultry industry is regulated by the State Department of Agriculture; whose primary mission is helping farmers. Although legislations have been proposed to curb the effects of the pollution such as permits to handle manure, Farmers have defeated such efforts twice in the past. Lawmakers have even given them options like to either maintain a 35 ft wide filter strip of vegetation along streams and ditches or to not spread manure within 50 feet of streams or 10 feet of ditches. Unannounced inspections would occur and if the farmer is caught in violation they can face hefty fines. This method allows the liability for the manure to be placed on the farmer rather than the larger companies who provide the chickens and feed.

Some alternative uses for the chicken manure have been suggested while some are already in effect in other states. For example, some agricultural farms recycle the chicken manure at a factory that produces fertilizer pellets and ships/sells the product elsewhere. Other companies, like Waste to Energy Plants (WTE), are using the poultry waste to turn biomass into biogas. The biogas product can be used for steam or electricity generation and possibly heat/light homes in the local area or be sold to other companies.

I think the fertilizer pellets are a great idea to keep the waste out of the Bay. Also, if I were a farmer of large operations that produced tons of biomass waste, I would open up a second business, that produces organic flowerpots and other such products from biomass. This way the farms can become even more efficient by selling their waste to consumers in the form of goods. I also believe that the WTE plants are a great idea. I don’t know how cost effective they are, but I don’t see the harm in using biogas to cut down on energy prices.

-- Mark Preston

California Drought Hits Agriculture

Hundreds of thousands of acres, far more than in years past, are expected to lie fallow this year. As they dry up, so do the fortunes of communities across the state. Proud, self-reliant people are going to be going through their savings and maybe even going on the dole. Tough times, and another sign about the linkages between resources and the economy!

End of material on the first midterm

Hic iacet inquisitionis magnae materiae finis.

Mmmmm... Beer...

"To alcohol, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems." --Homer Simpson
Beer is a beverage consumed across the world by many cultures. In the United States, beer consumption is a popular pastime with a large economic impact on society. Brewers employ over 2.5 million people in this country, and those people earn about $60 billion which is redirected back into the economy. However, beer has its dark side as well. Brewers have excess yeast that is discarded every year and dumped or used for feeding livestock.
Sierra Nevada brewing company has joined forces with a company known as E-Fuel to convert the left-over beer yeast at Sierra Nevada's Chico, California brewery into ethanol that can be used as a biofuel. E-Fuel is the creator of the Efuel 100, the first home ethanol system. The Efuel 100 will be installed in the first quarter of 2009 and tested in the second. If all goes well, it will be in regular use starting in the third quarter of 2009.
In the past, Sierra Nevada would transport discarded yeast to local farmers to feed local livestock. Last year Sierra Nevada discarded 1.6 million gallons of leftover yeast. Now, Sierra Nevada Brewing company has installed the E-Fuel 100 and will be using biofuel for part of the production process. The E-Fuel 100 costs almost $10,000 to install but will eventually bring a return on investment. [According to this site, using discarded beverage alcohol in the mini-refinery will result in making ethanol as cheaply as 10 cents per gallon!)
In my opinion, this is a great example of how some of the latest technology can make something from nothing. This is a cost-effective way for companies to lower their demand for oil. It is not that I disagree with brewers feeding livestock with discarded yeast, it is that in this day and age energy is a concern for everyone. Using discarded material for energy is more efficient for our economy than feeding livestock is.
--Brady Langelan

Gas flaring

Gas flaring can be defined as the process of burning off unwanted gas and liquids into the atmosphere during the process of extracting crude oil from the earth. Gas flaring not only harms the environment by emitting some 400 million tons of carbon dioxide globally, but it is also wasteful of a comparatively clean energy source- natural gas.
Gas flaring has caused a lot of environmental problems especially in regions that still practice it. Studies have shown that the chemicals that are burnt off during this process, including benzenes, sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide, can cause diseases such as cancer, bronchitis, and skin ailments. Gas flaring consumes about 170 billion cubic meters of natural gas and it is a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions.
This process of gas flaring may be tolerable in remote areas where no nearby animals or plants will be exposed to these chemicals, but that is not the case in countries like Nigeria and Russia. These countries have continuously practiced it, exposing communities in places like the Niger delta to hazardous emissions. NGOs and other have suggested that oil companies and/ or government should pay for the pollution they have caused and continue to create and profit from. I feel oil companies will have the money to pay any amount we want them to pay because of the excessive profits they make. It is difficult to stick a particular price on pollution, but this is a human rights issue as well, so something needs to be done. Gas flaring should be abolished and if it continues, other coutnries should lay sanctions on the countries that practice it.
--Ike Ezekwe

Tough times for ethanol

In addition to hurting the wind power industry (below and here) the recession is hurting ethanol producers. It used to be that corn-based fuel was cheaper than refined petroleum, so gasoline producers were mixing in as much ethanol as they could get away with. Now that demand for fuel is down due to the economic slump, governmental requirements that producers mix in some ethanol are costing producers more than expected.

From what little I know, corn-based ethanol is just a bad idea to begin with. I support cellulosic ethanol production (i.e. that from bio-waste materials such as the wood chips and corn stalks mentioned in the article) but it's hard to imagine that turning food for people into food for cars makes economic sense. Of course, I can see why corn producers like it, but that's another issue!

An Economic Solution to an Environmental Problem

Washington DC is considering taxing plastic bags to internalize the environmental externality they create. This article has the usual whining and semi-legitimate arguments we saw a few years ago out in San Francisco, but it gives short shrift to what for me is a huge point: if people will just learn to bring bags with them when the go grocery shopping, they won't have to pay the tax! How hard is it to grab a handful of plastic bags before you head out the door, or just keep some in your car? Sure, it takes getting used to, but that's all we're talking about- learning a new habit. Amazing how excited people get about such a small fee that seems like it will actually do some good.

Oops, sorry- I guess this one gets my hackles up a bit!