Taking a Bite Out of BBC Credibility?

@bbc bitesize offers video and audio clips designed to help people with homework, revision and learning. The service is aimed at adults, children, parents and teachers. Bitesize's generally helpful content, is linked to the age of the target group of children. A recent posting seems, however, to have been very badly written. The BBC have been forced, by informed opinion, to remove a page (aimed at 10 year olds), citing the 'benefits' of climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/jul/02/bbc-removes-bitesize-page-climate-change-benefits-backlash). The offending page suggested that climate change might lead to people adopting healthier, outdoor lifestyles. Presumably, children in the UK would be able to play outside for longer? That would not be the case in the Middle East or the Indus Valley. The page also listed increased access to oil in Alaska and Siberia as a benefit. It failed to mention the inevitable impact on 'greenhouse gas' emissions and further climate change. The clip also opined that people would be able to grow crops in Siberia. It didn't mention there would certainly be larger areas of the globe, where growing crops, became impossible. Melting ice caps were opportunities for faster shipping routes and more extensive tourism. Apparently, the increased sealevels would not be a problem for many major coastal cities. The original version of the page read like a climate change denier's manifesto. I suspect, however, that someone had been asked to brainstorm possible benefits of climate change (along the lines that Wales could become a major wine-producing region). The suggestions may have ended up being uncritically listed in the final edit. Irrespective of how it happened, the very fact the post was aimed at children, by a supposedly reliable source, made it all the more dangerous. Would we get so excited, if it had been on Fox? Perhaps such material should be sent to educators before being fast-tracked to online?

Seeing the Changes 1590

In Bynea, Wild parsnip (Pastinaca sativa) was coming into bloom. Months after London, Common ragwort (Senecio jacobaea) also came to Bynea.

Urban Spaceman (and Woman)?

It may be 'heart-warming', that Wally Funk will finally achieve her ambition to go into space on the 20th of July (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/01/jeff-bezos-space-flight-pilot-wally-funk). Funk was a trained female cosmonaut who, in the 1960's, was not allowed to be part of a rocket crew because of her gender. She will be the oldest person to briefly touch space, when she takes the third passenger seat in Jeff Bezo's scheduled Blue Horizon flight. It may also be exciting for some, that Richard Branston's Virgin Galactic is still striving to beat Blue Horizon. They aim to achieve the first space tourism flight 9 days earlier (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/02/richard-branson-aims-to-beat-jeff-bezos-into-space-by-nine-days). I'm afraid, however, that I can't stop thinking about the mighty carbon emissions, associated with several active space tourism enterprises. It may be fun for some but will be another nail in the coffin of planet Earth.

Cowing Plastics?

Herbivores (like cows) need help from 'friendly' stomach bacteria to breakdown the cellulose walls of their exclusively plant-based diet. Cellulose is a polymer, as are plastics. It was, consequently, logical for Doris Ribitsch and her colleagues (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna) to explore the ability of the fluid in a cow's rumen (a stomach compartment), to break down plastics (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/02/study-suggests-bacteria-in-cows-stomach-can-break-down-plastic). Ribitsch and her colleagues obtained gallons of rumen fluid from slaughterhouses. The fluid was incubated with PET (a synthetic polymer used in textiles and packaging); PBAT (a material used to make compostible plastic bags) and PEF (a biobased material used to manufacture renewables). The plastics were added to the vats in both film and powder form. All three polyesters were broken down by bacterial enzymes. Powders (because of their greater surface areas?) were broken down faster. The race is now on to determine which bacteria is/are producing the effective enzyme or (more likely) enzymes. Other bacteria, from other locations, have already been shown to have the potential to facilitate environmentally-effective ways of disposing of the burgeoning plastic waste. It would be best to use purified enzymes in designed industrial plants, as cows have nasty habit of burping out methane. Methane is a very potent 'greenhouse gas'. It would also be a good idea to use less plastic.

Chickens Coming Home to Roost?

It's a story with strong parallels to that of the Tobacco industry. Cigarette producers knew for decades, from their own and funded research, about the harmful effects (e.g. on lung cancer, cardiovascular disease etc) of their products. The companies essentially colluded to downplay the link and, in doing so, left themselves open to lawsuits by former smokers and/or their dependents. In the case of oil, as early as 1979, a study by Exxon scientists, warned the company that burning fossil fuels (oil, in this case) would cause dramatic environmental effects over the coming decades. The company's scientists described the potential problem as being 'great and urgent'. The US (and other) oil companies clearly appreciated climate change science. They collectively colluded, however, to bury the findings (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/30/climate-crimes-oil-and-gas-environment). The decision by 'big oil' to hide the situation from governments and the general public, clearly aggrevated the environmental crisis. As a consequence, they (and producers of gas and coal) are now open to an unprecedented wave of lawsuits, filed by cities and states across the US (and elsewhere in the world). It can (and perhaps will) be claimed that oil company actions have resulted in heat deaths, flooding, building collapses, crop failures etc etc. Lawsuits may not be limited to the US, as carbon dioxide doesn't recognise borders between countries. Lawsuits will certainly cause the companies financial problems. Top lawyers are likely to benefit. The lawsuits won't, however, restore 'greenhouse gas' levels back to manageable levels. I also suspect that executives, who took the well-remunerated 'fatal' decisions decades ago, will largely emerge unscathed. Greed may not be good but it is often successful.

Danger Supporters Supporting?

The 'experiments' evaluating allowing supporters into/near major sporting events, in the UK, seem to have some glitches. It appears that almost 2,000 of Scotland's new infections with the delta variant of Covid19, can be linked to people who travelled to London to support their country, playing England in the UEFA competition (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57667163). Admittedly, not all these individuals actually had tickets for Wembley stadium. They did, however, congregate around the stadium in large singing and chanting groups. Naturally, there are now concerns about the increased crowd capacities scheduled for the semi-finals and finals, also scheduled for Wembley. Supporters operating in fan-zones near big outside screens, also often appear very clumped and generally unmasked. The Wimbledon tennis championships is another event, where allowing spectators is being trialled. A son, who recently attended, tells me that, although spectator capacity was reduced, this was not done in a very effective way. Spectators for popular games were crowded around the court, close to the action. The reduced capacity was achieved, by leaving the seats in the 'gods' (those highest in the stands, far from the playing surface) empty. We appear to have some way to go, before mass participation events can be held with acceptable levels of risk.

I Told You I Was Poorly!

Calum Semple (SAGE and University of Liverpool) and others are pushing the UK government, to expand the list of symptoms for Covid19 infections (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/01/scientists-urge-uk-to-expand-official-list-of-covid-symptoms). The UK currently has one of the most restricted lists of symptoms for Covid19. The UK only lists having:- a high fever; a new continuous cough and an early loss of the senses of smell/taste. Many people infected with Covid19, get none of these symptoms over the course of their infection. In contrast, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, lists 11 symptoms. The World Health Organisation beats this with 13. Headaches; weakness or tiredness; muscle aches; a runny nose; appetite loss and a sore throat are listed by some authorities. These symptoms tend to occur earlier and are more common in young, unvaccinated individuals. The young and unvaccinated are very effective transmitters of the virus. The people pushing for an official expansion of Covid19 symptoms, admit that this might increase the demand for testing (the lateral flow test isn't especially well-suited). They feel, however, the change would stop medics missing some cases altogether and help control the spread of the virus, as society opens up.