QUEST Community Science Blog

A sample of switchgrass at Sandia National
LaboratoriesIt doesn’t need to be said that there’s a heated debate about how to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions with actions that lessen our society’s carbon footprint. Biofuels like ethanol or biodiesel are one option. They’re touted as being carbon neutral because the CO2 they emit comes from crops which had previously sequestered them in the atmosphere. In contrast, petroleum produces CO2 emissions that had previously been buried deep in the earth’s crust, adding to the other green house gases in the environment. For example, the U.S. Department of Energy - citing research by the Argonne National Laboratory – states that ethanol derived from corn emits 25% less greenhouse gas emissions than petroleum and that the savings with cellulosic ethanol, made from a feedstock like switchgrass, are much higher, in effect producing no additional greenhouse gases.

So when QUEST decided to move forward on producing a story about biofuels, I welcomed the opportunity to assist Series Producer Josh Rosen in its crafting. Being QUEST, we weren’t content to merely renumerate the different kinds of biofuels and how cellulosic ethanol is more efficient than corn-based ethanol. Instead, our story focuses on the pioneering work being done by researchers affiliated with the Joint BioEnergy Initiative (JBEI), a multi-billion dollar research initiative based in Emeryville, as they look beyond ethanol to the next generation of biofuels. So not only is JBEI looking at various feedstocks like switchgrass, rice, poplar and innovative ways to “deconstruct” the cellulosic material, it also attempts to synthesize fuels that work more efficiently in America’s automotive fleet, still overwhelmingly reliant on gasoline.

But even top researchers at JBEI like Jay Keasling and Blake Simmons caution that this next generation of biofuels won’t be coming online for years. Moreover, new research suggests that the net production cycle of biofuels, from the clear-cutting of trees to grow the crops to their transport to markets far away, may yield as many or more emissions as the use of petroleum-based fuel. A recent Op-Ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle by UC Berkeley Alex Farrell cites the reason for this as primarily one of production– the way we clear land for growing biofuels, as well as our emphasis on the use of food-based crops like corn and soybean, which aren’t terribly efficient sources of ethanol to begin with.

Tad Patzek, also at UC Berkeley, has been an ardent critic of the carbon-neutral reputation of biofuels, garnering controversy for conducting studies that some other researchers have criticized for their calculations of emissions arising from biofuel production. (See Patzek’s co-authored article on page 19 of the March 2007 edition of Energy Tribune). Earlier this year, a study by researchers at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute suggests that biofuels are not created equal, as those made from U.S. corn, Malaysian palm oil and Brazilian soy yield more emissions than their petroleum-based counterparts, given the environmental damage they reap when grown for fuel. The study cites recycled cooking oil and biofuel made from grassy and woody cellulosic material as being more intelligent choices for cutting down on emissions.

And so the debate continues, struggling to keep pace with the technological progress made by scientists toiling away in their quest to find the holy grail of an efficient, cheap and environmentally-friendly biofuel.

Watch the “Biofuels: Beyond Ethanol” TV Story online, as well as find additional links and resources.

Sheraz Sadiq is an Associate Producer for QUEST on KQED Television.

This year the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) will celebrate its 35th anniversary. Under the ESA over 1,350 species are listed in the United States as threatened or endangered, including over 300 in California. This includes a number of “celebrities” of the conservation world such as the humpback whale and California condor, but also dozens of much more low profile species. Around our offices, we have a particular soft spot for the California freshwater shrimp (Syncaris pacifica), the impetus for our Students and Teachers Restoring a Watershed (STRAW) Project).

The California freshwater shrimp is 10-legged crustacean in the family Atyidae.

Found only in a handful of Bay Area creeks, the shrimp is a detritus feeder that prefers glides (calm, slow-flowing sections of streams) with undercut banks, exposed roots, and overhanging vegetation. Adult females produce relatively few eggs-about 50-120-that stick to the mother’s pleopods during winter incubation. The young measure about 6 millimeters and are released in late spring or early summer. They grow rapidly, reaching up to 2.5 inches as adults and ranging in color from translucent to rusty red.

The species’ closest cousin, the Pasadena freshwater shrimp (Syncaris pasadenae), went extinct in the 1930s, leaving the California freshwater shrimp as the only representative of its genus. The California freshwater shrimp was listed under the ESA in 1988. Recently the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service issued its 5-year review of the shrimp’s status. The report concludes that the species is not ready for delisting, as it still faces many of the same threats as 20 years ago: loss of habit due to agricultural activities and development, water pollution, water diversions-even the construction of recreational summer dams for swimming and fishing.

But there is also good news in the report. At the time it was listed, the shrimp was known from 17 streams; it now has been found in 23. In one of these, the number of shrimp surveyed increased from 1,878 in 1991 to 4,407 in 2000. Many of the streams in which the shrimp is found have watershed management plans in place. And the report also acknowledged the ongoing work of STRAW to restore more than 50,000 linear feet of stream bank, creating new habitat for the shrimp-not to mention other native species.

When Congress passed and Richard Nixon signed the ESA in 1973, a little freshwater shrimp was not at the forefront of their minds. But there is an inspiring sense of democracy in the ESA as written: It empowers citizens to petition or sue the government to protect species. And it doesn’t discriminate between the big, showy species and the small and obscure-but equally unique and imperiled-ones.

According to the US Fish & Wildlife Service, since 1973 the ESA has protected 99% of listed species from extinction. National Endangered Species Day is coming up May 16. Find out about ways to help celebrate.

Ann Dickinson is Communications Manager for The Bay Institute (www.bay.org), a nonprofit research, education, and advocacy organization dedicated to protecting and restoring San Francisco Bay and its watershed, “from the Sierra to the sea.”

Today’s San Francisco Chronicle reports on the California Air Resources Board’s decision to require automakers to produce more low-emissions cars such as plug-in hybrids and on the plug-ins that GM, Toyota and Ford are now testing.

If you’re curious about how plug-in hybrids actually achieve 100 miles per gallon, watch Plug-in Hybrid Cars, the story I produced for QUEST. The segment follows a group of weekend mechanics hacking a Toyota Prius to make it into a plug-in hybrid.

Enjoy!

Gabriela Quirós is a Segment Producer for KQED-TV.

A tiny moth, new to California, is at the center of a controversy pitting state officials against Bay Area residents and politicians. The Light Brown Apple Moth is seen as a threat to California crops. Now the State Department of Food and Agriculture is planning to spray a synthetic hormone over Bay Area neighborhoods this summer to stop the moth from reproducing, but some angry residents are worried it would be unsafe. Rori Gallagher reports.

You may listen to the “Stamping out the Apple Moth” Radio report online, as well as find additional links and resources. Also don’t miss our photo set for this story on flickr.

Andrea Kissack is Senior Editor for QUEST at KQED Public Radio.

Congratulations to Flickr community member Erin Malone (erin_designr) of San Francisco, CA!

Windy Grass - by Erin MaloneErin will be collaborating with KQED staff on our 2 minute Your Photos on QUEST segment for broadcast and web distribution.

Her stunning set of Alviso Slough pinhole images wowed our KQED QUEST editorial staff. Her winning submission did a wonderful job of expressing a sense of locale, with a passion for nature, via a process that captures something unexpected and essential.

In her own words:

“…My process is primarily to make long exposures with pinhole and zoneplate rather than a glass lens. These long exposures made on Polaroid material force me to slow down and to appreciate the beauty around me. I make beautiful, impressionistic images in a place that many see as ugly. My hope is that these images change their mind about the hidden beauty here.”

This was a very difficult decision to make for us - we hope to do another YPOQ call in the near future. If you wish, you may leave your submissions open and we will consider them again in the next round. Sincere thanks to all who participated.

For those of you who are interested in entering the future, sign up for our email newsletter to get an announcement for the next submission call!

Craig Rosa is the Interactive Producer for KQED QUEST.

photo courtesy of the San Francisco Public Utilities CommissionWe’d had “aging infrastructure” on our story lists for some time when we first heard about the sewage spills in Mill Valley. When news came in that not just one, but two sewage spills had poured five million gallons of partially treated wastewater into Richardson Bay, we decided to move that story to the top of the list.

Those spills got a lot of coverage, including by KQED, so our question was a little broader. Were those spills an anomaly? (Answer: No, they were big, but not unusual.) And how does this happen in as eco-conscious a place as the Bay Area? What would it take to stop it?

The two Mill Valley spills seem to have resulted from a few different problems: overwhelmed capacity, failed alarms, operator error, and probably other factors, too. But the underlying cause is the same, and it’s true of many sewage systems in the Bay Area: These systems — the pipes, the digesters, the pumps – are reaching the end of their useful lives. (Some of the older clay pipes were built in the 1850s!) Few cities are jumping to do the necessary upgrades, and who can blame them? What’s less sexy than an expensive, disruptive construction project that takes place mostly underground, out of sight?

Still, as we say in the piece, we’ve done it before. Those who lived in the Bay Area before the 1970s may remember the stench of raw sewage drifting up through the car window as they crossed the Bay. Thanks to the Clean Water Act of 1972, the Bay is vastly cleaner than it used to be and there are far less spills.

So what will it take to get cities to pony up the cash this time around? Baykeeper is taking the issue to the courts – you can read more about their Sick of Sewage campaign here: http://www.baykeeper.org/

You may listen to the “Sewage Happens” Radio report online, as well as find additional links and resources.

Amy Standen is a Reporter for QUEST and Radio News at KQED-FM.

January and February are exciting months for movie buffs like me. And no, I’m not referring to Golden Globes, Oscar nominations, or Screen Actors Guild awards. I’m talking about two wonderful “green” film festivals, both right here in our own watershed: the recent Wild & Scenic Environmental Film Festival in Nevada City, and the San Francisco Ocean Film Festival.

For The Bay Institute, this year’s Wild & Scenic Film Festival was particularly exciting because it included the first public screening of “Taking Root,” a film-in-progress about our STRAW (Students and Teachers Restoring a Watershed) Project. I recently talked to David Donnenfield, who is co-producing the film with Kevin White (Kevin also has two films in this year’s Ocean Film Festival: Restoring Balance: Removing the Black Rat from Anacapa Island and Returning Home: Bringing the Common Murre back to Devil’s Slide Rock.) I asked David how the two came to be making a movie about kids working to save an endangered freshwater shrimp.

Taking Root is part of a larger project entitled How on Earth, which began with the goal to survey the spectrum of restoration work happening across the country. David and Kevin wanted to look at projects large and small, in different regions and involving different constituencies and different issues. They also were interested in documenting projects initiated by kids-one of the things that drew them to our STRAW Project, founded in 1992 by a class of fourth-graders.

David attended film school at UCLA (after he “got the bug” while starring in a high school film), but says he was always more interested in social issues than theatrical production. As to why he finds the topic of environmental restoration of particular interest, David points to the late environmentalist David Brower’s 3-part concept of “Global CPR”– Conservation, Preservation, and Restoration. While we’ve all heard about conservation and preservation, David notes, “We felt that very little of the story of restoration had been told.” That’s a critical oversight, since “in the face of worldwide environmental decline, there is less and less to preserve but more to restore.”

In talking about their process for making films, David explains that they do a lot of research up front to understand the issues, the players, and how the story fits into the “big picture.” But there is also that sense of “serendipity and discovery” when they actually get out into the field, and that’s a large part of what they bring back to the editing room.

And, in fact, editing is the next big challenge for Taking Root. Production on the full-length film (which will run about 1/2 hour) is nearly complete, but David and Kevin are still raising funds to complete the editing. Meanwhile, folks around our office are already looking forward to next year’s Wild & Scenic Film Festival, where we hope to be nibbling organic popcorn and cheering the completed film’s premiere.

Ann Dickinson is Communications Manager for The Bay Institute (www.bay.org), a nonprofit research, education, and advocacy organization dedicated to protecting and restoring San Francisco Bay and its watershed, “from the Sierra to the sea.”

No, this is not Big Brother. Credit: Jim GunshinanThe answer to the question, Who controls your thermostat?, which I raised in an earlier post, is now clearly answered. You control your thermostat!

The California Energy Commission (CEC) was to require, as part of the 2008 Title 24 building standards, that all new homes be outfitted with programmable communicating thermostats (PCT). The PCTs would allow a utility to remotely control your thermostat during power emergencies, especially during hot summer days when air conditioning use causes electricity demand to peak. By cutting peak electricity demand in this way, California could potentially avoid rolling blackouts and even eliminate the need for building expensive new “peaker” power plants, or firing up old, dirty plants just to meet an afternoon’s demand for electricity. But after a chorus of criticism from individuals and groups around the state, CEC has dropped the rule from the standards.

From the CEC Web site:

“There has been considerable discussion concerning programmable communicating thermostats (PCT) and their proposed inclusion in the regulations for the 2008 building standards. On January 15, 2008, the Energy Commission’s Efficiency Committee (Commissioner Rosenfeld and Chairman Pfannenstiel) directed that PCTs be removed from the proposed 2008 energy efficiency building standards.”

News of Home Energy’s and my support in particular for PCTs made it’s way into some online discussion boards and we felt the backlash. I’ve never been called a fascist before! I mistakenly believed that under the new rule, a utility would not be able to fiddle with your thermostat without your permission, even in an emergency. But if I looked carefully at the proposed standard, I would have read, “The PCT shall not allow customer changes to thermostat settings during emergency events.” I was wrong.

So, Big Brother will not be controlling your thermostat anytime soon. That’s a good thing, and, in fact, the CEC now agrees:

“Technology can be a powerful tool in managing our energy use. However, it is of utmost importance that consumers make their own energy decisions.”

Jim Gunshinan is Managing Editor of Home Energy Magazine. He holds an M.S. in Bioengineering from Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania, and a Master of Divinity (MDiv) degree from University of Notre Dame.

latitude: 37.8686, longitude: -122.267

It’s one of the most expensive high-tech projects the United States has ever attempted, and some say it will never work. QUEST visits the National Ignition Facility in Livermore, where scientists will soon aim the world’s largest laser at a target the size of a pencil eraser. The goal? Nuclear fusion — and, they say, the answer to the world’s clean energy needs.

You may listen to the “Super Laser” radio report online, as well as find additional links and resources. Also don’t miss our behind-the-scenes photos for this report.

Amy Standen is a Reporter for QUEST and Radio News at KQED-FM.

latitude: 37.6871, longitude: -121.697

At 5pm on Sunday January 6, 2008, California Academy of Sciences closed its temporary location in order to start the move back to Golden Gate Park. On September 27, 2008 the Academy will open to the public once again in its new home in the Park. Many curious museum-goers have asked, why the long gap between closing and opening? 265 days is long time to move across town.

What is on the public floors of the museum is just the tip of the iceberg of the Academy’s collections. Over a span of more than 150 years, the Academy has built an invaluable collection that acts as a strong backbone for the museum. Twenty million research specimens and 38,000 live animals have to be carefully packed and transported. The Academy is undertaking the most massive move ever undertaken by a museum.

The Botany collection was the first to move out of Howard Street. It took only eleven and a half days to move two million specimens. For perspective, it took 61,300 cardboard inserts bundled with over 40 miles of twine to bundle the flora. Botany is only one of eight Academy research departments preparing to move.

The Academy’s packing list is as varied as its research. Ornithology and Mammalogy have to transport Monarch, the last Grizzly bear of California. Because of its size and girth, it will not be boxed. However, it will take several movers to transport it carefully. Monarch will be joined by 30,000 other mammal specimens, including study pelts, skulls, skeletons, and the world’s largest collection of marine mammal specimens.

It will be even more challenging to move the Academy’s live animals. 38,000 live animals will be moved, water included, back to the Park in tanks of varying sizes. One of the aquarium’s Australian Lungfish will be the oldest living animal to move. Over seventy years old, this fish has seen the Academy through many changes– a move to Howard Street, and now the move back to Golden Gate Park.

The Academy’s Galápagos collection will also be packed up. It features thousands of Geospizine Finches (the group studied by Darwin) and the world’s largest collection of reptiles from the Galápagos.

Cultural keepsakes will be preserved. Pre-Columbian Inca clothing, 12th Century Persian ceramics, fragile feather leis, full-sized Native Alaskan kayaks, 500 Japanese folk toys, and a renowned collection of eating utensils will also find their home in Golden Gate Park.

To give you a sense of the immensity of the project, 20 million specimens include the following:

• Over 200,000 fish specimens preserved in alcohol, including a rare coelacanth (thought to be extinct until discovered in the 1930s);
• 14.5 million insects and arachnids, including more than 874,789 flies, some 524,666 true bugs, nearly 3 million beetles, and more than 700,000 butterflies and moths;
• Nearly 100,000 bird specimens, including the now-extinct Guadalupe Storm Petrel and 10,600 sets of bird nests and eggs;
• More than a quarter of a million reptiles and amphibians from 166 countries.

The sheer volume of this move makes it a migration. Over 20 million specimens can not be moved in a day. It will take every one of those 265 days to move and prepare to share the wealth of the Academy once again with the public. To find out more about this “Great Migration” and the museum that will ultimately house the collections – visit http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy.

Cat Aboudara is the Special Projects Manager at California Academy of Sciences and works in the public programs division. The Academy is a wonderful fit for her because of her curiosity about the natural world and her experience in working with native California wildlife.

latitude: 37.769, longitude: -122.467