Doug Nomura in action on the Bay Trail.

Something about San José photographer Doug Nomura’s pictures of birds in flight, or attempting to get off the ground to fly, grabs you.  I think it’s the sheer energy and effort that the photos convey.

It’s especially timely to be broadcasting our profile of Nomura as the Your Photos on QUEST (please link to our YPOQ8 segment) 2-minute segment on our Oct. 13 television episode, since the Bay Area is inundated with migratory birds starting in October.  The Bay Area is on the Pacific Flyway, a major north-south route of travel for migratory birds in the Americas, extending from Alaska to Patagonia.  As a result, close to 700,000 ducks are usually counted in the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta during October, said John Takekawa, research wildlife biologist with the US Geological Service. Raptors like hawks and falcons also stop over in the Bay Area in fall and winter.

Doug Nomura looks forward to the beginning of the migration in October because it multiplies his opportunities to photograph birds in flight.  He stalks his subjects along the Bay Trail, a shoreline trail that will eventually hug the entire circumference of the San Francisco Bay.  When the Bay Trail is complete, it will be 500 miles long.  Currently, the public can enjoy almost 300 miles of paths.  Nomura, whose day job is as a computer network security specialist, is an avid fan.  “This allows me to turn the cell phone off and go out there for a couple of hours,” he said.  “It’s some of the best therapy one can give oneself and it doesn’t cost anything.  I’d like my photographs to inspire people to visit the Bay Trail to look at the wildlife and appreciate what we have in our backyard.”

The beautiful San Francisco Bay.

Over the last two weeks I have had the opportunity to preview the film "Saving The Bay," as I prepare educational Viewing Guides for teachers. Even though I have called the Bay Area home for many years, I realized through watching this documentary that there is so much I do not know about my own backyard—the Bay. In addition to learning from "Saving The Bay," it has inspired me to explore new areas and to get more involved in restoration efforts. I am hopeful that students will also be inspired by this film and encouraged to go outside and enjoy our magnificent home.

"Saving The Bay," a film by Ron Blatman, is a four-part documentary chronicling the history of the San Francisco Bay. From the formation of the Bay itself to the formation of Save The Bay, this beautiful film tells the story of the Bay through striking images and knowledgeable voices. Complete with impressive animation, historical video footage and a lovely musical score, "Saving The Bay" offers an expansive overview of a vibrant San Francisco Bay region and how it came to be what it is today.

The first episode, "Saving The Bay," details the history of the San Francisco estuary and the first people to inhabit the region. "Harbor of Harbors", tells the story of San Francisco Bay’s dramatic transformation following the California Gold Rush. The third episode, "Miracle Workers," focuses on the engineering and industrialization of the Bay. "Bay in the Balance" shares how the Bay was saved and plans for the Bay’s future.

"Saving The Bay" is a great educational tool for teachers and alternative educators alike. This film presents a plethora of information in an engaging manner and covers many California State Science and Social Studies Standards for grades 4-12. Furthermore, upon watching parts or all of "Saving The Bay," students will develop a deeper understanding of their local environment and perhaps be motivated to participate in the on-going effort to save the Bay.

The first two episodes premiere on KQED Channel 9 on Thursday, Oct. 8 at 8pm. Click here to find additional air times/dates and to find out what else "Saving the Bay" has to offer.

Abandoned Boats

America’s Last Whaling Station (TV)

Cleaning Up Hunter’s Point

Elk Return to the Bay Area

From Salt Ponds to Wetlands

Fur Seal Pup Rehab

Ice Age Bay Area

Journey to the Farallones

Legacy of Salt

Mercury in the Bay – Part 1

Mercury in the Bay – Part 2

Redesigning the Bay

Rising Seas

San Francisco Bay Debris

San Francisco Bay Invaders

Sea Lion Rescue

Sharks of the San Francisco Bay

The Return of the Canal

Waste Water Woes: Sewage Spills in the SF Bay

Web Extra: Citizen Science – Mud Snails

Wetlands Time Machine

What’s Killing the Sea Otters?

The National Parks are a living record of America's past.

Living here in the San Francisco Bay Area I marvel at the diverse culture that sprouts from our surrounding parks and open spaces. In Golden Gate Park alone you can practice fly-fishing, sail a model boat, ride a horse, play golf, kick a soccer ball, tackle rugby, or pitch a horseshoe, bocce or baseball. You can see where the buffalo roam or spin round and round on an antique carousel. Skate, bike, row a boat, play music, dance to the beat of your own drum and stop to smell the roses. Nearby, down at Ocean Beach surfers ride the waves and kids make sand castles. Stroll the promenade at Crissy Field and you’ll see people soaking up the sun on the beach, flying kites, fishing off the pier or windsurfing under the Golden Gate. Go to Fort Funston where you can run your dogs down to the beach or launch your hang glider off the cliff and soar into the sky. I can go on and on but you get the picture. And that’s just here in San Francisco! Add the Peninsula, North, South and East Bay then combine all the city, county, state and federal parks with all the regional open spaces and count your blessings. It’s been said that if you go to any neighborhood in Bay Area, there is a park or a trailhead less than a mile away. These places are calling us outside to play. And in the process they are building our communities, and in many ways defining who we are and who we want to be.

Of all the activities happening in the parks, probably the most important and rewarding is volunteering to help preserve and protect these amazing places. I urge you all to pitch in. Contact your local regional parks and open space district and see what you can do to help. It’s up to all of us to make sure these wonderful places are saved and maintained for everyone in the future.

If you've watched the show, or are reading this blog about the National Parks, the chances are you also know that filmmaker Ken Burns is about to release his next series "The National Parks: America's Best Idea." Through our role in the development and distribution of the series, KQED is collecting viewer stories about their own experiences with these hallowed places. Let us know what these marvelous open spaces mean to you by sharing your story. We’d love to hear about your favorite park, Bay Area or beyond.

Watch the National Parks Special: Bringing the Parks to the People television story online.

Map of Moon water; blue indicates higher concentrations of detected water molecules. Credit: NASA/Moon Mineralogy Mapper instrument.Here it comes! A veritable tidal wave of discovery on Earth's Moon….

In one short week, NASA's LCROSS (Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite) mission will quite literally come to an end—a fiery, spectacular end as it deliberately crashes into the lunar South Pole crater Cabeus A in hopes of kicking up enough material for us to detect the presence of water. If you want to see the action as it happens, come up to Chabot Space & Science Center on Friday morning, October 9, 3:00 AM to watch NASA's live simulcast and–weather and the gods of astronomy permitting–the view through Chabot's 36-inch telescope, "Nellie."

In recent months, NASA has been sending a lot of acronyms—excuse me: spacecraft—to the Moon: LRO with it's LROC, LEND, and LOLA instruments; LCROSS (which I've heard some call "LaCROSS," for the record) with its VIS, NIR, MIR, TLP, VSP, NSP—oh, the list goes on!

The fact of the matter is MOON spells "Moon." Whether or not we do end up returning humans to the Moon in the next decade, which is partly what reconnaissance by LRO and LCROSS and their arrays of acro-instrumentation is for, there are still things to be learned about our nearest neighbor in space—and water is the word at present.

Even as LCROSS and its Centaur-booster-rocket-turned-lunar-clobbering-device follow their final fatal trajectory toward Cabeus A, its launch buddy LRO, now in an orbit around the Moon and beginning to send back scientific results and images, may have already detected telltale signs of the wet stuff—which on the Moon won't be wet, but frozen solid, of course; liquid water cannot persist in the Moon's airless environment.

LRO's LEND (Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector) instrument is designed to find signs of water molecules by measuring neutron radiation emanating from the lunar surface. The Moon is constantly bombarded by high energy cosmic radiation, which forms radioactive isotopes in the soil that in turn emit neutrons. By measuring the abundance and speed distribution of the neutrons, details of soil chemistry can be inferred. The presence of light atomic nuclei–in particular the lightest of all, hydrogen, a component of water—in the soil reduces the levels of neutron emission. That drop in neutron radiation is the telltale scientists are looking for.

While LRO scientists want to make further measurements before concluding the presence water ice concentrations, observations from three other spacecraft—NASA's M3 instrument (Moon Mineralogy Mapper) aboard India's Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft and the Cassini and EPOXI spacecraft—have mutually confirmed the presence of water and hydroxyl molecules (hydroxyl is a water molecule missing one of its two hydrogen atoms) in the soils of the Moon, across much wider expanses than the confines of dark polar crater floors.

Cassini and EPOXI made measurements as they flew past the Moon to their respective destinations (Saturn, and a comet), and measurements have been made by M3 from lunar orbit. The detection of water by these spacecraft doesn't mean seas of liquid or glaciers of ice, or even blanketing layers of gaseous water vapor, but rather relatively small amounts of water and hydroxyl molecules attached to, or "stuck to," other materials in the top few millimeters of soil.

This thin "confetti" of water molecules appears to come and go with lunar daytime, forming during the cold, dark two-week-long lunar night and diminishing under the baking light of the Sun.

So, right now, MOON spells water (M3 et al), water (LRO), and possibly more water (LCROSS, on October 9th)—at least, the evidence seems to be mounting!

Simone Crew (left) is now a freshman at Haverford College in Pennsylvania.

Today’s episode of QUEST-TV includes a 2-minute segment that marks our first collaboration with the San Francisco spoken word presenter Youth Speaks and The Redford Center, based in Provo, Utah. For the past four years, these organizations have been putting on a contest for young spoken word artists who perform poems about environmental themes. In our first installment of QUEST-TV’s Youth Speaks Green feature, 18-year-old San Francisco poet Simone Crew performs excerpts from her poem Yasmeena, which she originally performed at this contest. You can download a copy of the complete poem here.

Through Youth Speaks Green, we’ll explore how young people in the Bay Area view the challenges of becoming green. We’ll be looking beyond clean fuels, efficient vehicles and solar panel rebates and delving instead into the personal. Crew, who is now a freshman at Haverford College in Pennsylvania, wrote the poem when she was 16 and centered it on her experiences with an eight-year-old girl called Yasmeena, whom she had babysat. Through Yasmeena’s insistent questions, Crew began to feel the weight of the responsibility to conserve the natural world for her. In an engaging play of mirrors, we as the audience get to watch Crew observing Yasmeena, as Yasmeena makes sense of the world around her.

Crew will be performing a new environmentally-themed poem at the Sundance Film Festival in January of 2010, as part of a Youth Speaks team.

In coming episodes, we hope to present you with the work of other talented young Bay Area poets in our Youth Speaks Green segments.

Watch the Youth Speaks Green television story online.

Zoloft is a popular drug used for the treatment of depression symptoms.

Depression is hardly new. The Roman physician Galen, in the second century A.D., expounded on the prevailing medical view that four bodily fluids, or humors, existed within all people but that the unique variation of these humors within people resulted in individual differences among people in their behavior and temperament. An excess of black bile, for example, indicated a melancholic personality.

Fortunately, a lot of scientific progress has been made since then in understanding depression to be an organic, brain-based medical condition that afflicts millions. In fact, an individual has a ten to fifteen percent lifetime risk of developing a major depressive episode. But as Dr. Karl Deisseroth, a Stanford neuroscientist and psychiatrist, told me during our interview for “Illuminating Depression”, “Diagnosis is a big challenge because in psychiatry, we don’t have a lab test. There’s not a blood draw that you can do as you might to check how your liver is doing or how your thyroid function is doing.” So given that the diagnosis of depression is based on clinical observation (most often done by a primary care physician), one can’t help feel that hard, empirical understanding of depression is somewhat lacking, especially when compared to diseases of other organs like the heart and lungs where tests do exist to gauge the presence of pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases.

This was the most interesting observation for me when working on this story. Imagine a medical disease that afflicts eighteen million people in the U.S. (26 million if you include Bipolar Disorder), for which more than 160 million prescriptions were filled in 2008, that is one of the leading causes of disability in the U.S., but a disease for which no definitive medical model of pathology exists. Increasingly, doctors are prescribing antidepressants to treat not just depression but a host of other medical conditions, including chronic pain and insomnia, some of which can co-occur with depression. Sure, we’ve made strides since the time of Galen’s bodily humors and the Freudian view of misplaced hostility and mourning to explain depression, but in some respects, we’re still in the dark about why some people get depression while others don’t, why some people respond to one treatment and not another, or why one person will suffer from a form of depression that is less or more severe than another person. This lack of clear, empirical understanding comes at an awful price to victims of depression, as they encounter remarks from people that tell them to “snap out of it”, implying that they somehow can control the emotional crumbling and dark ideations that accompany the disease.

The consequence of all this is that it’s incredibly tough to create effective, lasting treatments for the disease if we can’t exactly track how the disease affects not only specific regions of the brain but the activity among individual brain cells in regions that may not have even been known to play an integral role in the disease. My layperson’s view is that treating depression currently is a bit like bringing in a car to the mechanic and telling him to fix it but there’s a catch – the mechanic can’t get under the hood to observe directly what’s wrong with the car. We suspect that the problem is with the engine but good luck with opening it up and peering into its pistons. So the mechanic attempts to work on the engine but indirectly, and whatever repairs are attempted may affect the engine but they may also have unwanted effects on the car’s transmission, muffler, timing belt, etc.

Fortunately, advances in imaging techniques like two-photon microscopy and fMRI are elucidating the activity of the depressed brain, allowing the previously impenetrable forest of billions of neurons to be explored, to see their pathways altered, their branches pruned by the disease. And scientists like Philippe Goldin and Kelly Werner are compiling biomarkers like DNA and brain blood flow activity to see if those biomarkers can help predict if people suffering from anxiety and/or depression will respond more favorably to cognitive behavioral therapy than to mindfulness meditation, for example. Dr. Deisseroth is using genetically engineered, photosensitive proteins implanted into rodents’ brains to control brain activity at the level of individual neurons.

Dr. M. Bret Schneider told me during our interview, “A real cure for depression is gonna involve being able to selectively affect those portions of the brain which don’t function properly in depression… But fathoming the huge number of possibilities in each brain with every brain being a little bit different than every other one, is gonna require individualized solutions and will be a scientific feat.” I suppose that with a disease as complex as depression, where one’s individual genetic makeup can influence the kinds of side effects one may experience with an antidepressant, it’s apropos that the future of treating and eventually curing it will entail personalized medicine. Until then, let’s hope that more people bring psychiatry into the research lab to study illnesses like depression, for it’s only through the methodical rigor of science that we have the best hope for curing depression.

Watch the Illuminating Depression television story online.

An image of a bioreactor being developed by OriginOil scientists.

Today’s episode of QUEST features our 10-minute TV story about efforts to produce biofuels from algae. In 1996, when the U.S. Department of Energy concluded its 25-year research project into the potential of algae as biofuels, its report concluded that the most cost-effective way to grow algae was in open ponds. With climate change and geopolitics prompting new research into the algae-as-fuel question, some companies are pursuing the open pond route, while others are looking into closed systems such as bioreactors. In our TV story we profile OriginOil, a Los Angeles-based company developing a bioreactor that looks like a miniature Christmas tree, complete with bright, colored lights. And we interview the CEO of Aurora Biofuels, a company based in the Bay Area city of Alameda, which is re-imagining open ponds, as well as trying to create strains of algae that are ideal for fuel production. Before becoming the CEO of Aurora Biofuels, Bob Walsh worked at the oil company Shell for 25 years. Here’s an excerpt of QUEST’s March, 2009, interview with Walsh, most of which didn't make it into the TV segment.

QUEST: What excited you about algae?

BOB WALSH: I ran oil products businesses for many years and understand the cost-competitiveness and the commodity basis of it. And what excited me about algae was, A, it’s renewable. B, you're using a feed stock of carbon dioxide, which is basically free. And finally, what excited me about this company, Aurora Biofuels, was the aspect of solving it end to end, not just the biotech (end of things), but also the engineering aspects.

Q: What has algae been grown for in ponds in the past?

WALSH: Algae’s been grown in open ponds for decades. And typically it’s been done with nutraceuticals – spirulina, which many people use as a protein pill. That is grown in open ponds, but not very cost-effectively because they haven’t had to be very cost-effective. They can charge $10 per pound.

Q: What would be the difference that you would be looking for in terms of cost-effectiveness, compared to what’s been done already?

WALSH: Historically, algae were just grown in an open pond and captured carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and the sun. What we’re actually doing is injecting the CO2 we recover from a steel mill or power plant, to give the algae food. And we’ve engineered it to get better mixing, so it grows more quickly. And then finally, rather than drying the algae out, we actually do a wet extraction of the oil, which is much more cost-effective than drying it as they have historically done for proteins.

Q: So what price would you be aiming for, and what price can the algae be grown for now?

WALSH: Oil today has been around $50 per barrel. We believe we need to be competitive in the $50-60 range. And that’s what our final target is. I think oil will be $60-100 over the next 10 to 15 years.

Q: What would the algae biofuels facility of the future look like?

WALSH: You’ll situate it very close to a CO2 source – a steel mill or a power plant. It will encompass several thousand acres of barren land – because you want dry, barren land – and use salt water. And it would produce roughly 120 million gallons a year of useable fuel into the existing infrastructure.

Q: Can algae fuel actually make a contribution to our transportation needs?

WALSH: Algae can be a player. It’s going to take a lot of different solutions because of the different climates and things that you need for it. It’s also a trillion-gallon market. And so it’s not going to happen tomorrow. But certainly algae can be a 5- to 10-percent player in ten years, in the marketplace.

Watch the Algae Power television story online.

The Crab Nebula as seen through Chabot Space & Science Center’s 8-inch refracting telescope, Leah. Image: Conrad Jung, Chabot Space & Science CenterWhen asked what got me interested in astronomy, the stock answer I offer is my childhood experience going to Chabot Observatory and looking through the telescopes—and I'm sure that had a great deal to do with it. But, if I want to give an even shorter answer, I just say, "Crab Nebula!" and walk away….

What's the Crab Nebula? Astronomy enthusiasts are very familiar with this celestial object, or at least become so very quickly after entering the world of space. It's a supernova remnant—a torn and tortured cloud of gases expanding outward into space, the aftermath of a supernova explosion that happened almost a thousand years ago in the constellation Taurus. In fact, as I write this blog, the age of the Crab Nebula is exactly 955 years and 40 days.

How do we know with such precision when this former star went supernova? The answer, as always in science, is careful observation! The explosion of the star was witnessed by Chinese and Japanese astronomers—and possibly sky watchers of the American Southwest—who carefully observed and recorded the event. The explosion took place on July 4th, 1054 CE.

Seven hundred years later, a century after the invention of the telescope, the Crab Nebula was discovered in the same spot—first in 1731 by John Bevis, then again by Charles Messier in 1758 (August 28, in fact—the date of this blog posting!). Messier ran across it while searching for Halley's Comet, and at first mistook it for a comet. This was the reason that he began compiling his famous Messier catalog of "fuzzy" objects: a wall of mug shots of unusual suspects that resembled, but were imposters of, comets. He began his catalog with Messier 1 (M1), the Crab Nebula.

Messier 1 got its nickname of the Crab from a drawing made by observer Lord Rosse in 1844.
Today, the Crab Nebula is an expanding cloud of gas and some dust spanning 10 light years, or 60 trillion miles. The cloud is still expanding at a speed of about 1,800 kilometers per second—a speed that would get you to the Moon in just under 4 minutes! At its center is the collapsed remnant of the dead star's core, which has become the incredibly small and dense object known as a neutron star.

So why did the Crab Nebula spark my interest in astronomy? I have a specific memory of being at a summer camp and engaging in a craft activity where we cut out the pictures from a bunch of astronomy calendars and made frames and matting to display them in. I selected a few of my favorite images, which included the Dumbbell Nebula (a planetary nebula), the Veil Nebula (another supernova remnant), and, of course, the Crab. Of all these stunning astrophotos, it was the Crab that stuck the longest in my mind and on my bedroom wall, and impelled me to get my first subscription to Astronomy Magazine, and eventually my first telescope. Sometimes, our lives are guided by stars….

Professor Gordon Frankie of UC Berkeley was an early adopter of urban beekeeping. A couple years ago, it was all the rage in the science news world: Colony collapse disorder. Bee populations declined upwards of 30% here in California, a decline that has continued without much fanfare into 2009. While scientists continue to find new clues in the mysterious affliction, a new trend in beekeeping is emerging, which QUEST recently covered in a radio piece: urban bee farming to build biodiversity and catalog native species.

Professor Gordon Frankie of UC Berkeley was an early adopter of urban beekeeping. In the late 1990s, he started the Urban Bee Project, an experimental project to document bee populations in the Bay Area. Gordon used this data to plant a bee garden right in downtown Berkeley (how he managed to get approval of that is mystery to me). The project has catalogued over 80 species of native bees, a number expected to grow well over 100. Gordon has even used the research to create a bee-friendly garden builder.

Gordon will discuss the Urban Bee Project at the next East Bay Science Café. In addition, there are a whole host of local beekeeping organizations that offer educational events.

Native Bees: A rich natural resource in urban California gardens

When: Wednesday, September 2^nd 2009

Where: East Bay Science Café, La Pena Cultural Center, 3105 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley

Cost: FREE

Local Beekeeping Organizations

• Alameda County Beekeepers Association
• Santa Clara Valley Beekeepers Guild
• Santa Cruz Guild for Beekeepers
• Mount Diablo Beekeepers Association
• Sonoma County Beekeepers
• San Francisco Beekeepers Association
• San Mateo Bee Guild
• Marin County Beekeepers

Also, you can watch QUEST's TV story "Better Bees: Super Bee and Wild Bee" below:

QUEST on KQED Public Media.

The paint on this piggy bank tested for lead at 7253 parts per million (ppm); that is 11 times higher than the legal limit for lead paint. By Oanh Ha, Globalization Reporter for The California Report.

Editor's Note: This week we have the first of two special reports on lead.

As a parent, there is a lot to worry about when it comes to the safety of my kids. Lead wasn't high on my list. Lead poisoning in children has dropped significantly in recent decades since the ban on lead-based paint in homes and the phase-out of leaded gasoline. Then came the record toy recalls of 2007, where millions of imported items coated in lead paint and made by household names like Mattel and Fisher Price violated the 30-year-old lead law.

Suddenly, parents, including me, eyed the toys in our homes and on store shelves with suspicion. Extensive research links lead exposure in children to lower IQ scores, neurological and behavioral problems, even anemia.

The toy recalls prompted congress to pass the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008.

The Act not only lowers limits for lead and bans certain kinds of phthalates–it makes manufacturers and distributors accountable for products sold to American consumers by requiring items to be certified by third-party labs. But the testing, or certification piece of the Act, was postponed for a year. That raised a lot of questions for me as a reporter and as a parent.

I contacted the Center for Environmental Health, which researches lead, and other toxics, in consumer items and has sued manufacturers and distributors for violating standards.

CEH and KQED were interested in looking at what's sold at discount chains and 99 cent stores because of the history of previous recalls. CEH, through its regular spot testing, also thought that many of the larger retail outlets seem to have improved their process to weed out lead in children's items after the 2007 recalls.

I got some tips from CEH about potentially problematic products to look for. We purchased about 200 items and then CEH did the first round of testing using an X-ray fluorescence (XRF) device. The XRF is a handy tool used by a lot of commercial lead inspectors. It shoots high-energy x-rays at the item and sends back a chemical analysis, including the lead content.

Most items that exceeded the lead limits (600 parts per million) set by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act using the XRF device were then sent to a federally-accredited lab, MACS in Hayward, for detailed testing. At the lab, the parts or components that exceeded the lead limits were cut or scraped off and dissolved in an acid solution. Then tests were run to determine the lead content.

View a slide show of several of the items that violate the new lead limits below. We've also put together a list of items that violate the new lead limits, along with the test results.

So how can parents keep leaded toys away from kids? In addition to avoiding vinyl products, stay away from metal jewelry.

If you can, choose natural wood toys instead of painted items, especially if they are in yellow. Check the recall list posted by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Many companies sell home lead test kits for consumer products. They're not 100-percent reliable and can give false negatives-and false positives too. If you're really concerned about your child's lead level, the best thing to do is to get a blood lead test.

Listen to the Playing with Lead – Part 1 radio report online.