Beth Hodgson's Notebook:

UK reintroducing insects into ecosystem

Everyone has a different opinion on what role the human population should play when it comes to messing with the natural order of things in the animal kingdom. So a new plan the U.K. has recently unveiled is sure to be a source of controversy. It goes beyond the preservation of threatened species, and aims to reintroduce them into the ecosystem.

What’s really got people talking is that the species are neither feathered nor furry friends, which is where conservation efforts are normally focused. Rather, they’re intending on breeding and releasing four different species of insect back into the environment.

Human activities cannot be directly blamed to the decline of these scarce insect species, like the dark bordered beauty moth. The moth is one of the species at the center of the initiative headed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. It’s possible that climate changes that have altered ecosystems could be a source, or insect species just might be dwindling in numbers as they fall at the bottom of the food chain.

Whatever the reasons, there are still questions if this is taking conservation efforts too far. Making up for harm caused to the animal kingdom as a result of human activity is one thing but this is another. 

Do you think when it comes to natural evolution and the survival of the fittest humans should interfere or remain hands-off?

(Image Courtesy Royal Society for the Protection of Birds)

Also read:

Should humans take all the blame for climate change?

Could species evolve to adapt to climate change? 

Debating the efforts of selective breeding in pets 

Predators aren’t to blame for ecological imbalance 

Skepticism about Energy Star savings

The promise of saving a few bucks and saving the environment comes along with the Energy Star program. With initiatives like the $300 million rebate program offered by the United States Department of Energy, the intent is to further encourage home owners to make the switch to energy-efficient home appliances.

The environmental benefits of energy saving appliances are clear, but many home owners still aren’t convinced when what it really comes down to for most is the financial savings. Unfortunately, since home appliances make up only a small percentage of a home’s total utility bills; the cost savings aren’t always quite so profound.

This is especially true when home owners are upgrading from machines 10 years or newer, to refrigerators, washers, dryers, dishwashers and stoves that are Energy Star rated. With barely measurable cost savings, and high costs for purchasing the appliances even with the government incentive for a $100 rebate on every eligible appliance, it’s still not enough to convince many Americans.

Real cost savings can come into play with those changing from appliances that are 20 years or older to newer, more efficient appliances whether Energy Star or otherwise. These can reduce energy consumption by up to 70 percent. But experts say that greater savings can come from investing money into better insulating the home since heating and cooling systems expend more energy.

The vast majority of the population is starting to care about their environmental impact — but no matter which way you swing it, what it still comes down to is a numbers game; Uncle Sam’s green, not the environmental kind.

It doesn’t help either that the Energy Star ratings program has been closely scrutinized for inappropriate use of rating stickers.

Global Green Guide: Bike-sharing programs from around the world

Bike sharing programs are a growing global phenomenon as more commuters are choosing to leave their cars parked in their driveway in exchange for human-powered vehicles with decreased environmental impact. But there are a few challenges with taking your own bike from home, most predominantly parking. Some innovative bike-sharing programs have popped up around the world that address these issues and provide convenience for bicycle commuters.

1. Bixi (Montreal, Canada)

Bixi brought the first European-style bike-sharing program to North America. In spring of 2009, it began placing bike stations around the city of Montreal and added 3000 auto-pedaling bicycles to its fleet, which members could use for a monthly fee. What’s unique about this system is that it’s managed by the city, and not an external system

2. Velib (various cities, France)

Quite similar to the program offered by Bixi in Canada, Velib offers bike sharing through one of the largest programs in Europe with more than 750 pickup and drop-off points for bike commuters. Bikes are also available for rent by the hour, but unlike Bixi, this is an independently run business not associated with the cities where it operates.

3. SmartBike DC (Washington, D.C.)

Washington introduced the first U.S.-based bike-share program in the country back in the spring of 2009. It offers a similar structure to the above, and it’s one that many cities have voiced interest in adopting.

4. Bike Park (Australia)

Perhaps the most innovative bike program is not for bike sharing. Since parking and the need to shower are two issues that bike commuters often face, Bike Park offers both. Bikers who have a membership or pay per use have access to a locker, bicycle parking and shower and changing facilities.

(Image Courtesty Bixi)

Also Read: YikeBike: E-bicycle of the future

YikeBike: E-bicycle of the future

Bikes are an increasingly popular form of transportation for urban commuters in North America and Europe. The good news is that bikes reduce traffic congestion and emissions output. The bad news, for some who commute by bike, is that you work up quite a sweat from physically powering your own vehicle and then arrive at work needing a shower. Enter the electric bike trend.

Should humans take all the blame for climate change?

As we focus all of our efforts to become a species with a minimized environmental impact, positive changes are in the works. But many of these efforts are a result of guilt that humans are solely responsible for climate change. But is that really a reasonable assumption to make?

Some say that the human contributions to global warming have been measurable since 1970. While there’s no denying we’re causing harm through emissions output, construction, agriculture, deforestation, and more on a long list of ways we as humans are detrimental to the environment; how do we know that global warming might not have been in the cards anyways?

After all, 14000 years ago marked the end of the last Ice Age when the Antarctic ice sheet began its final melting process. Specific reasons for this environmental change are unknown (and shrouded in heavy debate), with researchers still speculating about the origins of the last melt and the reasons for it. But what is known is that the environment was to blame on its own, not people.

There were regular evolutionary and natural changes that took place on this planet far before the human race stepped in to screw things up. Just ask the dinosaurs whose fossils speak to this truth. We are causing our share of environmental harm, but when you look at history, it might not be fair for humans to take all the blame for climate change.

Beth's Links:

More Dispatches:

• Latest