This is an example of a graph I produced with plot.ly, a graphing website. The influent results uses data from location Blue last year that was collected by Sean Anderson. Location Blue, is Calleguas creek and is located in CI Cam park near the Channel Islands campus. The effluent results are mock numbers that I would expect to be concentrations after location Blue has been treated by the Bio-SWIPE filter.
Fracking (hydrofracking) is a largely talked about issue these days. Getting the stores of natural gases out of the bedrock is helpful and highly useful for the energy needs of the planet. With petroleum reserves running low, natural gas extracted through fracking has become a very large portion of the total energy for the United States, as well as other parts of the world. This is good for keeping energy costs from skyrocketing, but the environmental impacts are just now beginning to be understood.
Despite gas company claims that they recover all of the fluid they use during the fracking process, when fracking fluid is pumped down into the wells where natural gas is stored deep in the bedrock, some of the fluid (10-40%) makes its way back up the well boring and leaches out into the surrounding soil. Through the soil, which is usually unsaturated (lacking moisture content) in the areas where natural oil deposits are located, the fracking fluid can flow outward and is currently seen making its way into aquifers. This doesn’t sound so bad, until you learn about the components of the fracking fluid. Natural gas companies will tell you that the majority of the fluid is just water, which is in large part true. But since the natural gas is held up in pores in rock hundreds of thousands of years old, and deep within the earth, water alone is not usually enough to dispense the gas from it’s stored locations. To address this purpose, gas companies mix a variety of compounds (surfactants) meant to make the water slipperier, which allows the water to better displace the natural gas in the porous rock. These surfactants are being found in aquifers near fracking sites, as well as a variety of other compounds that had previously been locked up in the bedrock with the natural gas.
The surfactant components as well as the particles that have been mobilized from deep within the rock bring up a whole new problem for environmental impact monitoring. Each gas company uses a different mixture of surfactants, and the recipe for them is considered a trade secret, so they do not have to disclose them to the EPA or local agencies whose duty it is to monitor the surrounding areas for contamination. Without knowing exactly what compounds are in the fracking fluids, it is impossible to monitor the movement of those compounds to ensure they do not end up in public water sources. During water treatment for mass consumption, a series of methods are performed to remove pathogens and toxins that might be present in the water to ensure public safety for water consumption. But without knowing what compounds are being introduced to the aquifer where the water is being drawn from, it is impossible to accurately develop methods of removing them all from public water. For the same reason, it is increasingly difficult to ensure proper removal of all compounds that may be brought up from the bedrock from hundreds of thousands of years ago.
On top of other issues that fracking introduces to many areas of the country / globe, these chemical contaminants are of growing concern. Without regulations on what chemicals are used, or the practice of collecting the fluid after use, it is impossible to initiate proper cleanup methods to ensure the safety of the public water supply. Natural gas currently provides between 20-30% of the energy in the US, but at what cost? What toxins is the practice of fracking introducing to the public domain? And what energy source will replace natural gas when the stores run out?
“It is the big “F” word that nobody ever wants to discuss. You rarely hear it at forums or conferences, nor will it make an appearance in published work: failure. In today’s environment society tends to view things in the absolute; either one is a failure, or one is a success. Yet research is often fluid, constantly evolving and changing, and an absolute is all but impossible.” Meet SURFer Christopher MacMahon and read about his thoughts on the role of failure in historical research.
As I grow into the amazing world of education, I am constantly immersed with new knowledge. This includes the important role the Federal government has in the educational system. As a young Chicana and future educator being informed of legislative changes in education is of great importance to me. It has been my experience that teaching comes with great responsibility. The role of a teacher is not solely based in the classroom, it is his/her active duty to also participate with the community at large. The personal is political. For this reason, I explore how legislation affects the future of all students.
Recently, I came across a letter made to the U.S. House of Representatives by the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda (NHLA), and the Hispanic Education Coalition (HEC). This letter brought me to seek further knowledge on H.R. 5, the Student Success Act that has been re-introduced to the House as of February 2, 2015. Currently, this bill is still pending passage. Both the NHLA and HEC are opposing this bill and stated, “H.R. 5 violates these principles by block granting Title III programs for English learners, removing performance targets for the academic achievement of Latinos and English learners, and removing accountability for the achievement and learning gains of Latinos and English learners.”
Several concerns arise as I review H.R. 5 and other articles. The controversy can be summed in two topics: funding and the reduced role of the federal government in education. This is a major impact as local districts and states rely on Federal funds for important before/after school programs. Most of this programs include English Language Leaners (ELL) and children with disabilities.
Additionally stated in H.R. 5, funds that are granted to schools are designed to follow low-income students to a school of their parent’s choice. According to a National Review article, “These funds will follow low-income children to the district school or charter school of a parent’s choice. DOES NOT allow a private choice (even when the money is not allowed to go to private schools, leading it to charter schools is one preceding step.”
As a student that grew up in various underserved communities, I am aware on the difficulty of moving to “better” neighborhoods. I have also witnessed my own students face similar challenges. It is not only almost impossible to afford but transportation becomes a major problem. I had to reflect and ask myself, if this is leading towards to the privatization of our educational system? Will students living in poverty have the same advantages in school choice as those that are not?
My take on this is not about supporting or opposing H.R. 5. I simply reflected on my research that indeed, the personal is political. I have no doubt that many “affluent” individuals can identify this. My concern arises from those that are underserved and uninformed. How can a seven year old understand he/she depends on a political agenda? When will parents have the time to read through a 600 page bill while working endlessly to make ends meet?
Rep. Kline whom introduced the bill, stated directly from the House floor: “the legislation eliminates ineffective or duplicative programs so that each dollar makes a direct meaningful and lasting impact in classrooms”.
There is not right or wrong answer. Neither am I seeking to diminish the important role that our government has in many successful educational programs. I do not expect anyone to take my side or vice versa. Let me simply refresh politicians, teachers, parents, and all other advocates that the heart of the matter in education should always be students. Whether it is a five year old in kindergarten or a high school senior. Students are and should be the center of attention. Real change in education rises from the passion to do better for future generations, not placing a tag price on supporting them.
This week I talked to my mom and my fiance, Eddie, about their medications.
Eddie takes levothyroxine regularly. He knows it is also called synthroid. He knows this drug is for his thyroid and he is supposed to take it every morning, 1 hour before he eats. He does not know any side effects per say, but knows if he does not take it, he feels tired. OTC he takes Advil. He only knows this name and does not know the generic. When asked how often he can take it he responded, “however often the bottle says.”
My mom takes an inhaler for her asthma regularly. She could not remember the name as she has recently started taking it. She does not know any side effects. She knows she is to use as needed for her symptoms. When asked how she uses the inhalers she stated she puts her mouth on and inhales as she depresses. OTC she takes multivitamins and calcium supplements. She takes Advil for pain as needed. She knows it is also called ibuprofen. Also did not know frequency she could take but knows to read the bottle.
Posted from Cerritos, California, United States.
here is my next location with place name zeroed.
Posted from Kenner, Louisiana, United States.
This is a test of Log My Trip again
My location is Zeroed here
Scroll to top
