http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/03nuke.html?hp

This article is about how a new idea for sealing the leaking oil pipe would be to use a nuclear explosion to seal the hole. The intense heat would, in theory, would melt the hole shut creating a cap like plug. The idea is gaining a lot of support, but the federal government is totally against it. not only would it go against obama's ideas of reducing nuclear armaments, but it would also ruin the pacts made between the US and Russia to try to stop using nuclear weapons even in peaceful ways. I think the government is right. I think the only reason that the idea is gaining support is because people are becoming really impatient with so many failed attempts by BP. People aren't thinking about the consequences that could come with detonating a nuclear weapon. For one it might not even work because it hasn't really been tested underwater or on an oil leak, and also who knows what the radiation could do. It just seems way too dangerous, irrational, and desperate to use such a method.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/business/energy-environment/22rare.html?hp

This article is about our reliance on China's low priced rare-earth minerals. Most of American mines for the rare minerals have been run out of business because of Chinese low wages and total ignoring any environmental factor the mining may have on the environment (the landscape around their mines look like moonscapes). Some big mining companies in the US want to open up older mines and make new ones; they are looking for possible help from the government on possible regulation of the Chinese mineral market. The problem with this is that the Army relies on the Chinese low prices, which totally out compete any American prices. I think this is ridiculous because we should be focusing on our own economy. The only reason the prices are low is because Chinese workers are being exploited and on top of that their homes are being destroyed by the dust from the mines. It seems like such a horrible thing to be buying from the Chinese when they are using their workers so unfairly and basically infecting the surrounding environment with the waste produced. This is just another example of how money is the only thing that matters to big agencies, like the Army.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/science/13adhesive.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fscience%2Findex.jsonp

This article is about how scientists are trying to imitate a natural adhesive made by the caddisfly. This is no ordinary adhesive, however, because it can cure underwater. This has not been able to be done by scientists so far because the problem is that when trying to cure an adhesive underwater it starts to adhere to a water layer in between the actual object. This makes it very hard to make an adhesive that will actually work. This is why scientists are studying these caddisfly, they have the ability to make a natural glue to build their homes. This glue could be extremely useful because it could be used for the Navy and also for possibly glueing bones, tissue, and muscle back together on people. This would make it much easier to fix problems like broken bones or large cuts. I think this is very intriguing and a really good area of research. If this underwater adhesive could be made it would make a large impact on medical and Navy uses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/science/earth/13trash.html?ref=science

This article is about how Denmark has created a super-clean waste to electricity plant. For years incinerators have been terrible polluters and hated by many people, especially those who live close to one. Now, however, this new plant has many filters to filter out anything from mercury to dioxins. It converts waste to electricity with less harmful emissions than a fire place and barbecues have. This is a huge advancement and many more of these plants are being set up in the country. The idea has been brought to America, but not in a very positive light. Scientists are split, on the one hand these are extremely green plants, but on the other hand its just encouraging people to produce more waste and use more plastics. This has the opposite effect of what people want because people would be more loose with what they buy and throw out. I think this is a really great idea, even though it could encourage bad behaviors. I think it could be the transition to perfectly green energy and would solve the problem of what to do with waste.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/world/asia/08reef.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fscience%2Findex.jsonp

This article is about another large oil spill off the coast of Australia in the very delicate ecosystem of the Great Barrier Reef. Apparently a Chinese oil tanker with 1075 tons of oil on it was basically speared by the reef and so is now stuck there until something is done to stop any further leaking. There hasn't been any major leaking because sea water rushed into the tank rather than the oil rushing out into the ocean, although this won't last for long. The Australians are saying that the Chinese crew tried to take a short cut through reefs, but got stuck. This conclusion was made because the vessel had just left a port in Australia, picking up coal and steel, and got stuck 12 kilometers off the shipping lanes. The Australians are extremely upset, calling it the equivalent to a terrorist attack because it could be so harmful. I think this is just yet another example of the stupid things people do. You would think the captain of a fuel tanker would be a lot more cautious with 1075 tons of oil and 72000 tons of coal on board. I think it is an outrage and the Australians should do as much as they can to punish the chinese vessel, releasing oil into the Great Barrier Reef, the biggest and most extraordinary reef in the world, is like pouring some paint on the Mona Lisa. It is such a delicate ecosystem and holds such beauty, tarnishing something like that is just plain stupid.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/science/23aquarium.html?ref=science

This article is about the aquarium fishing industry and how there may be a possibility of over harvesting in the Florida Keys. There is a debate going on among scientists as to whether aquariums may be asking too much from the environment. Most of their attractions come from the Keys and, although the fishing is highly regulated, there may be a chance of over fishing. One side of the argument is that the fishing is so regulated that nothing could possibly go wrong. This I think is naive, most of the animals harvested there have very little information known about them, including their reproductive cycles. Even if they are highly regulated if, hypothetically, one species every female reproduces every 3-5 years that would take a lot of time for the species to recover from harvesting. This could very well be the case and no one would know. I think there just needs to be more research on the actual animals being harvested so we know for sure we aren't hurting the environment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/health/16essa.html?ref=science
This article is about how fat people are being judged harshly by doctors and employers. Many doctors are very frank saying that they would treat fat people a lot different than average sized people, as they don't trust them to do what they need to do. They cause a lot of stress towards fat people, according to the article, causing diabetes and other stress related diseases. Employers are very biased, in that they will not even consider hiring a larger person for a job. One woman described how she had a really good phone conversation with an employer, but when they met in person she was totally turned down. The employer didn't look at her and made a big deal about whether or not to go up the stairs or take the elevator. She didn't even recieve a "not thank you" letter. I think this is a very biased article. The person who wrote it was obese herself, saying that in the first paragraph. She probably made it sound worse than it actually is and is making excuses for herself. Honestly, yes there are people who just don't have the ability to take off weight, but that must be a fairly small percentage. I think most obese people have the choice to work hard, eat right, and stay healthy or continue what they normally do. Employers probably stereo-type many obese people because they think they are too lazy to do anything about their weight. If you have ever seen the Biggest Loser, it proves that even the largest people can get thin, its just a matter of working for it. I think this article is just making excuses for obese people not to do anything about their weight and make them feel better about themselves.