Podcasts about n2o

Nitrous oxide, also sometimes known as “laughing gas,” is used in medicine for its sedative and anesthetic (pain prevention) properties. Joseph Priestley, an English chemist, and multidisciplinary scholar, first synthesized nitrous oxide, which has the chemical formula N2O, in 1772. After Priestley's initial discovery of this substance, fellow chemist Humphry Davy performed various tests on the substance, including breathing the gas alone, with oxygen, and with air. Through this testing, it became clear that nitrous oxide had psychogenic properties, including as a sedative and anesthetic (pain-preventer). At first, nitrous oxide was not used for its medicinal properties; it was sold recreationally as “laughing gas.” However, it was established for use in dentistry in the mid-1860s to relieve discomfort from tooth extractions and other painful dental procedures. By the 1880s, it was used for anesthesia during labor and childbirth. Today, nitrous oxide is still used in dentistry, during labor and childbirth, as well as in emergency medicine. When used medicinally, nitrous oxide is delivered with 30-70% oxygen so a person is never breathing in 100% nitrous oxide. Breathing in 100% nitrous oxide displaces oxygen from the lungs and can result in asphyxiation, damage the body's organs, and even death. Nitrous oxide is sometimes misused recreationally for its euphoric, pleasurable and hallucinogenic effects. However, inhaling nitrous oxide outside of medical settings can be dangerous and even deadly, particularly when used heavily. Although it's not common, repeated use of inhalants like nitrous oxide and whippets can also result in addiction, or substance use disorder. (CREDITS)

Kunstgjødsel inneholder nitrogen i en form som plantene trenger og er helt nødvendig for å fø 8 milliarder mennesker. En bieffekt fra denne tilførselen av nitrogen er utslipp av lystgass (N2O) fra jordene. Lystgass er en kraftig klimagass, og disse utslippene står for omtrent 5% av menneskenes klimautslipp.  Forskningsgruppen til dagens gjest har funnet en bakterie som potensielt kan løse dette problemet. Den lever i jorda og konverterer lystgass til klimamessig ufarlig nitrogengass (N2.)

Welcome back to another episode of The Case.Report! This month Leah and Liam take on a case of nitrous oxide (N2O) toxicity at the TCR ED, a presentation which unfortunately seems to be on the rise both nationally and around the globe. Our adult in the room is Dr Deirdre McElwee, an EM Consultant based in Tullamore with discretionary training in toxicology completed at The Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney. Who better to help us tackle our toxicology case?!Follow along with the show notes at thecase.report, and tune in on ⁠Spotify⁠, ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠ or wherever you get your podcasts, and as always check out our Bluesky⁠,  ⁠Instagram⁠,  ⁠Facebook⁠ and ⁠X⁠ to keep updated with all things TCR.Right then, let's get to it!

Tăng cường kiểm tra, ngăn chặn và xử lý nghiêm vi phạm về thuốc lá thế hệ mới - Gần nửa tháng thực hiện Nghị quyết số 173/2024 của Quốc hội khóa XV, các hoạt động sản xuất, kinh doanh, nhập khẩu, vận chuyển, chứa chấp và sử dụng thuốc lá điện tử, shisha và khí N2O còn gọi là “bóng cười" chính thức bị cấm. Tuy nhiên, các hoạt động kinh doanh thuốc lá điện tử và thuốc lá nung nóng vẫn lén lút diễn ra trên cả thị trường truyền thống và đặc biệt trên thị trường thương mại điện tử. Chủ đề : Tăng cường kiểm tra, xử lý nghiêm vi phạm, thuốc lá thế hệ mới

Lần đầu tiên cơ quan chức năng xử lý hình sự vụ buôn bán khí N2O hay còn gọi là "bóng cười" có số lượng đặc biệt lớn - Một đường dây nhập lậu và tiêu thụ sai mục đích hàng nghìn tấn khí N2O hay còn gọi là “khí cười” vừa bị cơ quan Công an thành phố Hà Nội triệt phá thành công. Điều đặc biệt, đây là vụ việc lần đầu tiên mà những vi phạm trong lĩnh vực nhập khẩu, kinh doanh khí N2O với số lượng đặc biệt lớn, phân phối từ Bắc vào Nam bị xử lý hình sự. Chủ đề : Bóng cười, Khí N2O --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

Chaque année, le 21 octobre, c'est la journée mondiale des vers de terre. Ce hors-série avec Christophe Gatineau, l'auteur de L'Éloge du ver de terre, lui est dédié._______Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides.Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre.Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols.Ils n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent.Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre.Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans.Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture.Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000._______

Chaque année, le 21 octobre, c'est la journée mondiale des vers de terre. Ce hors-série avec Christophe Gatineau, l'auteur de L'Éloge du ver de terre, lui est dédié._______Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides.Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre.Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols.Ils n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent.Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre.Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans.Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture.Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000._______

Nitrogen is absolutely essential for all forms of life, plants, animals and microbes. Nitrogen is the basis for making amino acids, and amino acids are the basis for making proteins, enzymes. The historic nitrogen system was balanced and based on microbial activity transforming atmospheric nitrogen into soluable forms usable by plants and microbes. Eric Davidson's has been working to transform our food systems through better understanding terestrial nutrient cycling, cycling, greenhouse gas emissions from soils, global biogeochemical cycles, and how they impact sustainable agriculture. Charles Brooke has been working to accelerate the rate of action and innovation in reducing the climate impact of livestock production. He leads Spark Climate Solutions livestock enteric methane mitigation program.The modern nitrogen system is based on the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilzers produced through the energy intensive Haber-Bosch process developed just prior to World War I to manufacture munitions. The impact of this sythetic nitrogen has spread far beyond conflict. Synthetic nitrogen has enabled our modern food systems to produce enough food to feed 8 billion people. It has also resulted in widespred nitrogen pollution in water ways and ever incresing levels of the potent greenhouse gas nitrous oxide. Synthetic fertiliser production has been so successful that today 50 - 60% of all the nitrogen in human bodies in humans actually comes from Habe-Bosch processes.From a warming perspective nitrous oxide (or N2O) is about 270 times more potent than is carbon dioxide. However, unlike CO2 where levels are somewhat plateauing, N2O levels continue to rise. The use of nitrogen fertilizer is hugely inefficient. Half of all fertilizer put on the ground is lost. Additionl losses occur when plant proteins are fed to animals prior to human consumption. Nitrogen 2.0 is focused on reducing nitrogen wastage and pollution, and increasing the circularity of nitrogen use. The three components are:Feeding nitrogen directly to livestockDecreasing the nitrogen required by and provided to cropsIncreasing the recycling of nitrogen in manure back into our cropping systems Eric Davidson is Professor of the Appalachian Laboratory of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. He is also a Principal Scientist at Spark Climate Solutions. His most recent book Science for a Green New Deal; Connecting Climate, Economics, and Social Justice was published by Johns Hopkins University Press in 2022.Send us a text

Lords: * Wacy * https://www.youtube.com/@WacyandChris * Chris * https://twitter.com/mrchrislhall Topics: * Difficulties with long term traveling * Norway * Why don't they have novelty whipped cream * The Dirt Man Song, by Carter Vail * https://genius.com/Carter-vail-dirt-man-lyrics Microtopics: * Specialty pour over filter coffee. * A very deep rabbit hole of discovery of flavors. * Drink the Machine: a Clean Metallic Flavor. * Wacy and Chris. * Chris or sounds like Chris. * Living near your friends and family and being able to see them any time you want. * Spot-it. * Explaining what "on air" means to someone who has never listened to the radio. * Why are flickering lights creepy? * Getting Winston ready for swim class. * The pressure to hyper-optimize. * Being in the place where you are all the time. * The world: it's really big and really full of stuff. * How to exist in a city where you don't speak the language. * Things you don't feel like maximizing. * Grocery store bagged salads. * Countries that are known for salads. * Eating nothing but pickled fish and salty licorice during your trip even though you hate both. * Being delighted by mediocre sushi. * How many times Topic Lords has been downloaded in Osaka. * Modern New-Age Scandinavian Food. * Gas station hot dogs in Norway. * Ordering a big slab of My Girlfriend is Not Hungry. * Ways Norway is familiar to Americans. * Walking around kicking the glaciers. * Bikepackers. * Giant highway ferries with six lanes of traffic. * Brown Cheese Waffles. * Daylight all night long. * Normal people going outside and walking their dogs at 1am. * The song that plays with the baby raccoon spinning in a circle. * A country that is extremely serious about tunnels. * Opening up your windows to let the cave air in. * Visiting the Arctic circle in the winter. * Good ideas, like Pesto Whipped Cream. * Orange Cream Whipped Cream. * The toothpaste tubes with the colored wedges. * Birthday Cake Coffee Creamer. * Guava-flavored beer foam. * Coffee creamer except for beer. * Chefs seeking out the worst food so they can understand exactly why it's bad. * The Friendly's Cone Head. * The Bad-Interesting Food Spectrum. * Sleep regression, or more generally how you don't always keep forward progress. * Why kids become picky eaters. * Replicating the texture of uncooked hot dog in a novelty whipped cream. * What whippets are for. * Original flavorless N2O tanks. * Using the word for amyl nitrite that signifies that you are a VCR owner and not a drug user. * How to not become dirt in the dirt lair. * The dirt man's tithe. * Lying to your kid about cosmology. * Pretending to believe the little lies as practice for believing big lies. * Reminding your mom to make a leprechaun trap. * Making fake boot prints to convince your kids that god is real. * Reindeer food. (It's just hay.) * All the years you didn't keep dirt under your pillow. * The dirt man's dirt man taking you even deeper down. * Lots of great places where the dirt man can be found.

Tiếp tục kiểm tra, phát hiện cơ sở kinh doanh khí N2O trái phép   - Từ đầu năm đến nay, lực lượng liên ngành thành phố Hà Nội đã tăng cường phối hợp kiểm tra, phát hiện nhiều vụ việc liên quan đến kinh doanh trái phép khí N2O hay còn gọi là bóng cười. Cho dù cơ quan chức năng đã đưa ra nhiều cảnh báo về nguy cơ ảnh hưởng tới sức khỏe khi sử dụng nhưng vì lợi nhuận, một số đối tượng vẫn dùng nhiều thủ đoạn, hình thức ngụy trang tinh vi để cất giấu và lén lút hoạt động kinh doanh. Chủ đề : kinh doanh, khí N2O, trái phép --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

Aus dem Krankenhaus zur Party: Distickstoffmonoxid, N2O oder einfach Lachgas, wird zunehmend zweckentfremdet: Ursprünglich medizinisch eingesetzt findest du das farblose Gas immer häufiger auf Partys und es landet sogar – gepusht durch soziale Medien wie Tik Tok – auf Spielplätzen. Und das ist gar nicht lustig! Im medizinischen Einsatz beim Zahnarzt, Plastischen Chirurgen oder unter der Geburt ist Lachgas sehr gut und sicher einsetzbar zur Schmerzlinderung und Angstreduktion. Doch missbräuchlich verwendet für den schnellen Kick, kann es zum gefährlichen Nervengift werden. Dabei sind Lachgas-Kartuschen, Öffner und Luftballons legal in Drogerien, Supermärkten oder online frei erhältlich. Jugendliche sind oft von der kurzzeitigen und euphorisierenden Wirkung dieses Gases begeistert. Doch nur wenige sind sich bewusst, dass es auch ernsthafte gesundheitliche Schäden verursachen kann. In dieser Folge möchte Cordelia Bewusstsein für die neue Trenddroge schaffen. Sie führt durch die Geschichte von Lachgas – von der Entdeckung bis hin zu seinem heutigen Einsatz in der Medizin. Cordelia erklärt, wie das Gas leider zunehmend missbraucht wird und welche Nebenwirkungen, Risiken und sogar Langzeitschäden es bergen kann. Wie kannst du mit dieser „Trend-Freizeitdroge” umgehen und wie erkennst du den Konsum? All das und mehr erfährst du in dieser neuen Folge von „GESUNDHEIT KANNST DU LERNEN“.

Nitrous Oxide (N2O)also known as “Laughing Gas”, is a colorless gas used to relax the body and mind. Our dentist typically use N2O in a 80:20 ratio: 80% Nitrous Oxide and 20% Oxygen. When Whippets are used at home, 100% of Nitrous Oxide is used. Whippets typically only last 10-15 minutes. Therefore when one Whippet is found, oftentimes there will be several more found near by. Whippets are usually found with a device called a “cracker.” Find out more by listening to this week's episode!

Lack of consensus on how to account for powerful greenhouse gases from agriculture is impeding policy development for net zero climate targets to ensure a just transition for farmers, the authors of a new scientific study have said. Many countries have signed up to net zero climate targets by 2050 - less than 26 years from now - which means no longer adding to the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere in a bid to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C. Can we achieve net zero? What this means for one of the main contributing emissions, carbon dioxide (CO2), is very clear, the study led by researchers at University of Galway notes. However, the team say their findings raise concerns over significant gaps in how countries should tackle powerful greenhouse gases which are intrinsically linked with farming - nitrous oxide (N2O), often considered a forgotten greenhouse gas, and methane. In the study, published in Nature Communications, Earth & Environment, the researchers analysed 3,000 scenarios of agricultural activities and land uses in Ireland out to the year 2100, using 10 definitions of net zero while also accounting for future emissions reductions via farm management and new technology. In order to meet targets using any of the definitions of net zero, the analysis found: Transformation of Ireland's agriculture and land sector is required, involving ambitious tree planting and wetland restoration. The increased biodiversity is needed alongside technical abatement measures such as low emission slurry spreading and anaerobic digestion of manures. Land use scenarios that achieved net zero had larger areas of rewetted peat soils, more than double the current area of forestry, and substantially lower meat and/or milk outputs relative to 2021. Maintaining milk production close to 2021 levels would require a reduction of up to 97% in suckler-beef output. Net zero definitions requiring the least dramatic changes in agriculture and land use include those focussed only on carbon dioxide - meaning no targets for nitrous oxide and methane - or those based on an alternative accounting approach ("GWP*") that attributes a "cooling" effect to a reduction in methane emissions. Net zero definitions requiring the most dramatic transformations - eg the largest reductions in milk and beef output - were those based on the long-term offset of cumulative emissions between 2050 and 2100 and those based on Irish methane emissions being capped based on a per-capita "fair share" of "allowable" global methane emissions. Colm Duffy, Research Fellow at University of Galway and co-lead author, said: "Our study shows just how much the national interpretation of net zero could shape Ireland's future landscape, with implications for the environment, the economy and rural communities. Choices that may seem difficult now will only become more difficult with delay - clarity is urgently needed to plan a just transition." David Styles, Associate Professor at University of Galway and study coordinator, said: "For carbon dioxide, net zero represents a clear, absolute target that is invaluable for strategic decision making. Including nitrous oxide and methane emissions from agriculture in national climate targets is crucial, but lacks consensus and involves contentious value judgements. Some targets may be perceived as unfair to Ireland, given that they either don't take into account the distinct warming effect of methane through time, or they disregard Ireland's outsize contribution to global milk and beef production. Other targets may be perceived as unfair by other countries because they allow Ireland to maintain disproportionately high emissions of methane (and nitrous oxide)." George Bishop, Postdoctoral Researcher at University of Galway and co-lead author, concluded: "Actions like planting forests take time to deliver benefits. Delaying decisions due to fuzzy net zero goals makes the challenge harder, but also risks missing out on economic oppo...

Nitrous Oxide (N2O) sedation relieves anxiety and makes dental visits relaxing, even enjoyable. If your practice isn't utilizing N20 sedation, The Divas provides insights on the many benefits.  And for those already using N2O, how confident are you in your maintenance  protocols for delivery systems, tubing,  and nasal masks?  The Compliance Divas are a trusted source for consistent, accurate information, based on guidelines, standards, science, and recommendations.Resources:ADHA State requirements for hygienists and nitrous oxide  https://bit.ly/3PLlf8vDANB Dental assistants functions by state: https://bit.ly/3PJtditAccutron Nitrous Oxide/Oxygen Sedation Solutions https://www.hufriedygroup.com/en/accutron Accutron - Nasal Masks Samples https://bit.ly/3vzfXWQAccutron - Reprocessing Instructions for Scavenging Circuits  https://bit.ly/3VOqKH8 https://www.thecompliancedivas.com

This episode of Blue Notes dives into the world of water innovation. Join Divya and Rhys as they discuss the upcoming Bluetech Forum in Edinburgh, Scotland (June 3rd-4th), where industry leaders will explore the latest water tech solutions.They then shift gears to chat about a critical environmental issue: greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater treatment plants. They highlight a new Bluetech Research report on measuring and reducing nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, the biggest culprit. Learn about effective strategies for tackling this challenge.Looking to the future, the conversation explores the role of sensors and data in transforming the water industry. But it's not all smooth sailing - discover the challenges of integrating various technologies and ensuring cybersecurity.Divya and Rhys wrap up by sharing some recent industry news, including a surprising bankruptcy and a major company facing wastewater discharge violations. Plus, get a sneak peek at Bluetech Research's upcoming investigations into reverse osmosis, Legionella control, and advancements in biological treatment processes.--Presented by BlueTech Research, Actionable Water Technology Market Intelligence.Join us at BlueTech Forum 2024 in Edinburgh, Scotland! Stay tuned for the world premiere of Brave Blue World in March 2024.

Le carburant des bateaux de marchandise est un fioul lourd difficile à brûler. Sa combustion rejette du dioxyde de carbone (CO2), du méthane (CH4) et du protoxyde d'azote (N2O), les principaux gaz responsables du réchauffement climatique. En définitive, les navires utilisant un fioul lourd émettent 3 500 fois plus de particules fines que le diesel. Pour (enfin) décarboner ce secteur, Guillaume Le Grand a fondé TOWT, le premier armateur Français de transport trans océanique à la voile. Il était au micro de Christophe Meunier-Jacob.

Humusaufbau ist Klimaschutz – oder? Macht uns das Lachgas einen Strich durch die Rechnung? Wir schauen uns eine Übersichtsstudie an.

Le secteur du #transport émet à lui seul 32 % de CO2 au niveau national, 27 % en Europe et 23 % au niveau mondial. Sa décarbonation dépend de tous les acteurs : industriels, opérateurs, mainteneurs, pouvoirs publics, consommateurs. Chacun doit faire sa part. l'ONG Transport & Environnement travaille sur cet enjeu majeur depuis de nombreuses années. Et pour en parler ce matin, nous recevons Nicolas RAFFIN, son porte parole. "En 2019, les concentrations atmosphériques de CO2 (dioxyde de carbone) ont été les plus élevées depuis au moins 2 millions d'années et les concentrations de CH4 (méthane) et de N2O (protoxyde d'azote) ont été les plus élevées depuis au moins 800 000 ans. Depuis 1750, les augmentations des concentrations de CO2 (47 %) et de CH4 (156 %) dépassent largement [...] l'ampleur de leurs variations naturelles plurimillénaires entre les périodes glaciaires et interglaciaires des derniers 800 000 ans au moins." Ce paragraphe est tiré du 6ème Rapport du 1er Groupe de Travail du GIEC. Ce rapport date de 2021. Il est mis à jour tous les 6 ans. Il est important de rappeler l'urgence de limiter le plus possible les émissions de GES simultanément à la nécessaire adaptation de nos modes de vie et de nos infrastructures pour limiter le plus possible la hausse des températures les événements météorologiques et climatiques de plus en plus extrêmes. Le premier secteur concerné reste le transport. Véhicules électriques, Hybrides rechargeables, taille et pouids des véhicules, nouveaux carburants de synthèse pour le secteur aérien, de quoi parle-t-on vraiment ? Nicolas Raffin dresse l'état des lieux des vraies et fausses solutions.

Kiểm tra, phát hiện và thu giữ lượng lớn khí N2O với nhiều chiêu thức tinh vi - Thực hiện kế hoạch cao điểm kiểm tra kiểm soát thị trường, bảo đảm trật tự, an toàn giao thông, trật tự xã hội Tết Nguyên đán Giáp Thìn và các Lễ hội đầu xuân 2024, các lực lượng chức năng đã tăng cường kiểm tra, kiểm soát thị trường và phát hiện nhiều vụ san, chiết khí N2O trái phép, thu giữ số lượng lớn. Điều đáng nói, hành vi vi phạm của đối tượng này ngày càng tinh vi, nhằm tránh sự kiểm tra, giám sát của cơ quan chức năng. Cụ thể, lực lượng chức năng phát hiện một số điểm san chiết khí cười ngụy trang trong khu vực bãi xe; thuê chung cư cao cấp để chứa bình khí cười để bán qua mạng xã hội; san chiết khí N2O vào các bình chứa mini, cho vào túi đựng đồ thể thao rồi vận chuyển khí cười đi tiêu thụ. Chủ đề : thu giữ, khí N2O, tinh vi --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

We review Nitrous Oxide Toxicity: Symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment overview Hosts: Stefanie Biondi, MD Brian Gilberti, MD https://media.blubrry.com/coreem/content.blubrry.com/coreem/Nitrous_Oxide_Toxicity.mp3 Download Leave a Comment Tags: Toxicology Show Notes Patient Case Illustration Hypothetical case: 21-year-old male with no previous medical history, experiencing a month of progressively worsening numbness, tingling, and weakness. Initially starting in his toes and spreading to his hips, and later involving his hands, the symptoms eventually escalated to the point of immobilization. Despite initially denying drug use, the patient admitted to using 40-60 canisters of nitrous oxide (whippets) every weekend for the last three months. Background and Recreational Use of Nitrous Oxide Nitrous oxide, a colorless, odorless gas with anesthetic properties. Synthesized in the 18th century. Its initial medical purpose expanded into recreational use due to its euphoric effects. Resurgence as a recreational drug during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Accessibility and legal status. Public Misconceptions and Health Consequences There are widespread misconceptions about nitrous oxide Particularly the belief in its safety and lack of long-term health risks. Contrary to popular belief, frequent use of nitrous oxide can lead to significant, sometimes irreversible, health issues. Neurological Examination and Diagnosis

Cận Tết Nguyên đán Giáp Thìn, tăng cường kiểm tra, ngăn chặn kinh doanh khí cười trái phép  - Do nhu cầu tăng cao, siêu lợi nhuận cùng cách thức mua hàng nhanh gọn đã khiến cho việc kinh doanh khí N2O (hay còn gọi là cười) chưa có dấu hiệu dừng lại. Dự báo, dịp cận Tết Nguyên đán Giáp Thìn và suốt mùa lễ hội 2024, tình hình vận chuyển, kinh doanh khí N2O diễn biến phức tạp, lực lượng quản lý thị trường đã phối hợp với cơ quan chức năng có kế hoạch tăng cường kiểm tra, ngăn chặn tình trạng kinh doanh khí cười trái phép. Chủ đề : ngăn chặn, kinh doanh, khí cười, trái phép --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

A little N2O for the NYE --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/processingpodcast/message

In this episode, Peter Lehner, head of the food and farming sustainability program at Earthjustice, gives his expert perspective on the upcoming Farm Bill and its potential impact on agricultural decarbonization in the US.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsAs longtime subscribers know — indeed, as the name makes plain — Volts is primarily focused on the energy side the climate fight. I haven't paid much attention to agriculture over the years. I understand that agriculture is a huge piece of the puzzle, both for decarbonization and for sustainability more generally. It's just not really been my jam.However! The Farm Bill — which requires reauthorization every five years — is likely to pass in coming months, and it is arguably the most important climate bill Congress will address this session.To talk me through the agriculture/climate nexus and discuss opportunities in the upcoming Farm Bill, I contacted Peter Lehner. He is the head of Earthjustice's food and farming sustainability program, and the author of Farming for Our Future: The Science, Law, and Policy of Climate-Neutral Agriculture.We talked about how US agriculture has evaded environmental laws and become the source of 30 percent of US greenhouse gas emissions, ways that the upcoming Farm Bill can be tweaked to better fight climate change, and what's next for agriculture decarbonization.Peter Lehner of Earthjustice, welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming on.Peter LehnerGreat to be here, Dave.David RobertsAs you may know, if you have read my work over the years or followed me at all, I'm pretty heavily, deeply into the energy world as the source of most of my time and attention in the climate fight. I know on some level, partially because I've been lectured by people numerous times over the years, that agriculture is a big piece of the puzzle — and land use and oceans, which are other things that I also don't spend much time on. And I fully acknowledge that they're important, they're just not my personal passion. However, I've felt vaguely guilty about that for years.And I know the Farm Bill is coming up, which is a significant marker, I think, possibly the source of some significant action. We'll discuss that in a while. But at the very least a good excuse, I think, for me to check in and just sort of see like, what's the state of climate and agriculture, you know, action stuff, what's going on there? So, that's what you're here for, Peter, because you are the expert author of a book on the subject, numerous podcasts, been studying this for a long time. So before we get into the Farm Bill, just maybe — I know that the subject of the ties between agriculture and climate and carbon and methane greenhouse gases is very complicated.You've written entire books on the subject. But I wonder, for people like me who have had their nose mostly in the energy world, if you could just summarize relatively quickly what are the big kind of buckets where agriculture overlaps with carbon and decarbonization and climate generally? What are the big areas of concern that people should have their eyes on?Peter LehnerSure, you know, I should say, Dave, that I came to this really the same as you. I'd been working on energy issues for a very long time. For three decades, I've sued many power plants. I've worked on many different environmental laws dealing with regulation of the power sector. And what happened is, over time, doing general environmental law for New York State, for NRDC, for Earthjustice where I am now, I kept seeing the impact of agriculture as really being enormous and impeding our ability to achieve our environmental and health goals unless it was addressed. So that's why I'm focusing on this now.But like you, I think most environmentalists focus much more on the industrial sector, the power sector, the transportation sector. And part of what I've come to realize is that we all should pay a lot more attention to the agriculture sector. And we'll talk about the Farm Bill coming up. But really the Farm Bill is the biggest environmental law Congress will address that most people have never heard of. Now why is that? So, I'll tell you quickly. First, agriculture uses most of our land. It uses about two thirds of the contiguous U.S.David RobertsCan I pause you there?Peter LehnerSure.David RobertsThat took me two or three seconds to catch up with that before my mind blew. Two thirds of the land of the contiguous United States is devoted to agriculture?Peter Lehner62%, yeah. And that's about using rounder numbers, about 400 million acres of cropland. About half of that is used to grow food that people eat, and about half of that is growing food that animals eat. And close to 800 million acres of grazing land, some of that is federal land, some of that is state land. A lot of that is private land. But all told, it's over a billion acres of land, almost all in the lower 48 is used for agriculture.David RobertsThat is wild.Peter LehnerSo think about it. If you fly anywhere and look out the window, what do you see? You really see agriculture, whether it be the irrigation circles or just the fields or whatever. That's what has transformed our landscape. And part of the result of that, of course, is agriculture is really the biggest driver of biodiversity loss. So much of biodiversity loss is habitat loss. And look, I've spent decades working on issues like grizzly bears and wolves. But what those issues are at bottom is agriculture because we are grazing in grizzly and wolf territory. And so much of habitat loss, whether it be land or polluted waters, is driving other biodiversity loss.So in addition to that, what I was going to mention is the environmental laws that you're probably familiar with, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act have actually done a pretty good job of addressing air and water pollution from industrial sources, from the energy sector. But they really have not done a very good job addressing air and water pollution from agriculture, whether it be these hundreds of millions of acres of row crops. Or these hundreds of million acres of grazing. Or these more industrial scale facilities where thousands or tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of animals are crammed together into buildings — those are called concentrated animal feeding operations. Those are now the largest source of water pollution in the country.David RobertsDid the laws pass over them or just inadequately address them?Peter LehnerA little bit of both. What happened was in 1972, say, when the Clean Water Act was passed, Congress really wasn't thinking that much about agriculture. But also agriculture has changed tremendously since then. It has become so much more industrial. So that a small number of facilities that are gargantuan produce, for example, almost all of our meat, but those didn't exist in 1970. And as you probably know, in the Clean Water Act, it did a good job dealing with pollution coming out of a pipe. But pollution, say, coming off of city streets, that's called non-point source pollution.The regulation was much less strong, and they relied more on grants and education and sort of nudges, as we say. And much of agriculture — 400 million acres of cropland, 800 million acres of grazing land — that's not, by and large, water pollution coming out of a pipe. So essentially, the Clean Water Act doesn't cover it. And similarly, the Clean Air Act does a great job of addressing stuff coming out of smokestacks. And while there's some, like from these concentrated animal feeding operations, there's very concentrated air pollution coming out of the vents. But out of all of those acres of cropland and grazing land, those are called area sources under the Clean Air Act and are addressed much, much less.But still, air pollution from agriculture, I bet this would surprise most of your readers, kills about 17,000 people a year. It's a major source of air pollution in this country.And that is mostly methane or other criteria pollutants?Methane is actually one of the ways agriculture drives climate change. It's actually other pollutants, largely ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, which come from overfertilization and animal waste. And ammonia is a major precursor to the fine particulate matter that gets into our lungs and causes disease and kills us.David RobertsWhich we're finding out, as I've covered on the pod, is worse. You known, every time a new round of science comes out, we find out it's worse than we thought.Peter LehnerYeah. And in a place like, say, the San Joaquin Valley in central California, which has some of the worst air quality in the country, almost all of that PM, that fine particulate matter, is driven by animal agriculture.David RobertsAnd I'm also going to guess maybe you're going to get to this, but that when you take wild land and make it into agricultural land, the land subsequently captures and holds less carbon.Peter LehnerMuch less carbon. So one of the reasons why I think people don't realize that agriculture drives about as much climate change as our transportation sector is — and think about that for a minute, it drives as much climate change as our transportation sector — and yet most of the time there are conversations about climate change and conversations about agriculture. But until recently, those have been two separate conversations. Say in 2018, when we were working on the Farm Bill then, there was virtually no discussion of climate change in the 2018 Farm Bill.David RobertsI'll admit I don't think of it that way in the mental category in my head when I'm thinking about major sources.Peter LehnerYeah, well, why is that? I think that's because when we think about climate change, most people think about climate change, you think about burning fossil fuels and releasing carbon dioxide.David RobertsRight.Peter LehnerAnd that's climate change for most people. Agriculture's contribution to climate change has some of that. Agriculture uses actually a fair amount of energy for, say, irrigation and tractors and of course, food processing later on down the road. But most of agriculture's contribution to climate change is from other sources.David RobertsRight. Which is to say that even if we clean up energy sources, which everybody is working on, and even if the energy inputs to agriculture, you drive the tractors with whatever, electric tractors or electric irrigators, whatever, even if it's zero carbon energy fueling agriculture, that still leaves most of agriculture's contribution to climate change untouched.Peter LehnerExactly, that's true. And even more frightening, even if we do clean up our energy system and our industrial system to a no carbon situation where we hope to of course, that's where we're putting so much effort into, we will still almost certainly face catastrophic climate change because of the contribution of agriculture alone. In other words, if we do everything else perfectly and we don't change our agriculture system and don't address agriculture's contribution to climate change, we are blowing past 1.5 degrees centigrade, blowing past two degrees.David RobertsSo you think just taking the U.S.: The U.S. can't meet its stated Paris climate targets without reforming agriculture?Peter LehnerThat's basically correct. So let me explain a minute why this is the case. Agriculture's contribution to climate change: First, think about methane, which you've mentioned most people think about methane, oil and gas, right?David RobertsYeah.Peter LehnerActually, cows and animal agriculture emit more methane in the U.S. and around the world than the oil and gas sector. Most of that methane is called enteric methane. It's essentially belching and exhaling of cows. And their stomachs are different than ours. That's why they can eat grass in a way that you and I can't. But every time they breathe out, they're breathing out a lot of methane. So that is an enormous source of methane, which I'm sure your listeners know is more than 80 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over 20 years.David RobertsNobody thought they're innovating a better cow, are they? That seems like fewer cows is the only solution to that. I mean, maybe we're going to touch on solutions later so maybe we should save this. But just like that doesn't seem like a technologically solvable problem. You just need fewer cows.Peter LehnerMost studies have shown that fewer cows, and therefore the consequent part of that is shifting diets to less beef-heavy is one of the fastest, most effective and cost-effective climate strategies and really has to be a part of any strategy. There are things you can do. Breeding has reduced the methane emissions per pound of beef. The way you raise the cows can make a difference. The way you graze them can make a difference. How long they live before they're slaughtered can make a difference. There is some research into feed additives that you'd feed cows, and that changes the bacteria in their gut to produce a little less methane.David RobertsOh, interesting.Peter LehnerAnd all of these are important. There's not one solution. But I think what is unfortunate is sometimes it's viewed by industry as only a technical solution. And the reality is it has to be both technical and essentially demand side. So, the other way methane is produced is manure. There's all those animals. We've got about 50 times more waste produced by animals than by humans in the United States.David Roberts50 times more?Peter LehnerYeah. Those animals produce a lot of waste. One dairy cow, for example, can produce about as much waste as 200 people.David RobertsJesus Christ.Peter LehnerSo all that waste, most of it sits in lagoons or essentially is handled in such a way that it creates a lot of methane. So that's another way that methane is produced and agriculture contributes to climate change.David RobertsWhen people talk about lagoons, I just want to clarify here, they just take all the manure and slough it into a giant pond of manure where it then sits. Is that what people are talking about when they talk about lagoons? There's not any fancy technical. It's just a big pool full of crap.Peter LehnerThat's basically correct. And that's the dominant way in both pig farms and dairy farms, we handle our waste. To get technical, when you put the manure into a big pit like this, because it's wet, there's water, it's transported by water, it is anaerobic. That means it doesn't have oxygen. So as it decomposes, it releases methane. And that is a really significant source of methane all around the country and contributes both locally, but also obviously, majorly to climate change. And I should say rice, also, rice production, also, if you think about it again, you have the image of a rice patty, it's flooded. So you have organic matter decomposing in an anaerobic, without oxygen, system releasing methane. But by far, most methane is from cow belching.David RobertsThat's the big source.Peter LehnerYes.David RobertsBigger than manure.Peter LehnerBigger than manure. Although manure is also very big, I don't want to minimize that. And the two together, again, are more than the oil and gas sector.David RobertsThat is wild. There's so much attention going to oil and gas methane right now, EPA rules coming, there's international treaties being signed, like on and on.Peter LehnerYep. And there should be. We obviously need to address those sources of methane. I think that what is often forgotten is we also have to address these other sources of methane. So the other reason it gets confusing is the other two ways agriculture contributes to climate change are also very different than burning fossil fuels. The second is that almost all of that cropland uses a lot of fertilizer. By and large, in the U.S. and around the world, people put on a lot more fertilizer than the plants take up, and a lot of nitrogen is added to the ground that is not absorbed by the plant.So where does that nitrogen go? Some of it runs off into the water, and then it causes eutrophication, algae outbreaks. It causes the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. It seeps into groundwater: You have heard of blue baby syndrome, which is too much nitrate in the groundwater. But some of it also goes into the air. And some of it goes into the air as NOx, which is sort of a local smog causing pollution. And some of it goes into the air as nitrous oxide. N2O nitrous oxide, which is about 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas and also one of the major drivers of ozone depletion, stratospheric ozone depletion.So this is a major source of climate change, nitrous oxide pollution alone, virtually all of which comes from agriculture, virtually all of which is this overfertilization and some coming from these manure pits that we talked about before. That alone is about 5% or six percent of U.S. greenhouse gases.David RobertsOh, wow.Peter LehnerSo again, it's not burning fossil fuels, but a major contribution to climate change. And then the last way agriculture contributes to climate change is what you alluded to earlier. When you convert land, say, native grasslands or forest in Brazil or forest in the U.S. to cropland, you take this carbon that is in those healthy soils or in the grass or in the trees, and you release it, and that goes into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. So you get two things: One is you get this slug of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when you convert land, this conversion of land from grassland to forest.But then the second part, which EPA is only beginning to really pay attention to, is what you can think of as the lost sequestration capacity. Healthy land, grassland, forest, land is this very dynamic, wonderful system that is sequestering carbon and storing carbon. And by contrast, cropland is really — the way we treat it often is largely biologically dead. It has very little carbon life in it. And that's why we have to put so many fertilizers in it.David RobertsIs that just because of monocrops? Is that just an inevitable result of monocrops?Peter LehnerI'm not sure it's absolutely inevitable. It's in large part because of the way we grow in these sort of chemical dependent monocultures, for sure. So you have both this slug of carbon when you convert land. But, hey, look, a lot of our cropland in the U.S. was converted 100 years ago. Every year, that is not sequestering nearly as much as it could. So you were losing the sequestration capacity. That 800 million acres of grazing land — think about that, it's about 40% of the contiguous U.S. And it has been overgrazed for decades. There are reports of John Wesley Powell going out west and saying, "Whoa!"He was sent out to look after exploring some more remote areas. But everywhere he saw cattle, he said the land is getting degraded. In 1934, Congress tried to address overgrazing and erosion and soil degradation. And then 1976, they tried to do it again, so far, really not to much avail, with the result that you have hundreds of millions of acres that aren't sequestering the carbon they could.David RobertsYeah, this came up in our Biofuels discussion a few weeks ago, too. A lot of new thinking about biofuels is taking that sort of counterfactual sequestration into account.Peter LehnerExactly. And you did a great podcast with my colleague Dan Lashof, and we're working together on biofuels. That was a great podcast you did there. So if you add all of this up, what you see is that agriculture has this enormous contribution to climate change, but it's so different than the way most people think about climate change. And what happens also is EPA sort of thinks about it differently. So, first of all, their classic greenhouse gas inventory puts, say, on farm energy in a different category. They don't put that in agriculture. They put that in energy, or they put that in the manufacturer fertilizer, which itself is enormously energy intensive and releases a lot of CO2.That's in a different chapter. Land use conversion, that carbon that I was telling you about, they put that in a different chapter, and they don't even think about, in their greenhouse gas inventory about the lost sequestration capacity, this opportunity cost. So if you just look at the inventory, EPA says that agriculture contributes about 11% of U.S. greenhouse gases. But if you actually think of agriculture as a sector all, what really goes into agriculture, and you include the land use impacts, which, as I said, are usually left out, that's where you get that agriculture is basically in a par with transportation and is about a quarter drives about a quarter of climate change.And then, if you include the rest of the food system, the processing, et cetera.David RobertsFood waste.Peter LehnerAnd food waste, of course, rotting in landfills, you've got about a third or more of climate change is driven by our food system. And that's why unless we change our food system, we're not going to address climate change adequately.David RobertsWild, okay. I want to get to the Farm Bill, but one final question, which is just my — and again, this is sort of my impression from the outside over the year — is that the agriculture industry has a level of power and influence in political circles that I think most people don't appreciate. That sort of makes the oil and gas sector look like patty cakes. It's amazing. I will never forget that Oprah — I don't know if other listeners are old enough to remember this — but Oprah said on her show once, basically, "You know, beef's bad, it's not very healthy and it destroys the environment."And got taken to task by the agriculture industry and they basically took her down and forced her to publicly apologize. And if you can take Oprah down, you've got muscle.Peter LehnerYeah. And it is certainly true. There's no question that the conventional or industrial agriculture lobby is very powerful in Congress. I would point out that there's a lot of great farmers who are trying to do things right and are working to produce food, healthy food, in a sustainable way. And we work with groups like the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which is itself a coalition of a lot of these groups, I wish they had the political power that conventional AG does because they do great stuff and they are really examples of what we want to be doing, how we can produce food in a way that doesn't pollute our air and water and that rebuilds soil health.But unfortunately, the political power is with the agrochemical industries, which are very dominant. They say the meat processing companies, four companies control 85% of the beef market. These are enormously politically powerful.David RobertsSo the Farm Bill then, before we get into the details of what the Farm Bill might do or what you want it to do, let's just talk about the Farm Bill as such. This is something that they pass every year or a set number of years because it just like comes up periodically. Is this something they have to do every session?Peter LehnerNo. So, the Farm Bill is so important, and for a long time, really, when it comes up, it's really only the farm community that pays attention to it. And I think what I hope you've heard is that everybody should pay attention to it. And that's why the Farm Bill is far more important than people realize. For all of us who eat, for all of us who breathe, for all of us who drink, the Farm Bill has an enormous impact. So what is the Farm Bill? The Farm Bill was first passed actually in the Depression in 1933. There was the Depression and hunger.There was the Dust Bowl, there was the crisis on farms. And so Congress stepped in. And I can give you a long history and I won't. But basically Congress did two things. One, they tried to address the hunger and they also tried to restrict supply, pay farmers not to produce, to keep prices high. And sometimes also buy some surplus to give that to the hungry also, but as a way of keeping the surplus off the market and keeping prices high.David RobertsThat's why the Farm Bill has this weird structure where it has food subsidies for the poor in it, which I think, on the surface, seems like just an odd artifact.Peter LehnerYeah. And it's also essentially a political marriage. So, the Farm Bill, on one hand, provides nutrition assistance, now called SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance, formerly Food SNAP, that helps feed about 45 million Americans every year, and that right now provides about $75-80 billion a year. It also then provides about $20 billion a year in farm subsidies. And ever since it was passed in 1933, it was amended a few times. But basically, it has to get reenacted, reauthorized every five years. And if it doesn't, these programs on which so many people depend basically stop. They won't continue without being reauthorized.So the last Farm Bill that was fully enacted was in 2018, and so it expired September 30, 2023. There was still a little extra money hanging around, so we had a couple of months. But then what Congress just did a couple of weeks ago in the continuing resolution that funded the government up to January 19, they also agreed to extend the Farm Bill until September 30, 2024.David RobertsSuch a rational —Peter LehnerYeah, exactly. We're covered right now. But it ends up being enormously important because it provides this nutrition assistance for, as I said, 45 million Americans. Really important. And it also has a series of different programs that provide enormous subsidies to farmers. And those subsidies, when you put them together, have an enormous impact on what is grown, where it's grown, how it's grown, and all of that for the reasons I was just explaining about how agriculture affects our environment, and climate change has an enormous impact on the environment. And that's why the Farm Bill is actually the most important environmental law Congress is going to address in the next couple of years.And unlike our other environmental laws that haven't been amended for decades, this one is amended every five years.David RobertsI'm so interested in the SNAP thing. I mean, it's a big safety net program, correct? That's been around since 1933, I am assuming, in fact, I know to be the case that conservatives hate social safety programs generally, and I bet they hate SNAP. So what is the magic sauce that has allowed this extremely large subsidy for poor people to survive what I can only assume are repeated conservative attempts to weaken or get rid of it? Is there some reason it has stayed in? How has it survived, I guess, is what I'm asking.Peter LehnerLook, I'm not the super political expert here, but what people have said who know this and have worked with this is, you essentially have a marriage. You have the Democrats that support the Nutrition Assistance Program, and by and large, Republicans support the farmer subsidies and neither has enough support to get either of those through separately. And in some ways there's something good there, which is that the Farm Bill has always been pretty bipartisan. And for example, right now Senator Stabenow, who is the Democratic Chair of the Senate AG Committee, and Senator Boozman who's the Republican ranking member of the Senate AG Committee, are really trying to work together because history is that this Farm Bill doesn't get passed unless it's bipartisan.David RobertsDefinitionally it will have to be this time, right?Peter LehnerExactly.David RobertsIt's going to have to go through a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. I mean, is it viewed is it widely accepted as sort of must pass, like they are going to figure something out or is there any chance at all that it could just lapse?Peter LehnerI don't think there's really any chance it would just lapse because that would largely end these programs on which so many Americans, both the Americans who need it for food — and by the way, it's often thought of as though those are urban Americans and rural Americans are the farmers. That's not the case. There are people all around the country and in many places rural communities at even higher rates that depend on SNAP assistance, on food assistance. So this is really important to everybody. And of course producing food is important. So the farm safety net is important.What could happen is, I suppose, even though I think both the House and the Senate agriculture leaders are saying they're going to work very hard to get a new Farm Bill out in the spring of 2024, if that doesn't happen, potentially they could just extend it for another year the way they just did.David RobertsThat does seem like the way we do things.Peter LehnerRight. It's not ideal, but I don't think, and people who know this area better than I do, I don't think the chances of the law just ending completely is really in the cards.David RobertsSo they're going to figure something out, so they're going to pass something. So this is a chance to get some good things through.Peter LehnerRight. And there's some good things in. And I should say one of the important elements here is the Inflation Reduction Act. And you've probably talked about that a lot and mostly focused on the many billions of dollars that went to clean energy programs. But the Inflation Reduction Act also put $20 billion into essentially Farm Bill programs, preexisting Farm Bill programs, which pay farmers to implement conservation measures. And those have always been oversubscribed, which means more farmers apply for this assistance than can get it. So the Inflation Reduction Act put an extra close to $20 billion over four years into these conservation programs, but with a twist, which we think is terrific.Most of these conservation programs are for a wide range of resource concerns: water quality, air quality, habitat, and others. In the Inflation Reduction Act these have to be conservation practices focused on reducing net greenhouse gases.David RobertsInteresting.Peter LehnerSo this was the first time — in the Inflation Reduction Act — that Congress really, in any way, really linked agriculture and climate change and said, "Here's $20 extra billion, but you got to spend it on climate change."David RobertsRight. So AG did not get completely overlooked then, in this last session, in this last round, because yeah, I hadn't really paid attention to that. I had kind of thought it was like the redheaded stepchild that got passed over. So there is $20 billion is not pocket change either.Peter LehnerNo, it's a lot of money. As I said, right now, the core Farm Bill gives farmers about $20 billion in subsidies every year. But most of those subsidies are not for conservation programs. A lot of that is for what are called either commodity support, where essentially a farmer gets paid, based on what he grew in the past, if the market price or his revenue goes below a certain price. So it's essentially a price guarantee called the reference price.David RobertsIt's an extremely Soviet sector of our economy.Peter LehnerYeah. And it's largely almost three-quarters of that goes to corn and soybean, which of course, is largely used either for animal feed or for ethanol. And then we also have crop insurance, which, again, that makes a lot of sense. We all want to eat. We need food security, there should be crop insurance. In this case, the premiums are very heavily subsidized by the taxpayer. Over 60% subsidized. And again, over about three-quarters of crop insurance went to corn, soy, wheat and cotton, those four big crops. And what happens, the environmental impact of that is it encourages farmers to essentially plant in riskier areas, which tend to be the more ecologically sensitive areas, because if it works out, they get all the benefit, and if it doesn't work out, the taxpayer funded crop insurance pays them off.David RobertsLittle moral hazard there.Peter LehnerRight, exactly. And then the last bit is these conservation programs, which got this big boost in the Inflation Reduction Act.David RobertsIs there any reason to think that that 20 billion is threatened in some way, or is that pretty secure? Is that part of the Farm Bill fight those subsidies?Peter LehnerYou nailed it. Absolutely. Much of what we've been hearing are ideas of how to essentially — we think of it as a raid on that money, that $20 billion. And some would say, well, let's put it to a broader range of conservation issues like irrigation or something, and others would say keep it within agriculture, but instead let's use it to sort of lift, say, the price guarantee that peanut farmers get. And we have been pushing very hard to try to keep this money and keep it climate focused. And fortunately, Senator Stabenow, who, as I said, is the chair of the Senate AG Committee, has been very, very firm.She has repeatedly said that it's not going to happen that we're going to lose this. Because this is really an extraordinary investment. It's big boost in conservation funding and the fact that it is climate focused is really important because this is where there has not been enough attention over the past and where there's really great opportunities. I think it's important just to pause for a moment and just remind there's a lot of things farmers can do, and some farmers are already doing, that can make a big difference in how much nitrous oxide you release, how much methane you release, how much carbon is stored in your soil. And the trouble is most of those practices are only used on about 2% or 3% of American farmland.So we know what we want to do and this is a way to really accelerate the adoption of those practices.David RobertsSo would you say that's the biggest priority here, the biggest fight, the biggest priority for the Farm Bill is preserving that money for its intended purpose?Peter LehnerYes, with a slight caveat. One is we definitely want to save the Inflation Reduction Act money, but the Farm Bill money is separate. The Inflation Reduction Act directed additional money into Farm Bill programs. But the Farm Bill itself provides money. And so we're going to want to be sure that we continue what's called the baseline amount of funding for the conservation programs in the Farm Bill and ideally make sure that those are better targeted, also more closely targeted to climate issues. And actually the federal government itself, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resource Conservation Service has studied these practices that they're funding and they themselves have found that some of them are actually counterproductive.Needless to say, we'd like to say let's not have the taxpayer subsidize practices that the government itself recognizes are counterproductive. Let's focus on the best practices, the ones that have the best climate and environmental impact. And since there's a lot of farmer interest in these, let's really put our money where it can make the biggest difference.David RobertsYeah. So fights over the money and you mentioned also in your blogs on this subject, speaking of research, that AG research in general is undercooked, underfunded. Is there a chance to get more of that in the Farm Bill?Peter LehnerWe are certainly hoping. And again, there's two or three elements of that under President Obama, he started these climate hubs which were really areas to focus on climate aspects of agriculture. There's been a lot of research but most of it has been on productivity and what you can think of as just classic conventional agriculture chemicals. So one is to get more research. Unfortunately, publicly funded research has dropped in the U.S. And when that gets its place taken by private funded research; it's not on things like climate change, it's on things like seeds that you can sell.And then the other is that that research — so, we need more, we need it to be better focused on sustainable practices rather than on unsustainable practices. And we need it to be essentially guaranteed because research is a long-term process. If you just do it for a couple of years, you may not, especially in agriculture, things take time. And so, we need a long-term commitment to these climate hubs and to research and sustainable agriculture. There was a study done by, I think it was UC Davis — I'm not sure — that every dollar in agricultural research has over $20 in payback.It's one of the most cost-effective ways we can spend research dollars. So that's a real opportunity for us.David RobertsAnd you also mentioned the crop insurance program, which I think most — even if you just explain that to a person on the street, the opportunities for that to encourage bad behavior seem quite obvious from the structure of the thing. Are substantial reforms to that on the table at all, or is that a subject of discussion?Peter LehnerI think it's a subject of some discussion and a lot of people in different ways want to make sure we get the best benefit. They recognize we do want crop insurance because it's important to recognize crops are sort of different. Most insurance is sort of trying to pool risk. So if my house burns down, I get covered. But if my house burns down, it probably doesn't mean your house is burning down. But with crops, if I have a bad crop, chances are my neighbor does too. That's why I think some amount of government involvement in crop insurance makes sense.You really have to sort of spread the risk around. And of course, food security is really important for our country. So we want to keep crop insurance, but we also want to do it to incentivize behavior that minimizes risk. And in particular, as climate change is affecting farmers more and more with droughts and floods and changing weather patterns and increased pests, we'd like to ensure that our crop insurance system is encouraging farmers to use practices that minimize risk. Unfortunately, right now a lot of the practices that farmers use actually enhance risk. They make them more vulnerable to floods and droughts.And the good news here is that many of the same practices that the Inflation Reduction Act will be funding that will help mitigate or curb climate change will also help farmers adapt or prepare for climate change or better respond and manage climate change. The same ones that mitigate can help build resilience. And that's a real opportunity.David RobertsAnd what about the Rural Energy for America program, REAP as it's called? This came up when I raised the subject on Twitter. This came up a couple of times. Is that on your radar?Peter LehnerIt is not as much. So, I'm not an expert. But there again, there was money in the Inflation Reduction Act to help convert some of the rural energies, which I remember from my time working on energy are some of the dirtiest parts of the power sector and there's great opportunity in rural communities. One thing they have is a lot of land. And so it's a great opportunity to shift from, say, an old dirty coal plant to solar and wind. And I think that's what the Inflation Reduction Act funding will help accelerate.David RobertsAnd the final thing you mentioned in your blogs was transparency. This is another thing where on the energy side I've been following, there's a lot of talk about this, a lot of talk about like California just passed a law that forces large industrial users to report their scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. So there's a lot of work on transparency on the energy side, I'm guessing giant AG corporations are not super transparent. What can be done on that front?Peter LehnerWell, we need to keep pushing that. That is a real problem. And I think it's a problem both in the specifics that there's very little transparency and it's not over agriculture's contribution to climate change, but agriculture's conventional air pollution. I mentioned earlier that say these concentrated animal feeding operations are the country's largest sources of hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, which are poisonous gases. And EPA for a long time exempted them from reporting under the federal statutes. And we actually sued EPA and said that exemption was illegal and the court agreed with us. And then the industry was powerful enough during the Trump administration to get Congress to amend the environmental laws —David RobertsHoly crap.Peter Lehnerto exempt them from — and again, this is just reporting their poisonous emissions.David RobertsIs there any plausible cover story for that or is that just a pure power play like we don't want to?Peter LehnerIt's hard not to see it as a power play because of course, reporting is, I think, by industry seen as the first step to potential oversight or regulation.David RobertsHeaven forbid.Peter LehnerWe were talking earlier how nobody really understands how much agriculture contributes to climate change. And of course, if they don't understand that, there's going to be no pressure politically to address that contribution. And unfortunately, right now, agriculture doesn't have to report their greenhouse gas emissions. There's been a rider in Congress for almost a decade prohibiting EPA from making industrial agriculture report its greenhouse gas emissions. And there's already proposals in Congress that if the SEC rule requiring reporting ever comes out to try to exempt agriculture from that, there has been pushback in almost every way of having agriculture to report their emissions.And the sad reality is these emissions are real. They're either causing climate change or they're causing local air pollution or both. And not reporting them doesn't mean they don't cause climate change. It just means we're not going to address them as effectively. So it's really important that people begin to understand that this is a sector that has tremendous impact and we've got to be much more open about it so that we can address it in a way that makes sense. And look, we all eat: We need to have a food sector. Nobody is saying that we should get rid of the food sector in any way.Agriculture is super important, not only to the country overall, but to every state. But we also know enough today to be able to produce healthier food in a much more sustainable way.David RobertsYeah, you've laid out some specific stuff that sort of climate aware people are pursuing here. Preserving the IRA money for conservation programs, beefing up those conservation programs, aiming those conservation programs more at climate change, beefing up research, reforming the federal crop insurance program, increasing transparency. Give me a sort of realpolitik assessment. How should we think about the chances of these good things happening? Unlike on the energy side, where nothing passing at all was always an extremely real and looming possibility here, something's got to pass. Right? So what do you think are the chances of this good stuff getting in there?Like what's? Sort of the balance of political forces? And I'm thinking specifically about the House, the Republican House, which is, as you might have heard, insane and incompetent.Peter LehnerSo I think breaking it into two pieces: Senator Stabenow is so strong on protecting the climate focused conservation funding of the Inflation Reduction Act that I would like to feel that we can think that that will remain. And that's really important. And that, of course, is going to be helping. I think it's important to remember this is money that then goes to hundreds of thousands of farmers who want to spend the money in good ways.David RobertsThis is not against farmers. None of this is against farmers.Peter LehnerNot at all. More farmers have applied for these programs than could get it. Two out of three farmers in the past have been turned away because we didn't have enough money. So this is money that is going right to farmers doing exactly what they want and what we as a country want. So that's really great. I think 2018 may be a bit of a lesson for us. In 2018, the House of Representatives passed a Farm Bill with one party. The Republicans passed a very extreme Farm Bill, unlike any before. It had always been bipartisan in both houses.And then the Senate sort of ignored that and passed a bipartisan bill that was really much, much better. And then the House came around and adopted the Senate bill. So I hope something like that may happen again. I think the Senate is going to be working hard to come up with a bipartisan bill that will make some climate improvements along the way. There's also, I should say, a long history of discrimination and of unequal access to Farm Bill programs for farmers of color. And this administration is doing a lot to try to address that, to really make sure the money is getting to farmers that have been underserved in the past.And I think we will see some improvements on that score in the Senate Farm Bill. And my guess is that although there may be some noise at the House beforehand, one can be hopeful that at the end of the day, the House will go in the direction of a more reasonable bill from the Senate.David RobertsYeah, it seems like clowning around and embarrassing themselves for a while and then just sheepishly doing what they should have done all along seems to be the pattern they've set so far. So maybe that'll happen again.Peter LehnerYeah, that happened in 2018.David RobertsYes, I know. It's like the House Republican special. I hate to be in a position where I'm depending on the U.S. Senate for anything good in life, but here we are. So a lot of this seems like I don't want to say small ball, but let's say there's nothing fundamental here on the table in the Farm Bill. We're nibbling around the edges, beefing up existing programs, tweaking existing programs. So I want you to imagine — free yourself from the fetters of politics for a while — imagine some bright future day when Democrats have another trifecta and they have, for whatever reason, power to do big things, another big swing at climate, because there are a lot, I think everybody sort of acknowledges, IRA was a big deal, but there are definitely pieces of the puzzle that IRA did not get to.And so say there's Democratic majorities and Democratic will to do big things on climate in the next Farm Bill. Think big for me here, just for a few minutes. What kind of things would you like to see that would be more transformative?Peter LehnerWell, I would focus on two. One, I mentioned earlier we would have a crop insurance program that really benefits crop risk reducing behavior, which also is climate change mitigating behavior. And so instead of just having the conservation programs encouraging behavior or practices on farms that we want to encourage, you have the much bigger and much more important crop insurance program doing that.David RobertsAnd that's stuff like just rotating crops and —Peter LehnerRotating crops, cover crops, adding trees to pasture land and to crops. Having a diversity. Part of the way you can be more resilient is having a diversity of crops if you have nothing but one crop, if there's any problem there, you're in big trouble. And diversity is both biologically much more stable, but it's also economically a lot more stable.David RobertsAnd we should note and this is, I guess, implied and obvious, but I'm just going to say it explicitly anyway if farmers were not completely insured against the risks of giant monocropping, they would naturally be moving towards more variety just to protect themselves, right? It's only because they are protected entirely by this crop insurance program that they're not buffering themselves more against risk in this way.Peter LehnerThat's certainly what you're seeing, that the farmers that are using more sustainable approaches tend to be growing a much wider range of crops and products. So they have that economic as well as biological diversity. But the other big thing that would be great to change right now, the Farm Bill directly and indirectly, very heavily supports animal agriculture. And for the reasons that I mentioned, that is where most of the climate change contribution from agriculture comes from. It's the animal manure, it's the cows belching, it is the production of animal feed. And it's animal feed is very inefficient.It takes about 15 pounds of grain to get a pound of beef. And corn is the most heavily fertilized with nitrogen fertilizer crop. And all of that nitrogen fertilizer, as I mentioned, not all of it, but a lot of it is running off as nitrous oxide. So all of this animal agriculture, which also uses up that 800 million acres of grazing land and therefore losing carbon, has this huge climate impact. It also, frankly, is unhealthy. It also isn't great for biodiversity.David RobertsYeah, I mean, beef is bad. People hate to hear this and no one wants to say it publicly, but beef is bad down the line. Pick your lens: health, you know, ecology, economics, concentration of wealth. I mean, name it.Peter LehnerWRI has some great charts. They're a great organization that compares the climate, water and land use footprint of different foods. And you will see that beef is just far more than any other food that we have. So right now, the Farm Bill really heavily supports that and provides almost no support to plant-based alternatives to a healthier diet. And if you think of what we've done in the energy system, we tried to clean up coal plants, we tried to switch to inherently clean energy like solar and wind, and we tried to reduce demand by energy efficiency.Right now, most of what we talk about in agriculture is just that first one, just trying to clean up existing production. We have to think about both shifting to inherently cleaner way of getting food and that is, for example, a plant-based diet or plant-based alternatives. And it doesn't have to be going vegan. This is just Americans eat many times more meat than any other culture. We could still have plenty of meat and eat much less than we are now, with much less of an impact. And the Farm Bill can make a big difference there.People love to think that this is all cultural, but it's also economic. Right now, meat is cheap because taxpayers pay for a lot of the bill. And that can be balanced in a Farm Bill where taxpayer subsidies, the subsidies in the farm Bill are supporting a healthier, more climate friendly food system rather than a food system that is so focused on these products that have a very big climate impact.David RobertsYeah, I hate that cultural argument. I just have to say you see that in transportation too. You have decades of public policy supporting automobile infrastructure such that average people just living normal lives have to drive all the time. And then you get a bunch of people saying, "oh, it's just cultural, Americans just like their cars." That's not really it. And I think it's really the same with beef. This whole idea that Americans just have some sort of inherent love of big steaks, big meat, it's so ridiculous. I always find that absurd, although that is a real third rail.Peter LehnerYeah, that's where economics makes a difference. And right now, as I said, we're subsidizing foods that tend to have a larger environmental impact and frankly, are less healthy, and we could and should be subsidizing food that is healthier. For example, good old fruits and vegetables get comparatively much, much less support in the Farm Bill.David RobertsYeah, that's crazy. When do you think, and this will really be the final question, but when I think about all the kind of cultural hot button issues that are involved in climate change and decarbonization, I mean, there are millions. Like, we just went through this gas stove nonsense last year. But no hot button issue is hotter of a button for some reason than diets and meat. Meat in diets is just like — we're talking about Oprah — just like you can't go there. So when do you think we'll reach a point where a mainstream politician will actually broach the subject, "hey, we should encourage Americans to eat less meat" and just say it outright?Is that ever going to happen?Peter LehnerWell, Cory Booker is already saying that to some extent, and he's very aware of this impact. Part of the reason it gets so derailed is people tend to view it as an all or nothing. And we make food choices three times a day. There are a lot of chances to just slightly shift to a diet with more fruits and vegetables. And it doesn't have to mean you're going 100% vegan and just in the same way that we can shift our transportation system — and maybe you drive a little less and you take mass transit a little more — it doesn't mean you will never, ever get into a car again.So I think the conversation about diets has been, unfortunately, torqued, and actually it makes even less sense. You will only buy a car maybe once every ten years, but, as I said, you make dietary choices three times a day, and you also have the health benefits of eating more fruits and vegetables. So it's a great opportunity. But again, I think it's important in terms of what policy can do is partly it's what foods say, for example, the federal government itself buys. But it's also in the farm Bill, which is so important to every environmental matter that we care about.It can also be supporting healthier foods and more so than it does today. That way you'd have a farm Bill that is encouraging farmers to grow different foods in places with less environmental impact in a way that is more sustainable. And that's, again, it's why this Farm Bill, most people don't think about, has this environmental impact far in excess of virtually anything else that Congress will be addressing.David RobertsAwesome. Well, Peter, thanks so much for coming on. I've been meaning to do this for ages, and it sounds like this was the right time to do it. So thank you so much for clarifying this whole subject matter for me more. As you could tell, I wandered into it more or less ignorant. So this has been absolutely fascinating. Thank you for taking the time.Peter LehnerThank you for your interest. It's great to spread the word on this; it's so important.David RobertsThank you for listening to the Volts podcast. It is ad-free, powered entirely by listeners like you. If you value conversations like this, please consider becoming a paid Volts subscriber at volts.wtf. Yes, that's volts.wtf. So that I can continue doing this work. Thank you so much, and I'll see you next time. Get full access to Volts at www.volts.wtf/subscribe

La journée mondiale des vers de terre, chaque 21 octobre, a été proposée en 2016 par la Société britannique des vers de terre. Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides. Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre. Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols. Leur respiration n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent. Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre. Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans. Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture. Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000. En fonction de leurs déplacements dans le sol, on distingue 4 catégories de “tunneliers”  :  Les anéciques ( 80 % des lombrics en Europe tempérée) : Ils font des terriers et des galeries verticaux. Ils se nourrissent la nuit de feuilles tombées à la surface du sol qu'ils traînent dans leurs terriers. Ils défèquent au passage à la surface en déposant leurs turricules (petites tours, monticules).  Les épigés (19%) : Ils vivent à la surface du sol dans la litière. Ils sont aussi souvent rouge vif. Certains mangent la litière, d'autres des excréments animaux, du compost ou du bois mort. Certains malins dit phélophiles squattent les galeries de cousins anéciques et se nourrissent de leur mucus déposé par leur passage. C'est le cas du plus célèbre d'entre tous : le Lombric commun. Mais attention, il n'est épigé que quand il est juvénile ! L'adulte devient anécique (les zigues du yoyo vertical). Les endogés (1 %) : Ils creusent des galeries horizontales dans le sol qu'ils consomment pour se déplacer. Ils sont souvent sans pigments cutanés et de couleurs pâles, gris, rose pâle, vert ou bleu. ______ On aime ce qui nous a émerveillé … et on protège ce qu'on aime. ______ Découvrir tout l'univers Baleine sous Gravillon, et Mécaniques du Vivant sur France Culture : https://baleinesousgravillon.com/liens-2 Soutenir notre travail, bénévole et sans pub : https://bit.ly/helloasso_donsUR_BSG http://bit.ly/Tipeee_BSG https://bit.ly/lien_magq_lilo_BSG Nous contacter pour une conférence, un partenariat ou d'autres prestations ou synergies : contact@baleinesousgravillon.com

La journée mondiale des vers de terre, chaque 21 octobre, a été proposée en 2016 par la Société britannique des vers de terre. Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides. Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre. Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols. Leur respiration n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent. Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre. Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans. Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture. Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000. En fonction de leurs déplacements dans le sol, on distingue 4 catégories de “tunneliers”  :  Les anéciques ( 80 % des lombrics en Europe tempérée) : Ils font des terriers et des galeries verticaux. Ils se nourrissent la nuit de feuilles tombées à la surface du sol qu'ils traînent dans leurs terriers. Ils défèquent au passage à la surface en déposant leurs turricules (petites tours, monticules).  Les épigés (19%) : Ils vivent à la surface du sol dans la litière. Ils sont aussi souvent rouge vif. Certains mangent la litière, d'autres des excréments animaux, du compost ou du bois mort. Certains malins dit phélophiles squattent les galeries de cousins anéciques et se nourrissent de leur mucus déposé par leur passage. C'est le cas du plus célèbre d'entre tous : le Lombric commun. Mais attention, il n'est épigé que quand il est juvénile ! L'adulte devient anécique (les zigues du yoyo vertical). Les endogés (1 %) : Ils creusent des galeries horizontales dans le sol qu'ils consomment pour se déplacer. Ils sont souvent sans pigments cutanés et de couleurs pâles, gris, rose pâle, vert ou bleu. ______ On aime ce qui nous a émerveillé … et on protège ce qu'on aime. ______ Découvrir tout l'univers Baleine sous Gravillon, et Mécaniques du Vivant sur France Culture : https://baleinesousgravillon.com/liens-2 Soutenir notre travail, bénévole et sans pub : https://bit.ly/helloasso_donsUR_BSG http://bit.ly/Tipeee_BSG https://bit.ly/lien_magq_lilo_BSG Nous contacter pour une conférence, un partenariat ou d'autres prestations ou synergies : contact@baleinesousgravillon.com

La journée mondiale des vers de terre, chaque 21 octobre, a été proposée en 2016 par la Société britannique des vers de terre. Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides. Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre. Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols. Leur respiration n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent. Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre. Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans. Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture. Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000. En fonction de leurs déplacements dans le sol, on distingue 4 catégories de “tunneliers”  :  Les anéciques ( 80 % des lombrics en Europe tempérée) : Ils font des terriers et des galeries verticaux. Ils se nourrissent la nuit de feuilles tombées à la surface du sol qu'ils traînent dans leurs terriers. Ils défèquent au passage à la surface en déposant leurs turricules (petites tours, monticules).  Les épigés (19%) : Ils vivent à la surface du sol dans la litière. Ils sont aussi souvent rouge vif. Certains mangent la litière, d'autres des excréments animaux, du compost ou du bois mort. Certains malins dit phélophiles squattent les galeries de cousins anéciques et se nourrissent de leur mucus déposé par leur passage. C'est le cas du plus célèbre d'entre tous : le Lombric commun. Mais attention, il n'est épigé que quand il est juvénile ! L'adulte devient anécique (les zigues du yoyo vertical). Les endogés (1 %) : Ils creusent des galeries horizontales dans le sol qu'ils consomment pour se déplacer. Ils sont souvent sans pigments cutanés et de couleurs pâles, gris, rose pâle, vert ou bleu. ______ On aime ce qui nous a émerveillé … et on protège ce qu'on aime. ______ Découvrir tout l'univers Baleine sous Gravillon, et Mécaniques du Vivant sur France Culture : https://baleinesousgravillon.com/liens-2 Soutenir notre travail, bénévole et sans pub : https://bit.ly/helloasso_donsUR_BSG http://bit.ly/Tipeee_BSG https://bit.ly/lien_magq_lilo_BSG Nous contacter pour une conférence, un partenariat ou d'autres prestations ou synergies : contact@baleinesousgravillon.com

La journée mondiale des vers de terre, chaque 21 octobre, a été proposée en 2016 par la Société britannique des vers de terre. Il existe 7000 espèces de lombrics, dont 150 en France. Toutes appartiennent à l'embranchement des Annélides. Constituant 60 à 80 % de la biomasse animale des sols, ils émettent des gaz à effet de serre (CO2, N2O) via ce qu'ils mangent (décomposé par les bactéries de leur microbiote. Les vers de terre ont donc un effet bénéfique sur la séquestration du carbone mais négatif sur l'effet de serre. Le fait de creuser la terre (bioturbation) favorise la pénétration de l'air et de l'eau. Leur rôle de décomposeur contribue à la libération des nutriments nécessaires aux plantes et aux microbes des sols. Leur respiration n'ont pas de poumons et respirent par la peau …  qui doit rester humide pour permettre l'échange de gaz et éviter la déshydratation . C'est le rôle du mucus qu'ils produisent. Les lombrics avancent en s'allongeant puis se recroquevillant, et non en serpentant. Ils prennent appui sur leurs soies (setae). Leur mucus lubrifie la locomotion et c'est ainsi que la chenille redémarre. Les densités des lombrics se situent entre 50 et 400 individus par m², soit en moyenne 300 g par m² et donc 3 tonnes par ha dans les riches prairies fertiles des régions tempérées. Au total sur Terre, ils représentent un poids 20 fois supérieur à celui des Hommes. Ils entretiennent un réseau de galeries de 400 m par m². Toute la terre d'un jardin passe dans le tube digestif des lombrics en 50 ans. Le philosophe grec Aristote les avait surnommés les “intestins de la terre “. Pour Cléopâtre, ils étaient sacrés pour leur rôle dans la fertilité des rives du Nil. Les spécialistes des vers de terre s'appellent les géodrilologues. Le plus célèbre d'entre eux est un certain Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Avec son fils, il les a étudiés pendant 45 ans. Il a été l'un des premiers à réhabiliter le ver de terre, à l'époque considéré comme nuisible à l'agriculture. Leur abondance est réduite par le labour et les pesticides. Leur population a été divisée par 10 en un siècle à peine. Ils sont parmi les animaux les plus utiles mais aussi les plus touchés par la crise climatique. Pour ne rien arranger, des vers invasifs (plathelminthes) venus du Brésil, de Nouvelle-Guinée et d'Australie les ratiboisent depuis les années 2000. En fonction de leurs déplacements dans le sol, on distingue 4 catégories de “tunneliers”  :  Les anéciques ( 80 % des lombrics en Europe tempérée) : Ils font des terriers et des galeries verticaux. Ils se nourrissent la nuit de feuilles tombées à la surface du sol qu'ils traînent dans leurs terriers. Ils défèquent au passage à la surface en déposant leurs turricules (petites tours, monticules).  Les épigés (19%) : Ils vivent à la surface du sol dans la litière. Ils sont aussi souvent rouge vif. Certains mangent la litière, d'autres des excréments animaux, du compost ou du bois mort. Certains malins dit phélophiles squattent les galeries de cousins anéciques et se nourrissent de leur mucus déposé par leur passage. C'est le cas du plus célèbre d'entre tous : le Lombric commun. Mais attention, il n'est épigé que quand il est juvénile ! L'adulte devient anécique (les zigues du yoyo vertical). Les endogés (1 %) : Ils creusent des galeries horizontales dans le sol qu'ils consomment pour se déplacer. Ils sont souvent sans pigments cutanés et de couleurs pâles, gris, rose pâle, vert ou bleu. ______ On aime ce qui nous a émerveillé … et on protège ce qu'on aime. ______ Découvrir tout l'univers Baleine sous Gravillon, et Mécaniques du Vivant sur France Culture : https://baleinesousgravillon.com/liens-2 Soutenir notre travail, bénévole et sans pub : https://bit.ly/helloasso_donsUR_BSG http://bit.ly/Tipeee_BSG https://bit.ly/lien_magq_lilo_BSG Nous contacter pour une conférence, un partenariat ou d'autres prestations ou synergies : contact@baleinesousgravillon.com

Theo một báo cáo của Cơ quan dược phẩm châu Âu (EMA) hồi cuối năm 2022, việc sử dụng khí cười đang gia tăng một cách đáng lo ngại tại nhiều quốc gia thành viên Liên Âu, trong đó có cả Pháp, và nhất là ở giới trẻ. Điều đáng lưu ý hơn là thông tin về những tác dụng phụ nguy hiểm, thậm chí có thể gây tử vong, của khí cười lại ít được công chúng biết đến, trong khi loại khí này lại rất dễ mua. Riêng tại Pháp, gần đây nhất, theo AFP, cảnh sát hôm 22/07/2023 đã thu giữ được số lượng cao kỷ lục - 21 tấn khí cười tại Vénissieux, vùng Lyon. Để hiểu thêm về loại khí được gọi là khí cười, được giới trẻ ngày càng dùng nhiều, nhưng cũng đã bị chính quyền Pháp cấm bán cho trẻ vị thành niên, RFI Tiếng Việt đã có cuộc phỏng vấn phó giáo sư, tiến sĩ hóa học Phạm Quốc Nghị, đại học Paris-Saclay của Pháp.  RFI : Khí cười cụ thể là gì ? Chất này ra đời từ khi nào ? Ứng dụng chính là gì ? TS. Phạm Quốc Nghị : Khí cười có công thức hóa học là N2O, với tên gọi là dinitơ oxít. Trong điều kiện thường, chất này tồn tại dạng khí, không mầu, có mùi và vị hơi ngọt. Khí N2O do nhà khoa học người Anh, Joseph Priestley, khám phá ra vào năm 1772. Khí này được sử dụng trong lĩnh vực y khoa, pha trộn cùng với khí oxy, để gây mê hoặc giảm đau. Trong chế biến ăn uống, khí này cũng được sử dụng trong các bình kem chantilly. Khí N2O có ảnh hưởng rất lớn đến môi trường. Khí này có hiệu ứng nhà kính rất mạnh (gấp gần 300 lần so với CO2). Đây là khí phá hủy tầng ozone nhiều nhất. Theo 1 nghiên cứu gần đây của Tổ chức Khí tượng Thế giới (World Meteorological Organization), khí này có nguồn gốc 60% từ tự nhiên (ví dụ như liên quan đến các vi sinh vật) và 40% từ các hoạt động của con người (các nguồn phân bón nông nghiệp).Cơ chế tác dụng dược lý của N2O trong y khoa vẫn chưa hoàn toàn được hiểu rõ. Theo các nghiên cứu thì N2O can thiệp vào các đường truyền tín hiệu lên não. Khí này chặn 1 phần các kênh nhận tín hiệu như Niconitic, AMPA, GABA … Lấy ví dụ trường hợp cụ thể khí N2O tác động lên các tế bào GABA (Gamma Aminobutyric Acid) có chức năng kìm hãm những tế bào thần kinh gây buồn ngủ. Chất khí này cũng đồng thời can thiệp vào quá trình sản sinh ra các tế bào liên lạc thần kinh nội sinh như opioid peptide và serotonin - một loại hormone có khả năng tạo ra cảm giác hưng phấn và hạnh phúc. Chính việc giải phóng các tế bào liên lạc thần kinh nội sinh đã kìm hãm sự phát ra cảm giác đau đớn trong não và kích hoạt khả năng giảm đau. RFI : Vậy tại sao khí cười lại được gọi là ma túy của người nghèo ? Đâu là những tác hại chính của việc lạm dụng khí cười ?TS. Phạm Quốc Nghị : Đến nay, chưa có nghiên cứu y khoa nào chỉ rõ sự lệ thuộc vào khí cười, do đó khái niệm ma túy, chất gây nghiện vẫn còn gây tranh cãi. Tuy nhiên, do giá thành rẻ (khoảng 25€ một lít khí, tương đương gần 400 lượt dùng), và các hiệu ứng kích thích giảm nhanh, nên nhiều người có xu hướng lạm dụng. Ngoài ra, các bình nhỏ khí N2O được rao bán tràn lan trên mạng, chẳng hạn trên các trang Amazon, Cdiscount, nên người dùng có thể mua bán dễ dàng.Theo một báo cáo của tổ chức ANSES, Pháp, năm 2020 có 134 trường hợp ngộ độc ở Pháp liên quan đến khí cười, tăng nhiều so với 46 trường hợp thống kê vào năm 2019. Theo 1 nghiên cứu khác gần đây vào tháng 06/2022 của 1 tổ chức y tế thì số ca bệnh với các triệu chứng nặng liên quan đến khí cười tăng gấp 10 lần so với năm 2019.Điều đặc biệt là độ tuổi trung bình là 22 tuổi và có 10% số ca này là trẻ em. Một nửa các bệnh nhân khai báo là có sử dụng khí cười hàng ngày. Vào ngày 06/08/2022, tại Vitry-sur-Seine, ngoại ô Paris, một nam thanh niên tử vong do sử dụng khí cười dẫn đến suy tim.Thông thường, hiệu ứng gây cười sẽ biến mất sau 2 phút sử dụng và các hiệu ứng phụ sẽ biến mất sau khi sử dụng khoảng 15 phút. Tuy nhiên, nếu lạm dụng quá liều, các hiệu ứng phụ này có thể kéo dài nhiều giờ, thậm chí nhiều ngày. Các biểu hiện nhẹ bao gồm : buồn nôn, đau đầu, đau bụng, tiêu chảy, mất tập trung, hoa mắt. Nặng hơn thì có nhầm lẫn mất phương hướng, khó nói và khó cử động, yếu cơ.Khi sử dụng khí cười, thì có các nguy cơ chính sau : bị bỏng lạnh, nếu dùng khí trực tiếp từ bình (chính vì vậy, mọi người thường cho vào quả bóng bay để sử dụng), thiếu oxy nên có nguy cơ dẫn đến tử vong (như đã đề cập ở trên, trong y học thường trộn lẫn với oxy theo tỷ lệ 1/1 khi dùng để gây mê hoặc giảm đau), mất kiểm soát dẫn đến ngã và chấn thương, hoặc rất dễ gây tai nạn khi tham gia giao thông. Ngoài ra, nếu sử dụng liên tục thì sẽ dẫn đến các triệu chứng như giảm trí nhớ, chứng hoang tưởng, tụt huyết áp, rối loạn cương dương ở nam giới.RFI : Pháp có chính sách gì để hạn chế tác hại của khí cười ?TS. Phạm Quốc Nghị : Từ năm 2021, khí cười bị cấm bán cho trẻ em dưới 18 tuổi tại Pháp, ai vi phạm thì phải chịu mức phạt 3750 euro. Các chuyên gia đang đề nghị chính phủ cấm tiêu thụ khí này, ngoài mục đích y khoa.Ngoài việc cấm bán hoặc tặng khí cười cho trẻ vị thành niên, nhà chức trách Pháp còn ra quy định phạt tiền 15.000 euro đối với những ai xúi giục, kích động trẻ vị thành niên lạm dụng mặt hàng tiêu dùng dinitơ oxít để đạt được các hiệu ứng thần kinh.Thực ra, ngay từ năm 2018, Đài quan sát Pháp về chất gây nghiện và nạn nghiện ngập (OFDT) đã nhấn mạnh về nạn lạm dụng khí cười gia tăng, thế nhưng theo báo L'Union, những lời báo động của các cơ quan dường như vô ích : Đến năm 2021, tình hình vẫn không được cải thiện, thậm chí còn xấu đi, theo ghi nhận của Cơ quan quốc gia về an toàn y tế và thực phẩm ANSES và Cơ quan quốc gia về an toàn dược phẩm và sản phẩm y tế ANSM.   Báo Le Point trích dẫn bác sĩ chuyên khoa thần kinh, Étienne Fortanier, bệnh viện Timone, thành phố Marseille, miền nam Pháp, theo đó từ giai đoạn phong tỏa chống dịch Covid-19 tại Pháp, việc sử dụng khí cười đã tăng bùng nổ đột biến và trở thành một vấn đề về sức khỏe cộng đồng. Các ghi nhận gửi đến các trung tâm chống độc (CAP) và các trung tâm thông tin và đánh giá về chứng lệ thuộc - chứng nghiện dược phẩm (CEIP-A) cũng xác nhận sự gia tăng rất rõ rệt các ca ngộ độc dinitơoxít trong năm 2020 ở giới trẻ. Tình hình nghiêm trọng đến mức Cơ quan Quốc gia về An toàn và Sức khỏe Thực phẩm, Môi trường và Lao động (ANSES) của Pháp cũng đã phải đưa ra nhiều cảnh báo. Bước ngoặt Covid-19Về phía các địa phương, trước khi Quốc Hội thông qua đạo luật hồi năm 2021 có hiệu lực trong toàn quốc, thì chính quyền một số thành phố, chẳng hạn Aulnay-sous-Bois, ngoại ô phía bắc Paris, hồi năm 2019, khi thấy mức tiêu dùng khí này ở địa phương tăng vọt, đã ban hành lệnh cấm bán khí cười cho trẻ vị thành niên. Sévrine Maroun, trợ lý thị trưởng phụ trách an ninh của thành phố Aulnay-sous-Bois, ngoại ô phía bắc Paris, đã xác nhận với báo Le Point mỗi ngày họ thu gom được 600 ống kim loại chứa khí cười ​trong các bãi đỗ xe hoặc công viên (số liệu từ năm 2019, trước khi việc dùng khí cười được ghi nhận có sự gia tăng bùng nổ). Ban đầu, nhà chức trách thành phố Aulnay-sous-Bois không hiểu những ống kim loại đó là gì. Nhờ các hiệp hội, họ mới biết đó là những ống khí cười mà giới trẻ nghiện sử dụng bởi nó có khả năng mang lại cảm giác sảng khoái, hưng phấn, vui vẻ cho người dùng, có thể khiến người ta bật cười và làm biến đổi giọng nói khi hít vào qua đường miệng, nên « khí cười » đặc biệt được thanh thiếu niên ưa chuộng trong các dịp hội hè, tụ tập vui chơi. Thành phố Marseille, miền nam Pháp, cũng ra quy định cấm tương tự như Aulnay-sous-Bois từ hồi năm 2020.Mới đây, trong báo cáo hôm 18/01/2023, Cơ quan quốc gia Pháp về An toàn dược phẩm và các sản phẩm y tế về (ANSM) cho biết số ca bệnh nặng do dùng khí cười trong năm 2021 đã tăng gấp 3 lần so với năm 2020. Điều đáng lo ngại hơn là giới trẻ không chỉ dùng khí cười trong các dịp vui chơi, hội hè, mà đã chuyển sang dùng thường xuyên, dài ngày. Theo La Croix, 47% số trường hợp được ghi nhận hít khí cười hàng ngày, so với tỉ lệ 34% hồi năm 2020. Có những thanh niên dùng tới vài trăm ống khí cười/ngày. Không chỉ số lần hít khí cười tăng, mà liều dùng mỗi lần cũng tăng. Theo số liệu của cơ quan ANSM, biến chứng thần kinh vẫn là biến chứng được báo cáo nhiều nhất vào năm 2021 : 80% số ca. Nhiều biến chứng tim mạch mới cũng được ghi nhận. ANSM mới đây đã cho xuất bản một tài liệu dành cho các nhân viên y tế, giúp họ xác định các triệu chứng đặc hiệu của chứng ngộ độc khí cười và cách chăm sóc bệnh nhân.Trong bối cảnh này, báo Người Paris (Le Parisien) hồi đầu năm nay 2023 cho biết chính quyền Paris đã cấm trẻ vị thành niên hít khí cười ở nơi công cộng, nếu vi phạm sẽ bị phạt 150 euro. Quy định bắt đầu có hiệu lực từ ngay mùa xuân - hè năm nay. Đến ngày 31/07, CNEWS thông báo Paris triển hạn lệnh cấm đến hết ngày 31/10.Do nhu cầu tiêu dùng tăng quá mạnh và nhanh, chi phí bỏ ra thấp mà lợi nhuận lại cao, nên đã hình thành những băng đảng có tổ chức buôn bán, phân phối trái phép khí cười. Những ống khí cười, bóng cười có thể được các băng nhóm bán lậu cùng với các loại ma túy, chất gây nghiện khác, hoặc thuốc lá nhập lậu. Thậm chí còn xảy ra nạn trộm cắp, cướp bóc các xe tải vận chuyển hàng tấn khí cười, ví dụ vụ việc ở Sarcelles, tỉnh Val-d'Oise, vùng Paris vào cuối tháng 01/2022 : có 6 kẻ đã cuớp 2.000 thùng hàng mà tổng trị giá bán trên thị trường là 28.000 euro. Hồi năm 2021, một cuộc điều tra được tiến hành trong vòng 3 tháng cuối năm 2021 đã cho phép cảnh sát phá dỡ một mạng lưới buôn lậu khí cười giữa Pháp và Hà Lan, và thu giữ 11 tấn khí cười ở vùng Lyon và Paris. Trong 6 tháng cuối năm 2021 và 3 tháng đầu năm 2022, Pháp đã thu giữ tổng cộng 15 tấn hàng trái phép. Tuy nhiên, William Hippert, trợ lý phát ngôn viên của Cơ quan cảnh sát điều tra quốc gia của Pháp, vẫn lấy làm tiếc là hiện nay mới chỉ có « rất ít vụ truy tố tội buôn lậu » khí cười. Về phía các chuyên gia tâm lý, bác sĩ chuyên khoa về cai nghiện, theo France Info ngày 18/03/2023, điều khiến họ lo ngại hơn cả không phải là ở chính khí cười hay các chất gây nghiện khác, mà là ở mối liên hệ giữa thanh thiếu niên với sản phẩm gây ảo giác đó : giới trẻ bấu víu vào các chất này để quên đi nỗi buồn chán. Quả thực, nhiều nghiên cứu trong những tháng qua đã cho thấy sự xuống cấp về sức khỏe tâm thần của giới trẻ tại Pháp, do tác động của các đợt phong tỏa chống Covid-19, nỗi bất an về tương lai, nỗi sợ hãi về tình trạng biến đổi khí hậu, chiến tranh Ukraina, lạm phát, khủng hoảng … Điều tra của OFDT cho thấy gần ½ giới trẻ Pháp cho biết họ bị rối loạn sức khỏe tâm thần.

Hà Nội, phát hiện cơ sở san chiết khí N2O trái phép với số lượng lớn nhất từ đầu năm đến nay - Lực lượng quản lý thị trường phối hợp với cơ quan chức năng thành phố Hà Nội vừa kiểm tra và phát hiện một cơ sở san chiết gần 200 bình khí N2O (hay còn gọi là khí cười) tại một khu tập thể thuộc quận Thanh Xuân, thành phố Hà Nội. Đây là vụ kiểm tra, phát hiện và thu giữ số lượng bình khí N2O trái phép lớn nhất từ đầu năm đến nay trên địa bàn thủ đô. Chủ đề : Hà Nội, san chiết khí N2O trái phép, số lượng lớn nhất, từ đầu năm đến nay --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

Cần chế tài đủ mạnh để ngăn chặn việc kinh doanh, mua bán khí N2O 'bóng cười' trái phép - Thời gian qua, tình trạng kinh doanh trái phép khí N2O (hay còn gọi là bóng cười), không có hoá đơn chứng từ, không rõ nguồn gốc có chiều hướng gia tăng và diễn biến phức tạp. Mặc dù lực lượng chức năng, các địa phương đã tăng cường kiểm tra và mạnh tay hơn với tình trạng kinh doanh “bóng cười” trái phép nhưng thực tế diễn ra cho thấy, rất khó ngăn chặn triệt để việc kinh doanh, mua bán bóng cười trái phép tại các cơ sở vui chơi, giải trí. Nguyên nhân chủ yếu là do chưa có chế tài đủ mạnh để răn đe các đối tượng vi phạm. Chủ đề : ngăn chặn, kinh doanh, buôn bán no2 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

In part three of the Gremlin story Drisky and Kingy discuss the later years of Gremlin, covering the PC, PS1, Saturn and N64 era, up until when Gremlin was bought by Infogrames and became Infogrames Sheffield. So come join us as we go through these amazing games 1. slipstream 5000  2. whiplash 3. Actua Soccer 4.Loaded 5. Normality 6. Actua Golf 7. Reloaded 8. hardcore 4x4 9.Realms of the Haunting 10. N2O 11.Motorhead 12 Body Harvest post Gremlin Hon mentions: 13 Wacky Races 14 Hogs of War  15 Soul Bringer Please join us on our new You Tube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@RGDSPodcast-qw6mw We have loads of cool stuff already and stacks of great new content on the way, so please consider subscribing, watch and liking, to help our fledgling new You Tube channel to getter better known. Also please join us on Discord and chat with us and other listeners here: https://discord.gg/HzGAZ5FV7u

Although labor epidural remains the gold standard for labor analgesia, some patients may opt for a trial of a less invasive analgesic agent. While IV/IM narcotics are an option, others may prefer a trial of nitrous oxide (N2O). In this episode, we will review the crazy history of this useful inhalational agent, and how it has ties to the manufacturing of the Colt45 handgun, how it transformed dentistry, and review the contribution to medicine by Dr. Horace Wells. We will review N2O's current application in obstetrics, and summarize statements from the ACNM and the ACOG. And…What does this gas have to do with vitamin B12? Are there any safety warnings out there regarding its use? And does it even work? Let's answer these questions, and more, in this episode.

Tăng cường phối hợp, kiểm tra, xử lý tình trạng kinh doanh khí N2O trái phép - Thời gian vừa qua, tình trạng mua bán, sử dụng khí N2O, còn gọi là “khí cười”, “bóng cười” diễn ra tràn lan, ảnh hưởng tới sức khoẻ người dùng và gây nhiều hệ lụy cho xã hội. Mặc dù lực lượng chức năng và các địa phương đã mạnh tay hơn với tình trạng kinh doanh“bóng cười” nhưng thực tế cho thấy, rất khó ngăn chặn triệt để việc kinh doanh, mua bán bóng cười trái phép tại các cơ sở vui chơi, giải trí trên địa bàn. Chủ đề : kiểm tra, kinh doanh, no2 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

Nitrous oxide or N2O is the third largest source of GHG emissions behind carbon dioxide and methane. Also known as laughing gas, it's long-lived like carbon dioxide and incredibly potent like methane. And it accounts for about 6% of global warming.  So where does it come from? And what do we do about it? In this episode, Shayle talks to Eric Davidson, professor at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, and principal scientist at Spark Climate Solutions. Eric studies the surprising source of nitrous oxide: bacteria in the soil. Eric and Shayle talk about topics like:  How the application of nitrogen fertilizer causes more emissions than the production of fertilizer itself The challenging economics of agriculture that cause farmers to over-apply fertilizer How precise and timely application of fertilizer could cut emissions New livestock feed additives that could replace the N2O-intensive crops in animal feed New crops that require less fertilizer Recommended Resources: Nature Climate Change: Improving the social cost of nitrous oxide The Conversation: New research: nitrous oxide emissions 300 times more powerful than CO₂ are jeopardizing Earth's future Nature: A comprehensive quantification of global nitrous oxide sources and sinks Come watch a live episode of The Carbon Copy! Canary Media and Post Script Media are hosting a live event at Greentown Labs in Somerville, Mass. on April 6. We'll record a live episode of The Carbon Copy with some very special guests. Get your tickets today. Catalyst is a co-production of Post Script Media and Canary Media. Catalyst is supported by Antenna Group. For 25 years, Antenna has partnered with leading clean-economy innovators to build their brands and accelerate business growth. If you're a startup, investor, enterprise, or innovation ecosystem that's creating positive change, Antenna is ready to power your impact. Visit antennagroup.com to learn more. Catalyst is supported by EnergyHub. The company's platform lets consumers turn their smart thermostats, EVs, batteries, water heaters, and other products into virtual power plants that keep the grid stable and enable higher penetration of solar and wind power. And they are hiring! Learn more and see open roles at energyhub.com/catalyst Catalyst is brought to you by Sealed: The experts in home weatherization and electrification upgrades. Sealed is leading the way, with over a decade of experience being accountable to homeowners because they only get paid based on actual energy reductions. Visit Sealed.com/measuredsavings to learn more.

Thời gian qua, đã có rất nhiều trường hợp người hít bóng cười phải nhập viện sau khi hít bóng cười trong thời gian dài với những triệu chứng tổn thương thần kinh, tủy sống như nôn mửa, cơ thể mất sức, tứ chi không thể hoạt động bình thường, giảm vận động, tê bì tay chân, đi lại không vững... Những trường hợp này được xác định là bị ngộ độc khí N2O, nếu người hít bóng cười còn sử dụng thêm rượu, shisha hay ma túy thì còn có thể gây ảnh hưởng đến tính mạng. Chương trình “Sức khỏe trên hết” được phát sóng từ 13h30 – 14h00 các ngày thứ 2- thứ 4 – thứ 6 trong tuần trên Hà Nội FM tần số 90MHz.

Quản lý thị trường thành phố Hồ Chí Minh phát hiện, tạm giữ gần 12 tấn đường cát nhập lậu - Quản lý thị trường thành phố Hồ Chí Minh phát hiện, tạm giữ gần 12 tấn đường cát nhập lậu - Tiền Giang: Xử phạt 1 cơ sở gần 60 triệu đồng do buôn bán thực phẩm giả, không đảm bảo chất lượng - Hà Nội: phát hiện kho chứa bình khí N2O (bóng cười) các loại không rõ nguồn gốc xuất xứ lớn nhất từ năm ngoái đến nay Chủ đề : gian lận, thương mại, đường cát --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vov1kd/support

Last night we had our first ever live podcast. It's hard to believe that this podcast has even gotten to the point where we could do something like this but the stars aligned and a lot of different people helped us and made it happen for us. So a big thanks to them and to all the people who came along to the show. It was great fun and the good news is, it'll be the same again next week as we look to try and do the live podcasts on a weekly basis.The night wasn't without it's stereotypical ‘opening night' problems. Originally we had planned on putting the podcast out on YouTube live as well, but apparently you need to give YouTube 24 hours notice before you do your first live on your channel. Who knew? I didn't. We also had a couple of lads in the background doing their thing playing boardgames. We had the room booked for the evening but we decided to let them in as the room is really big and we didn't think our mics would pick them up. Once again, wrong again, so apologies for any background noise you hear during this episode.Apart from all that, our guest Malinda was absolutely wonderful and our live audience were even better! Malinda is a professional stand-up comic from Sri Lanka based out of Dublin. We talk about the Dublin comedy scene, realities of being a professional artist, seagulls, North Face jackets and much much more.Malinda runs the N2O comedy show which is in The Black Sheep on Capel Street on Friday and Saturday night. We couldn't recommend it more. Check out the link in the description of this episode.www.eventbrite.ie/o/n2o-comedy-club-dublin-36652764853 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

https://youtu.be/zWTL8mzta_E Host: Fraser Cain ( @fcain ) Special Guest: Historically, scientists using spectrographic analysis to study exoplanet atmospheres have considered oxygen and methane as two key biosignatures when identifying "life-friendly" planets. But could nitrous oxide (N2O) — aka "Laughing Gas" — also be a reliable biosignature? A recent paper published in the October, 2022, Astrophysical Journal (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...) explains why N2O can — and should — be included as a biosignature gas. Tonight we are pleased to welcome the paper's lead author, Dr. Eddie Schwieterman, astrobiologist at UC Riverside, to discuss why N2O is an indicator of life.   Dr. Eddie Schwieterman is an Assistant Professor of Astrobiology in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at the University of California, Riverside. He earned his undergraduate degrees in physics and astrophysics from the Florida Institute of Technology and his PhD in astronomy and astrobiology from the University of Washington in Seattle.   Dr. Schwieterman studies the climate, atmospheric chemistry, geochemical evolution, and spectral appearance of terrestrial (rocky) planets. His research specifically focuses on the habitability and potential biosignatures of exoplanets.   To learn more about Eddie's research visit his website (www.eddieschwieterman.com) and follow him on Twitter: @nogreenstars (https://twitter.com/nogreenstars)   You can also read more about nitrous oxide as biosignature in the following SciNews article: Nitrous Oxide Could Help Detect Extraterrestrial Life on Exo-Earths (https://www.sci.news/astronomy/biosig...) Regular Guests: Dr. Pamela Gay ( https://cosmoquest.org/x/ & @starstryder ) Dr. Morgan Rehnberg ( http://www.morganrehnberg.com/ & @MorganRehnberg ) This week's stories: - More evidence for modified gravity (MOND) as dark matter. - Cool, dark nebulae! - A giant eruption of Io! - How to get the cosmonauts home?   We've added a new way to donate to 365 Days of Astronomy to support editing, hosting, and production costs.  Just visit: https://www.patreon.com/365DaysOfAstronomy and donate as much as you can! Share the podcast with your friends and send the Patreon link to them too!  Every bit helps! Thank you! ------------------------------------ Do go visit http://www.redbubble.com/people/CosmoQuestX/shop for cool Astronomy Cast and CosmoQuest t-shirts, coffee mugs and other awesomeness! http://cosmoquest.org/Donate This show is made possible through your donations.  Thank you! (Haven't donated? It's not too late! Just click!) ------------------------------------ The 365 Days of Astronomy Podcast is produced by the Planetary Science Institute. http://www.psi.edu Visit us on the web at 365DaysOfAstronomy.org or email us at info@365DaysOfAstronomy.org.

Historically, scientists using spectrographic analysis to study exoplanet atmospheres have considered oxygen and methane as two key biosignatures when identifying "life-friendly" planets. But could nitrous oxide (N2O) — aka "Laughing Gas" — also be a reliable biosignature? A recent paper published in the October, 2022, Astrophysical Journal explains why N2O can — and should — be included as a biosignature gas. Tonight we are pleased to welcome the paper's lead author, Dr. Eddie Schwieterman, astrobiologist at UC Riverside, to discuss why N2O is an indicator of life. Dr. Eddie Schwieterman is an Assistant Professor of Astrobiology in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at the University of California, Riverside. He earned his undergraduate degrees in physics and astrophysics from the Florida Institute of Technology and his PhD in astronomy and astrobiology from the University of Washington in Seattle. Dr. Schwieterman studies the climate, atmospheric chemistry, geochemical evolution, and spectral appearance of terrestrial (rocky) planets. His research specifically focuses on the habitability and potential biosignatures of exoplanets. To learn more about Eddie's research visit his website (www.eddieschwieterman.com) and follow him on Twitter: @nogreenstars. You can also read more about nitrous oxide as biosignature in the following SciNews article: Nitrous Oxide Could Help Detect Extraterrestrial Life on Exo-Earths. **************************************** The Weekly Space Hangout is a production of CosmoQuest. Want to support CosmoQuest? Here are some specific ways you can help: Subscribe FREE to our YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/cosmoquest Subscribe to our podcasts Astronomy Cast and Daily Space where ever you get your podcasts! Watch our streams over on Twitch at https://www.twitch.tv/cosmoquestx – follow and subscribe! Become a Patreon of CosmoQuest https://www.patreon.com/cosmoquestx Become a Patreon of Astronomy Cast https://www.patreon.com/astronomycast Buy stuff from our Redbubble https://www.redbubble.com/people/cosmoquestx Join our Discord server for CosmoQuest - https://discord.gg/X8rw4vv Join the Weekly Space Hangout Crew! - http://www.wshcrew.space/ Don't forget to like and subscribe! Plus we love being shared out to new people, so tweet, comment, review us... all the free things you can do to help bring science into people's lives.

ESG Decoded is a podcast powered by ClimeCo to share updates related to business innovation and sustainability in a clear and actionable manner. In this episode, Kaitlyn Allen interviews Mark T Behrman, President and CEO of LSB Industries, Inc., and Bill Flederbach, President and CEO of ClimeCo. Mark joined LSB Industries in 2014 as Senior Vice President of Corporate Development and was subsequently appointed Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer. He has over 35 years of executive management, operational, financial, and investment banking experience. In addition, Mark serves as Chairman of the Board of PHX Minerals, Inc. and The Fertilizer Institute. Bill is the founder and CEO of ClimeCo, where he and his team have pioneered the creation of scaleable greenhouse gas reduction efforts since 2009. Bill is passionate about new practices and technologies that utilize markets to make tangible environmental and societal impacts. Listen as Kaitlyn, Mark, and Bill reflect on the long-standing relationship between LSB and ClimeCo, how carbon credits are generated, and opportunities in industrial decarbonization. LSB was one of ClimeCo's first clients and its very first N2O abatement client. (Nitrous oxide, or N2O, is a potent greenhouse gas). This conversation covers how GHG reductions can be converted into environmental credits, which can positively impact the environment and communities. The three explain why the energy transition to a low-carbon future is not just a fad, how companies are working to understand how to monetize the related benefits, and its impact on business models. In signature ESG Decoded fashion, we want to bring clarity to the complex. Listeners will gain insight into the 45Q Tax Credit, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the significance of “green,” “gray,” and “blue” ammonia, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). Make sure to subscribe to ESG Decoded on your favorite streaming platforms and our new YouTube Channel so that you're notified of our vodcast episodes! Don't forget to connect with us on our social media channels. Enjoy this episode! - Episode Resource Links LSB Industries Website: http://lsbindustries.com/ LSB Industries LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lsb-industries-inc./ Mark Berhman LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-behrman-8977a318/ Bill Flederbach LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bill-flederbach-bb5a143/

- Quản lý thị trường Hà Nội: phát hiện kho hàng chứa nhiều bình khí N2O (còn gọi là khí “cười”) không rõ nguồn gốc xuất xứ. - Vĩnh Long: phát hiện phương tiện vận chuyển gần 15.000 bao thuốc lá điếu nhập lậu. - Vận chuyển, kinh doanh rượu ngoại với thủ đoạn tinh vi. Chủ đề : Quản lý thị trường, bình khí N2O, khí “cười”, nguồn gốc xuất xứ --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/vov1kd/support

DOWNLOAD MP3

From a crop nutrition perspective, nitrogen losses as N2O or nitrous oxide pale in comparison to what’s lost in N2 form, but N2O has a much greater impact on the total greenhouse gas emissions from fertilizer. As part of this Wheat School episode filmed at Manitoba Crop Diagnostic School, Manitoba Agriculture’s John Heard shares a... Read More

It's been a little while, too busy making new dubs but it's finally here: a 2022 mix of ragga, rave, … More

Greenhouse gas emissions from nitrogen fertilizer were reduced by approximately 20 per cent in the Canadian government’s official 2022 greenhouse gas inventory report thanks to an update to how nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from fertilizer are estimated. The reduction, however, will not count toward the federal government’s mandate to reduce emissions from fertilizer by 30... Read More

In the 1990s we called it Hippie Crack. In the early 2000s we called them Party Balloons. Today the kids call them crackers or whippets. They are all the same things: Nitrous Oxide, aka "laughing gas" that your dentist might offer you for a particularly painful procedure.  In this episode I discuss the history of Nitrous Oxide (N2O), its medical applications, its illegal use, plus the dangers associated with the drug, which (as usual) are mostly related to the war on drugs, not the drug itself.To read more about N2O, check out "Past, Present and Future of Nitrous Oxide" in the British Medical Bulletin.  As always, this is not a medical podcast, I am not a medical doctor, and The Dr. Junkie Show does not offer medical advice. 

The Internet has radicalized people against their own long-term wellbeing.It's true for depressed girls who derive their self-image from Instagram.It's true for guys who seek out porn instead of real partners.It's true for boys who play video games instead of becoming useful.It's true for otherwise healthy people who become anti-vaxxers.It's true for everyday citizens who suddenly become rabid partisans.And it's especially true for the tens of millions of people who, thanks to Facebook's predatory algorithms, now believe climate change is a hoax.Every family seems to have one (or six) of them now.They don't believe in manmade climate change (and usually have a Koch Brothers-funded study to back it up.) Worst of all, they often vociferously deny that there is any possibility that humans could destroy the planet.Here's how to break through to people like this.Don't try this onlineLast week, someone on Twitter accused me of trying to incite murder.Seriously.I responded with composure and rationality, but that didn't stop him from roaring back with a second litany of lies.So I tried to take it offline:Why take of offline?Because I know for a fact that 99% of the population would never treat others the way they do online. This Twitter dude wouldn't tell me to my face over dinner that I'm trying to drum up mass murder. And if he did, we would discuss until we'd reached some sort of understanding.No one wins online.Get them highKidding.Get them drunk.Kidding again.But you get my point. Get them in the right mood first. Have a nice meal together, go for a long walk where you talk about the kids and pets, then cozy up in front of the fire with a tea and some cookies.You need to get them in a safe space before you take them well outside their comfort zone.Tell them your goal isn't to convince them of anythingAnd mean it, too.Be very upfront about your goal:Look, I know you have extremely strong opinions about climate change and how it's a total hoax, but because we're [family/friends/colleagues/inmates/etc] I would really love it if you'd give me five minutes to share my perspective. I don't need you to accept any of it, I just need you to suspend disbelief and humor me so that I can at least feel heard.Almost everyone I know will grant you this request.(If they won't, they're probably an extremely unsafe person and you need to take a big step back anyway, and let them know why.)Stop calling it global warmingGlobal-scale climate change is just too confusing for small minds.They'll say stupid stuff like, “the weather is always changing” and “we've had hot and cold periods before.”And they're right.But they're also practicing some classic third-grade misdirection and they probably don't know it.To gut them of this juvenile tactic, avoid the phrases “climate change” and “global warming.”Instead, keep it grade-school simple: Call it air pollution. That's it. Air pollution. People can deny climate change and global warming, but no sane person can say that pollution isn't real.Once you've gained that foothold, then it's simply a matter of scale.Explain how global warming actually worksTo help people understand how “air pollution” works, tell them this story or do the experiment in real-time:Imagine you have an empty fish tank or a glass cactus terrarium that's airtight and full of oxygen.Now imagine you have a heat lamp shining into the glass box. Sure, some of the heat will escape through the glass, but overall, the box and its contents are going to get hotter, right? Of course.Now, instead of oxygen (O), imagine pumping nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2), and chlorofluorocarbons (aka CFCs) into the box. If you do this, the glass tank will get hotter, even though the heat lamp's temperature hasn't changed, because these particular gases trap the heat and keep it from escaping. This is called the greenhouse effect. (If you have access to a sauna, take them in and dump a load of water on the rocks to create steam. That's the greenhouse effect.)Now understand that planet Earth is literally a greenhouse. When we pump too many heat-trapping gases into our greenhouse air, we get all sorts of really neat benefits (like longer growing seasons, the ability to grow food at higher latitudes, fewer winter deaths, fewer heating costs, etc) and some truly heinous side effects (scorching temperatures, more weeds and invasive insects, torrential rainfall, more hurricanes, ocean acidification, desertification, rising cooling costs, rising sea levels, increased food costs due to irrigation needs, etc.) So you can see this comes down to a cost-benefit analysis, right? Cool.So my question to you is: Do you think it's in any way possible that humans could potentially pump so much air pollution into our global greenhouse that the negative side effects could maybe outweigh the positives?Then sit back and listen. Your goal here is simply to open their mind to the possibility that global warming could, theoretically, be possible.If your climate change deniers are like the ones in my family, this is where they'll tell you that it's pretty prideful to think that humans are so powerful that they could possibly mess up Mother Nature.This is where you acknowledge their opinion, and then step back in to offer your perspective.Help them realize how tiny planet Earth isI've been to forty countries, driven across North America five times for work, and I literally took a trip around the world for my first book, and can tell you firsthand that the world is incredibly tiny. (Back in the nineties, a commercial plane circled the whole thing in just 31 hours.)People who insist that humans can't hurt the earth simply haven't done the math:The earth is only 123 billion acres, with less than 37 billion acres of it above water.33% of that land is desert and about 24% is mountainous.Only 10.6% is considered arable.There are currently 7.91 billion people alive.Ask your climate change denier friend/uncle if they think it's theoretically possible that you could potentially wreck their half an acre of land.I know I could.I could burn it, oil it, salt it, pollute it, poison it. I could wreck it for at least a century, if not a millennia. Now add the machines of industry, the beautiful and brutal efficiency of transnational corporate capitalism, and tell me our collective consumer lifestyle couldn't possibly do the same. It's an impossible thing to deny without a huge dose of delusion.Again, your goal isn't to convince them of anything, just to open the door to the possibility that so many humans on so little a planet could theoretically do so much damage.Then show them the current scale of human impactOnce you've established that the world is comparatively small and that humans could potentially pollute the air and ruin the land, have a short discussion about the current state of human impact on nature.Be sure to mention:Residential built-up (cities, towns, villages, hamlets, neighborhoods, etc)Crop and pasturelandsGrazingOil & gas productionMining & quarryingPower generationRoadsRailwaysPowerlinesElectrical infrastructureLoggingReservoirsThis is the part where you whip out your phone or laptop and pull up Earth Engine and actually show them a map of our current impact on earth.Now get them to imagine what this map might look like if we grow to 10+ billion people and continue to grow our levels of air pollution and land pollution. Ask them how they think this could impact the world in fifty years.(Pro-tip: If they say “technology will save us,” then point out the flaw in their argument — using such a phrase admits there's a pollution problem. If there wasn't a real problem, we wouldn't need tech to save us. Which it won't.)Understand their point of viewAt this point, thank them for listening to your perspective. Let them know you really appreciate that you feel like you've been heard, and acknowledge it must've been hard for them to sit through.Then, having worked together to establish that humans could potentially do real damage to planet Earth, invite them to share their feelings on your perspective.Ask them why they still feel the need to deny global warming and climate change.Specifically, try to understand their fears.Because if there's one thing I've learned about environmental arguments, it's that it's never about the environment.It's always about politics, power, and control.Remember that your goal isn't to convince themWhen was the last time someone convinced you of something you were 100% certain of?Now you understand!This is why every human on earth (myself included) needs to work on empathy, grace, understanding, and healthy communication.Because accepting the truth is hard. And it takes time.So instead of trying to win an argument, just try to win a friendship. Instead of trying to prove global warming to a climate change denier, just aim to plant some thought seeds. If there's any chance for change in their future, those thought seeds will grow.And remember: Nature holds the trump card. Whether you believe in climate change or not, we're all going to get blasted by the negative effects.We might as well get along in the meantime. Get full access to Surviving Tomorrow at www.surviving-tomorrow.com/subscribe

In this episode of the podcast, I have talked about in depth about "Climate Variability" and it is the final part which is part-2. Climate Variability is defined as variations in the mean state and other statistics of the climate on all temporal and spatial scales, beyond individual weather events. The term "Climate Variability" is often used to denote deviations of climatic statistics over a given period of time (e.g. a month, season or year) when compared to long-term statistics for the same calendar period. Climate variability is measured by these deviations, which are usually termed anomalies. Variability may be due to natural internal processes within the climate system (internal variability), or to variations in natural or anthropogenic external factors (external variability). Topics:IntroductionConsequences Estimating the effects of Climate VariationsCausesInternal Climate Variability External Climate Forcing Paleo-Eocene Thermal maximumHoloceneThe CenozoicVariability between regionsAdditional Info: A key difference between climate variability and change is in persistence of "anomalous” conditions - when events that used to be rare occur more frequently, or vice-versa. In statistical terms, the curve of the frequency distribution representing the probability of specific meteorological events changes. The curve may be modified either in amplitude, shifted about a new mean, or both.  The growth in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere because of anthropogenic activities is also expected to be the most important factor forcing climate to change during the 21st century. Within the atmosphere there are naturally occurring green-house gases, which trap some of the outgoing infrared radiation emitted by the earth and the atmosphere. The principal greenhouse gas is water vapour, but also carbon dioxide (CO2), ozone (O3), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxides (N2O), together with clouds, keeps the Earth's surface and troposphere 33◦C warmer than it would otherwise be. This is the natural greenhouse effect. Changes in the concentrations of these greenhouse gases will change the efficiency with which the Earth cools to space. The atmosphere absorbs more of the outgoing terrestrial radiation from the surface when concentrations of greenhouse gases increase. This is emitted at higher altitudes and colder temperatures and results in a positive radiative forcing which tends to warm the lower atmosphere and Earth's surface.  Climate variability and change affects individuals and societies. Within agricultural systems, seasonal climate forecasting can increase preparedness and lead to better social, economic and environmental outcomes. Climate forecasting is probably one of the oldest professions in the world. A Babylonia scroll dated to about 3000 BC may well be the oldest-known example of an attempt to predict the weather that would affect the following season's crops.  Follow me on Twitter for daily climate change news and feel free to email me regarding suggestions to improve and how do you feel listening to my podcast. I would like to say to you all that please leave some feedback in whatever platform you are listening to this podcast, it will help me to see if you are liking it or not.Twitter:  https://twitter.com/realyashnegiEmail: yashnegi@climatology.inSong: Ikson - New Day (Vlog No Copyright Music) Music provided by Vlog No Copyright Music. Video Link: https://youtu.be/cVA-9JHwbFY Support the show (https://paypal.me/yashnegi27?locale.x=en_GB)

In this episode of the podcast, I have talked about "Carbon sequestration".Topics:What is Carbon sequestration?Oceanic Carbon sequestrationGeologic Carbon sequestrationTerrestrial Carbon sequestrationCarbon Sources and Carbon SinksClimate Change MitigationCarbon sequestration in grasslandsCarbon sequestration in soilsAdditional Info: Human induced carbon pools are characterized with Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. Carbon capture and storage is a combination of technologies and techniques that enable the capture of CO2 from fuel combustion or industrial processes. Then transportation of CO2 is being done through pipelines, CO2 is stored underground in depleted oil and gas fields and deep saline formations. CCS can, therefore, have a unique and imperative role to play in a sustainable low-carbon economy.  This is caused primarily by increases in “greenhouse” gases such as Carbon Dioxide (CO2).   Small changes in the average temperature of earth so far, can transform into large in coming hundred years. Moreover, these climatic changes will have great potential to create negative impacts on environment and mankind. Therefore, it is essential to mitigate climate change for advance minimization of its dangerous impacts. Current evidence suggests that to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we should aim to limit the global average temperature rise to 2°C (35.6°F), not beyond that. This requires to undertake immediate reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions in all the sectors.  All extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing the overall temperature of earth on day-to-day basis, causing global warming. It is changing climate in unpredictable ways, from floods and hurricanes to heat waves and droughts. To try and reduce the risk of global warming and extreme weather events, It is required to reduce the amount of how much fossil fuel we are burning. This isn't an easy process. In the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, it was decided that carbon emission in the atmosphere will be reduced by 5% below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. Several measures can be found out to reduce carbon from the atmosphere and thus to reduce adverse impacts of climate change. One of the measure is carbon sequestration, which is cheap and simple as well as costly and complex. That is natural carbon sequestration and geological carbon sequestration.   Carbon farming is a name for a variety of agricultural methods aimed at sequestering atmospheric carbon into the soil and in crop roots, wood and leaves. Increasing soil's carbon content can aid plant growth, increase soil organic matter (improving agricultural yield), improve soil water retention capacity and reduce fertilizer use (and the accompanying emissions of greenhouse gas nitrous oxide (N2O). As of 2016, variants of carbon farming reached hundreds of millions of hectares globally, of the nearly 5 billion hectares (1.2×1010 acres) of world farmland. Soils can contain up to five per cent carbon by weight, including decomposing plant and animal matter and biochar.  The use of the technology would add an additional 1–5 cents of cost per kilowatt hour, according to estimate made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The financial costs of modern coal technology would nearly double if use of CCS technology were to be required by regulation.   Twitter: https://twitter.com/realyashnegiEmail: yashnegi@climatology.inBuzzsprout - Let's get your podcast launched! Start for FREEDisclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the show (https://paypal.me/yashnegi27?locale.x=en_GB)

In this episode of the podcast, I have discussed about Anthropogenic Emissions.Topics talked in the podcast: Introduction The effect of N2O emission on the net CO2 displacement by energy crop productionSmart Urban Energy Transition German Advisory Council on Global Change(WBGU)Nitrogen Oxides formation and controlEnvironmental Impact Follow me on twitter: https://twitter.com/realyashnegiSuggestions are always welcome: yashnegi@climatology.inWebsite: climatology.inSupport the show (https://paypal.me/yashnegi27?locale.x=en_GB)