Distracted Driving: A Risk Not Worth Taking

Current research reveals the legitimate danger of distracted driving. Distracted driving can include: dialing a cell phone, texting, reading, applying make-up, eating, reaching for a moving object or looking outside of the vehicle. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, more than 6,000 people in the United States were killed last year, and more than 500,000 were injured due to distracted driving. Factor in bad weather, road construction, work stress and traffic into the equation, and distracted driving becomes a recipe for disaster.

According to a study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, if a driver sends a text message while driving, he or she is 23 times more likely to get into a collision. At highway speeds, just five seconds spent looking at a texting device equals 100 or more yards traveled without paying attention. CNBC and Car and Driver Magazine indicate texting and driving can be worse than drunk driving, reporting that an unimpaired driver takes .54 seconds to brake while a driver reading an email or sending a text message could take up to an additional 70 feet to brake.  

Here are a few tips on remaining an undistracted driver:

  • Make and finish phone calls before you drive away
  • If your phone rings while driving, allow your voicemail to pick up the call
  • If you must answer your phone, pull over to a safe location to complete the call
  • Never text and drive
  • Give yourself time to eat, drink and rest prior to driving
  • Allow sufficient time to reach your location
  • Ensure all passengers are buckled-up properly
  • Adjust vehicle controls prior to driving away (navigation systems, climate control, radio/mp3 device, seat)
  • Lead by example: teach children how important it is to be focused while driving, and provide them with distractions like books or games
  • Properly secure a pet in a moving vehicle, and never allow them to sit in your lap while driving

While driving, it is important to remember the following:

  • Stay focused
  • Pay attention
  • Expect the unexpected

Remember, safe driving protects you and others on the road. Keep your mind on your driving, your eyes on the road and your hands on the wheel.

Resources:
http://www.nationwide.com/employee-driving-while-distracted.jsp
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffdl28.htm
http://hr.cch.com/hhrlib/issues-answers/Should-your-company-prohibit-texting-while-driving.asp?date=December-5-2011 
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31545004/Texting_And_Driving_Worse_Than_Drinking_and_Driving

Agriculture and Climate Change

Have you noticed that the seasons are behaving differently over the past few years?  Instead of mild summers are you experiencing temperatures 10-15 degrees higher?  Maybe you have kept that winter coat in storage longer than you normally would.   Most of the population is aware that our climate has been changing.  An important issue to consider is how will this affect our food production?

Agriculture stakeholders review everything from precipitation to CO2 levels when evaluating climate change.  Recent studies indicate other items such as flooding and droughts, as well as changes in the amount of heat stress can create a number of unpredictable issues.  These include pest and pathogen outbreak, or wildfires.   The consequences of climate change on agriculture stressors can alter the outcome of production because each one is connected to the other. 

Most ecosystems will likely experience an increase in temperature which will cause the growing season to lengthen.  Although this sounds encouraging, it will also increase the chances of severe drought and soil evaporation rates.  Because of the variables involved, it’s too difficult to predict exactly how much the temperature will change or how long a season may last.   Temperature increases correspond with precipitation which also modifies the climate and rate of growth in agriculture.

Rainfall can change the rate at which soil evaporates and erodes, and can limit our water resources.   Precipitation will vary from region to region but extreme precipitation events are predicted to increase.  This means that regions at higher latitudes may see an increase in water while mid-latitudes will continue to become drier.  There is no guarantee for food production even if we can provide the necessary water.  Crops rely on our atmosphere to assist with the process and if there is not a balance within regions experiencing a climate change, they will fail.

A rise in the amount of pollution will likely limit crop growth.  The lower levels of the atmosphere are affected by both temperature and emissions.   It is likely that ozone concentrations will increase as the climate changes.  Another change in the atmosphere is a higher concentration of CO2.  CO2 is shaped by humans and an increase can act as a fertilizer.  While this will initially have a positive impact on crops, other stressors such as rainfall can negate any benefits.

The effects of climate change on the world’s agriculture are not only determined by the factors stated above, but also on our ability to adapt to the changes.  Farmers, agriculture companies, and researchers must consider the impact of all aspects of climate change around the world.  At this time most countries are able to monitor a spectrum of changes to the ecosystem but cannot possibly quantify all influences on a global scale. 

Resources:
http://epa.gov/climatechange/effects/agriculture.html 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/6528979.stm 
http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap4-3/final-report/Synthesis_SAP_4.3.pdf

Electric Plants Shift from Coal to Natural Gas

For decades, electric power plants’ air pollution has been a main concern for environmentalists. However, a transformation is under way as more and more electrical plants are being fueled by natural gas, which has proven to be far cleaner than coal. 

Optimistics of this new trend hope the domestic energy source will create new jobs as well as provide cleaner skies and fresher air.

Over the last decade, electricity generated by gas-fired plants has risen more than 50 percent.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, gas plants generated about 600 billion kilowatt hours of electricity in 2000 and 981 billion kilowatt hours in 2010.

To the delight of environmentalists, during this time, electricity generated by coal-fired plants declined. Coal generation declined from 1,966 billion kilowatt hours to 1,850 billion kilowatt hours, while hydroelectric and nuclear generation stayed about the same. Between 2009 and 2010, overall natural gas power generation rose approximately 7 percent.

Jay Apt, a technology professor at Carnegie Mellon, stated most people he knew in the electrical power industry were building natural gas plants due to the “low prices over the last few years and relatively low cost of building such plants, compared with coal fired or nuclear.” Although the trend has grown in popularity, Apt believes the trend could potentially stall due to the basic economic principles of supply and demand. “If too many plants embrace cheap gas, it won’t stay cheap. The surest route to $6 or $8 gas is for everybody to plan on $4 gas, and if prices do rise, coal will again be the most cost-effective fuel.”

Hopefuls of the natural gas trend anticipate its profitability. There has been a large growth in supply of natural gas thanks to the Marcellus Shale drilling project. Gas deposits that could not previously be extracted in an economic manner are now being tapped using new technologies, including hydraulic fracturing.

Although some companies are choosing to make the switch to natural gas-fired plants, others are choosing alternate approaches such as investing in pollution control equipment while keeping coal-fired plants open and compliant with clean air laws.

Those using the alternate approaches don’t feel as though the natural-gas trend will last long and believe history might repeat itself. From the late 1990s to 2004, some companies believed they would become extremely prosperous from the combination of cheap fuel and plants that were highly efficient yet relatively inexpensive to build. However, the cost of natural-gas spiked and numerous plants became idle.

Most companies are not going to start tearing down their coal plants to replace with natural gas as it’s just as likely for natural gas prices to rise again.

Only time will tell if natural gas operations prove to be a success.

Resources:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46014119
http://news.yahoo.com/pa-plant-convert-generators-coal-gas-174025607.html

Hydraulic Fracturing Draws Opposing Views

There have been opposing views on the natural-gas drilling process known as “fracking” or hydraulic fracturing, being considered in New York this week.  Hydraulic fracturing is a proven technological advancement which allows producers to safely recover natural gas and oil from deep shale formations. This technology stimulates well production by injecting millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals down the well bore to crack surrounding shale.  Sources say it has the potential to not only dramatically reduce our reliance on foreign fuel imports, but also significantly reduce our national carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and accelerate our transition to a carbon-light environment.

Not everyone has agreed that this is environmentally friendly.  Opponents in New York are saying that water supplies are threatened by the shale gas development.  Environmental groups, who once viewed fracking as a better alternative to oil production, are now divided on whether or not regulations can adequately protect against environmental damage from hydraulic fracturing  Some even demand an outright ban of fracking.

There has been a coalition of groups including Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, and Riverkeeper, delivering comments to the Department of Environmental Conservation, (DEC).  Letters and a petition from other environmental groups were sent to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo regarding environmental concerns. The petition had over 20,000 signatures citing, what they consider, serious flaws in the oversight plan by the DEC.

The groups are extremely concerned that the document by the DEC failed to address a plan for the disposal of millions of gallons of hazardous wastewater, an assessment of potential human health impacts, and to quantify any negative socioeconomic impacts, among others.

However, supporters of the technique say the proposed regulations will actually prevent environmental harm and drilling brings job opportunities and other economic benefits.  If there is overregulation, it will be too expensive for New York energy companies to drill.

Because of the opposition, it has now caused a delay in New York on drilling in the Marcellus Shale, which extends from southern New York to parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. The gas drilling is moving forward in the other states, but New York drilling has been on hold since the review from the DEC since 2008.  At this time, the DEC commissioner, Joe Martens has not set a timeline for the review to be finished and issue permits to drill. However, Emily DeSantis, DEC spokeswoman said, “If the final documents determine high-volume hydraulic fracturing could move forward in New York, we could begin to review permit applicants after the final (environmental impact statement) is released.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is also conducting its own scientific study regarding the impact water resources incur from hydraulic fracturing.  It is expected that the first findings of the study will be this year.

The DEC is to address each issue raised by the environmental groups to then move forward with permits. Only time will tell how beneficial or detrimental hydraulic fracturing will be for both our environment and economy. 

Resources:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204257504577153190943260940.html?KEYWORDS=oil+and+gas+news
http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com/Pages/information.aspx

Steps to Keeping Your Employees Healthy

During flu and cold season it is important to have a plan in place within your company that will encourage a healthy work environment.  Here are a few simple steps that your company can implement to protect employees from spreading illnesses. 

  1. Encourage your employees to get vaccinated.  Offer days and times when they can leave to get the vaccination or host a flu vaccination clinic.
  2. Have a plan in place.  Allow your employees to get involved with developing and reviewing a pandemic flu plan or develop a new one.  Be sure to share your policies regarding your plan with all employees.
  3. Work with the community, including companies you do business with, to improve response efforts.  Illness can have a major impact on the community and it takes a concerted effort by everyone.
  4. Consider allowing sick employees enough time to recover so that they will not return to work only to get sick again or expose others.
  5. Send sick employees home as soon as possible.  If the employees cannot go home immediately, try to separate them from others.
  6. Have supplies available such as hand soap, tissue, and other items that will help prevent exposure and encourage healthy habits.
  7. Consider an Evaluation Program.  Have employees screened each year to evaluate their health and alert them of risks.
  8. Utilize your country’s own notification system regarding areas most affected by the flu.  Most countries provide a website with updates, information, and even a symptom checker.

It is important to provide guidance to employees to ensure awareness of what to do should they become ill or if a coworker appears sick.  Prevention is key and creating an environment where everyone can take care of themselves, will not only help ill employees return sooner, it may also prevent others from becoming exposed. 

References:
http://answers.flu.gov/questions/4805
http://www.ccohs.ca/pandemic/documents/flu.html
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/business/toolkit/actionsteps.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/business/Recommended_Strategies.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/business/toolkit_seasonal_flu_for_businesses_and_employers.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/business/Recommended_Strategies.pdf
http://www.flupandemic.gov.au/internet/panflu/publishing.nsf/Content/businesses-communities-lp-1