Thursday, October 26, 2006

Mushrooms and Fairy Rings

By Bruce Wenning

 

Every fall I get questions from people who are worried about the appearance of mushrooms (toadstools) growing in their lawns and gardens. Some people feel that they are unsightly and sure that their presence indicates that something is wrong. Others welcome these fungi and are delighted when they learn that mushrooms serve an ecological purpose by helping in the decomposition of soil organic matter. Only one caller has mentioned that the mushrooms growing in her garden and lawn added interest as "colorful little plants."

Mushrooms are fungi. Green plants (trees, shrubs, lawns and garden plants) contain chlorophyll in their leaves, and, by the action of photosynthesis, produce sugars and other compounds from carbon dioxide and water. Mushrooms, on the other hand lack chlorophyll and cannot undergo photosynthesis. They must derive their nutrients from dead plant and animal matter.

How do they do this? Mushrooms colonize organic debris in the soil by hyphae (fine branching tubes). As their hyphae grow and "seek out" organic debris such as buried wood chips, dead roots, pieces of wood, lawn thatch, etc., they gain more mass by branching outward and fusing together forming a larger structure called a mycelium. Mycelium is the body of the fungus and hyphae are its individual components.

As the mycelium moves or grows through the soil by way of multiple growing points, it increases in size as a diffuse, loosely combined fungal mass-producing various enzymes and other chemicals to digest or feed on organic compounds in the soil. Mushrooms and other decomposing fungi are important garden organisms involved with organic matter break down and nutrient recycling. They are welcomed additions to the organically-tended lawn and garden.

Mushrooms are the above ground portion of the underground growing mycelium. Mushrooms are the actual fruiting body or reproductive structure of the fungus. They are the "tip of the iceberg" of the entire fungus. In general, a mushroom is composed of a cap, gills, ring, stalk, cup and root-like extensions (rhizomorphs). Under the cap, spores are produced in the gills for release into the air. Boletes mushrooms release spores from pores instead of gills.

Spores, when released, can be carried by wind, rain, irrigation water from sprinklers, animals, insects and gardening tools that come into contact with the mushroom. For a spore to germinate into hyphae, the right combination of moisture, temperature, and available organic compounds must be present for growth and eventual development to occur. The process from spore to hyphae to a mycelium that produces a mushroom could take weeks to years depending upon the fungal species and environmental conditions.

Fairy rings are groups of mushrooms growing in lawns and pastures that form circular or semi-circular patterns. These mushroom rings occur during spring and fall in all types of grasses when temperatures range between 45 and 65 degrees F. Many species of mushrooms can form fairy rings, however these three species are the most common; Marasmius oreades (small, tan color), Agaricus campestris (edible, sold in grocery stores), and Chlorophyllum molybdites (large, white poisonous).

 

Fairy rings can vary from a few inches to more than 50 feet in length. The mycelium producing the fairy ring mushrooms can be as deep as eight inches or more, impeding water from reaching turfgrass roots. This is the reason why fairy ring fungi are considered a disease in lawns. Grass is killed inside the ring of mushrooms and grass. The outer ring of mushrooms and grass is alive with the grass exhibiting deep green color and a faster growth rate. This is due to the mushrooms' decomposing soil organic matter and releasing nutrients to the grass as a natural fertilizer. It is not unusual for a fairy ring to resemble a bulls eye appearance similar to dog urine spots on a lawn. However, dog urine spots lack mushrooms.

Fairy rings spread outward from a few inches to several feet per year. According to Mass Audubon naturalist, Dan McCullough, if the fairy ring mycelium hits a rock, fence post, bird feeder post or some other impeding object, the ring will become interrupted, possibly loosing its circular or semi-circular pattern. Digging out the mushroom-mycelium mass and replacing with good topsoil will help eliminate this problem.

McCullough owns fourteen mushroom field guides and still has problems identifying certain species. He strongly urges the beginner to use caution when looking for edible mushrooms. Identifying mushrooms is not like identifying birds, where one bird guide may cover all the birds in an area. You must use several guides when trying to identify mushrooms and it is strongly advisable to take a class to sharpen your skills.

Bruce Wenning is the horticulturist-grounds manager of the Mass Audubon Society, Habitat sanctuary, Belmont and serves on the Board of Directors of the Ecological Landscaping Association. www.ecolandscaping.org

Read More...

Nutrients help turn the Charles green

By Anna Eleria and Rebecca Scibek/Special to the TAB

 

 

While this summer was filled with warm, sunny days that encouraged recreation on the Charles River and in its parklands, it also saw an explosive growth of a potentially harmful algae in the Lower Charles. First identified in early August, the fluorescent green algal bloom extended from the Harvard/Massachusetts Avenue Bridge east to the Museum of Science, with dense, floating mats of algae most visible in lagoons, canals and along the river’s edge in Boston and Cambridge. 

Algal blooms have been a problem in the Charles River for years, but this year’s bloom was remarkable for two reasons. First, it was the first time that the algae bloom was identified - a sample collected in early August was identified as microcystis, a type of blue-green algae that secretes toxins and grows naturally in fresh and estuarine waters. Second, the amount of algae was extremely large. The abundance of algae was due to heavy late spring and early summer rainstorms that brought an enormous influx of nutrients to the river, followed by a period of extremely warm water temperatures, creating perfect conditions for algae growth.

In early August, the density of sampled algae was ten times greater than the moderate health risk threshold designated by the World Health Organization (WHO). Samples taken the second week in September by Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) showed that algae levels had decreased significantly, close to the WHO low health risk threshold. CRWA sent water samples (with algae concentrations slightly above the low health risk probability threshold) to a laboratory at the State University of New York in Syracuse to determine if and how much of the toxin was released by the algae. The results showed that a small, but significant, amount of toxin was present in the water at that time. Exposure to the toxin at that level could lead to short-term health problems such as skin irritations, diarrhea, and nausea. 

To notify the public of the potential hazard, CRWA informed all boathouses involved in the Flagging Program, a daily water quality public notification system, of the algal bloom, and instructed those within the affected area to fly red “do not boat”

flags. DCR posted signs along the river warning people to avoid direct contact with the water. CRWA and state environmental and health agencies are continuing to work together to better monitor and understand the algae issue.

Algae is a natural and critical part of the Charles River ecosystem that provides food for fish and other small aquatic animals. However, too much algae drives the ecosystems out of balance, as it blocks sunlight from underwater plants, creates large day-night swings in oxygen levels in the water, produces scum and odor and may secrete large amounts of toxins. Upon die-off, algae consumes large amounts of oxygen, which can damage or kill fish and plant species that are dependent on dissolved oxygen in the water.

The primary cause of algal blooms in freshwater is excessive phosphorus, a nutrient found in wastewater treatment plant discharges and in stormwater runoff. The single greatest source of nutrients in the Charles River is run-off from high-density residential land, which comprises nearly fifty percent of Newton’s land. Lawn fertilizers, soaps and detergents are the main human sources of phosphorus. Other “natural”

sources of phosphorus from residential areas are decaying leaves, grass clippings, and pet waste, all of which increase the level of algae-inducing nutrients when they flow into the river through storm drains or small streams.

The property management practices of homeowners and municipalities have a dramatic impact of the amount of nutrients flowing into the Charles. Property owners should minimize fertilizer use, use only low phosphorus fertilizers, pick up and dispose of dog waste, and dispose of yard waste properly (not in the street or into storm drains). Cities and towns should minimize the use of fertilizers on public playing fields, parks and landscaped areas, provide yard waste pickup, enforce “pooper-scooper” laws, clean catch basins regularly, and build “green infrastructure”

wherever possible. 

Other factors, such as low river flow volume, warm water temperature and the presence of dams, magnify the impacts of phosphorus and increase algae growth.  CRWA continues to develop science-based solutions to tackle these problems, and to advocate for policies and programs that will help reduce algae levels and ensure cleaner, safer waters for fish, wildlife and the public. 

Anna Eleria is a CRWA Project Manager/Engineer, and Rebecca Scibek is CRWA Volunteer Coordinator.

Read More...

Embedded Energy in Buildings

By Gilbert Woolley

 

For the past 30 years we have been harangued and implored to reduce use of energy and raw materials: drive less, turn down the thermostat, insulate; recycle paper, cans and bottles; use renewable materials and fuels. These are all necessary and beneficial. But there is one major use of energy that has received little attention: the energy "embedded" in construction materials. This is the energy used to turn wet clay into hard baked bricks, limestone into lime and cement, to melt and process steel, copper and aluminum used in a building. The raw materials for roofing shingles, vinyl siding, cable insulation and plastic piping is derived from oil or natural gas. Even the insulation added to reduce energy losses has an energy content.

To this must be added the energy used to mine the clay, lime and sand, to harvest trees and to transport these materials from mine, quarry and forest to the factories where they are processed, and finally to the construction site.  For a typical house in Massachusetts, this embedded energy may exceed the energy used to heat, cool and light it over a fifteen year period. So, how can some of this energy be saved?

There are significant differences in the energy embedded in various materials. In general, lighter construction embeds less energy than more solid masonry construction.  However, masonry has a much longer potential life and has other advantages, like rot and insect resistance.  In poor countries materials salvaged from demolition of buildings are often recycled, but in the US the cost of labor to separate the wood, cables and pipes from the concrete, plaster and bricks is usually greater than the value of the materials salvaged and the demolition debris is hauled away to a landfill, adding transportation energy and compounding another dilemma of modern life: shortage of landfill space.

The optimal way to save embedded energy (and in the long run to save money) is to make buildings last longer.  Often, demolition is not necessary.  Rooms can be added to houses; factories and warehouses are turned into office space; pricey condos and apartments; unused churches are transformed into restaurants and schools into apartments.  Such re-use by the private sector is usually motivated by cost savings. Local examples show how apparently unpromising buildings can be "recycled". The computer design and prototype manufacturing workshops of Digital Equipment Corporation were located in a 150-year-old mill in Maynard. This mill was fitted out with the latest methods of communication, including fiber optics cables throughout the million square foot, 21 building complex.  The old windows were double glazed, air-conditioning added and roofs well insulated.  Just over the border from Newton in Watertown, "HighTech" Boston Scientific has refurbished an old water mill on the Charles River.  These old buildings are often better built and have finer esthetics than recent construction.

If you are planning remodeling or an addition to your home, ask your architect to incorporate the existing building into the new design. A building is just a shell and the conveniences of modern life can be added to it. In Europe and Asia, buildings are still in active use that are 500, 1000 and more, years old. Even in the US buildings more than 200 years old can be found at many older universities, such as Harvard, and in historic sites like Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market. There are many examples of imaginative use of old buildings, impressive structures that escaped being been torn down in the name of "urban renewal".

Gilbert Woolley is a retired engineer and longtime member of the Sierra Club.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/environmentpage.html

Read More...

Putting a wedge in global warming

By Jill Hahn

The argument over global warming has shifted, from whether it’s real to what we ought to do about it.
On the one hand are those who’ll give you advice about what you, the individual consumer, can do to help. Buy energy-efficient appliances. Trade in your SUV for a hybrid. Change your lightbulbs to compact fluorescents.

On the other hand are those who point out that global warming is a problem of - well, of global dimensions, and your noble yet pitiful attempt to help is like hoping the ocean will care if you remove a drop of water. What you really need to do is learn how to adapt. Get flood insurance. Make sure your air-conditioning works.

So should you change your behavior, or is it pointless? In order to answer that, we need to get a handle on the magnitude of the problem, and the magnitude of your potential response.

Before the industrial age, Earth’s atmosphere contained about 280 parts per million (ppm) of CO2. Today the concentration of CO2 stands at about 375 ppm. There is some agreement that, in order to prevent most of the damaging climate change predicted by global models, we need to limit future atmospheric CO2 concentrations to no more than 500 ppm.
Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala, economists at Princeton University, asked what we would need to do in order to keep atmospheric CO2 from climbing past 500 ppm in the next 50 years. They found that carbon emissions would need to be held near the present level of 7 billion tons (or gigatons) of carbon per year (7 GtC/year) for the next 50 years. There’s a problem, though: emissions are currently on course to more than double in that time, pushing atmospheric CO2 concentrations past 700 ppm.

So Pacala and Socolow made a graph. The top line rises as emissions will if we continue “business as usual.” The bottom line is horizontal, holding steady at 7 billion tons of carbon per year. Pacala and Socolow then divided the difference between the top line and the bottom line into seven equal ‘wedges.’ Each wedge represents an emission-reducing activity that starts at zero today and increases until it accounts for a cumulative total of 25 GtC of reduced emissions over 50 years. In other words, if we can find seven different ways of lowering emissions by 25GtC over the next fifty years, we’ll keep ourselves below the ceiling of 500 ppm of atmospheric CO2.

Gigatons – that’s a lot of carbon. Trading in one SUV won’t do the trick. But what if we insisted that every new car sold in the United States be twice as fuel-efficient as the current fleet? That wouldn’t be hard to achieve, considering that right now the average American passenger car gets 22.4 mpg, while vans, pickups, and SUVs average a measly 16.2 mpg. Pull out your scratch paper.

We buy lots of new cars and light trucks in the US, 6.6 million in 2003 alone. If we doubled the fuel efficiency of these new vehicles, we would save over 5 billion gallons of gasoline per year. Each gallon of gasoline accounts for about 3 kg of carbon, so our new vehicles would save 17 million tons of C in a year. Over 50 years, the savings from that one year’s worth of new, more fuel-efficient automobiles would accrue to 846,387,000 tons, or 0.8 GtC.
Assuming that the same number of new vehicles is built each year for 50 years, these more efficient vehicles would save 21 GtC, almost an entire wedge. Buying that hybrid may represent only a tiny drop, but mandating higher fuel efficiency for all new vehicles would go a long way towards stopping draining the ocean.

What about potential energy savings in your home? Dr. William Moomaw, Director of the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy at Tufts University, recently built a new home that uses one-third the energy of a conventional house. That’s a high bar to achieve, but “my contractor,” says Dr. Moomaw, “… has built houses that … use 2/3 of the energy of a standard house at no extra cost.”

We know how many new houses are built in the U.S. in a given year, and how much energy they use annually, because the U.S. Census and the Department of Energy keep track of it. We can therefore calculate annual carbon emissions due to new homes (not counting AC): 3,363,228 metric tons.

Let’s be conservative and imagine that these houses were built to be 25% more energy-efficient. That would save us 840,807 metric tons of carbon each year. Over 50 years, adding a million energy-efficient new houses each year, we get a total savings of 1GtC, or a twenty-fifth of a wedge. So, although buying an energy-efficient refrigerator is a responsible thing you can do right now, it’s changing how we build all new buildings that will really make a difference to the planet. And the sooner we begin, the more of an impact we’ll have, since accrued over fifty years, it’s the early changes that make the most difference.

And what about lightbulbs? In 2001, lighting accounted for 101 billion kilowatt hours of U.S. household electricity use, which translates about 105 metric tons C. Compact fluorescents would save 66% of that, or about 5 GtC over 50 years. That’s a fifth of a wedge, if we simply replaced every lightbulb in every home in America with compact fluorescents. How many people does it take to change a lightbulb? Everybody, if we want to change the world.

Jill Hahn, a Newton Highlands resident, is a biologist, a writer, and a mom. All three roles contribute to her interest in environmental issues. She can be reached at jkkhahn@comcast.net.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/environmentpage.html

Read More...

Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force Working for Health and Safety

Most of us are becoming more aware of the threat from global warming and how much our reliance on the automobile contributes to it.  At the same time, we have been learning that obesity is on the rise, in part because children and adults are walking less and driving more. Newton has a Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force (BPTF) working to address these problems, by making walking and bicycling safer and more convenient for everyone in the city.

Recently, a national bicycling magazine gave Boston a low grade for bicycle accommodations, while commending Cambridge for its leadership in this area.  Although Newton is not known as being particularly bicycle-friendly, the city has been addressing pedestrian concerns, by publicizing the right of way of pedestrians in unprotected crosswalks and installing “count-down” pedestrian signal lights.

Newton’s population of 80,000 clusters around 13 distinctive village centers, each having a range of stores and services.  Improved conditions for bicycling and walking could enable many more residents to satisfy their shopping, commuting and recreational needs without having to use their cars.  Trips to school on foot or by bicycle would be more enjoyable and healthier for children and reduce the congestion and safety hazards now associated with the common practice of being driven to school.

BPTF has been cooperating with other Boston-area organizations to improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the entire metropolitan region, while working with our own city officials to mark heavily-traveled roadways with striped shoulders for cyclists, and encouraging private companies to make it easier for customers and staff to access their locations by bicycle and on foot. 

The Task Force has updated the city’s Greenman-Pedersen, Inc. Bicycle Accommodations Report (2000) and has submitted it to the Department of Public Works to help guide future road projects.  This plan helps the City set priorities for bicycle accommodations required by state law for any road project paid for by state and federal funds.  The accommodations include the four-foot wide striped shoulders on Centre Street between Mill Street and Newton Corner as well as “Share the Road” signs and painted “hybrid lane” symbols designed for congested areas that have been proposed for Walnut Street near the Newton Highlands village center. 

BPTF has worked with Boston College and Newton-Wellesley Hospital to improve bicycle and pedestrian access for students and employees, and has helped the city’s Planning Department set priorities for locating new bicycle racks (to be provided at no cost by the state) in conjunction with road projects.

Newton is one of many communities in the “inner core” area of the Boston region, and BPTF works with the MassBike Metro Boston chapter on issues of common interest.  Most recently, this group helped to prepare a report to the state Dept. of Conservation and Recreation on the deteriorated conditions of the Charles River paths that are used by hundreds of people every day.

In the coming year, BPTF will continue to monitor active road project planning, work with City officials on providing bicycle and pedestrian accommodations to the new Newton North High School, promote the adoption of safe routes to school programs, and work with city officials to improve pedestrian facilities in under-served areas and improve access to all sidewalks in the winter.

The Task Force has public meetings at 7:30 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month in the cafeteria of Newton City Hall. The October meeting is on the 24th. Come and share your concerns and ideas about bicycling and walking in Newton or contact me to be added to the email list.  More information: johnsbliss@verizon.net or (617) 244-6495.

Read More...

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

It’s Wednesday, do you know where your vegetables are?

Each year 76,000,000 Americans suffer food poisoning; 300,000 require hospitalization and 5,000 people die. These numbers imply much human suffering. The US food supply is highly vulnerable to contamination, even here in Metropolitan Boston.Michael Pollen, in a recent op-ed piece in the NY Times, cuts to the quick: “Today 80 percent of America’s beef is slaughtered by four companies, 75 percent of the precut salads are processed by two and 30 percent of the milk by just one company.” He adds: “Keeping local food economies healthy — and at the moment they are thriving — is a matter not of sentiment but of critical importance to the national security and the public health, as well as to reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy.”

Consider public health. Most of us felt a twinge of fear when we learned about the recent contamination of packaged spinach, and rightly so. Although we may never know the exact source of that deadly outbreak, the underlying problem is no mystery. E coli bacteria thrive in the guts and manure of feedlot cattle. Manure often finds its way onto agricultural fields and agricultural workers’ hands. This problem has escalated because of the increasing centralization and scale of US agriculture. Because the growing, packaging and distribution of agricultural produce has become highly centralized and mechanized over the years, what used to be a local problem of food-borne illness that could be contained and traced is now poised- at any moment- to generate a national disaster.

There are technological fixes for this, such as increasing radiation treatment of our food supply to eliminate bacterial agents.  There are also political fixes, such as government enforcement of strict separation of animal feedlots and produce fields. These solutions, however, exact a big price. Not so much in dollars; the large corporations involved in agribusiness are marvels of efficiency and can absorb the financial cost. The greatest price is borne by the public, because enacting these measures reinforcesthe trend of limiting consumer access to fresh, ripe and varied produce.Consider national security. In 2004 The US Health and Human Services chief, Tommy Thompson, publicly expressed amazement that “terrorists have not attacked our food supply, because it is so easy to do.”Consider energy and pollution. In Massachusetts, most of the domestic produce we eat travels on average 1500 miles (and often 3000 miles) from field to market. It is transported by vehicles that run on fossil fuels.  Consider biodiversity. Look at all those uniform bags and bunches of produce in the supermarkets. We have already lost so much of the variety that promotes disease resistance. Monocultures are not natural ecosystems; they require lots of pesticides and fertilizers.Consider local farmers.  Not only does the large-scale, highly centralized production of our food supply seriously compromise human health and biodiversity, while increasing our vulnerability to terrorism, it is also putting more and more small farmers out of business. They cannot afford- and they do not need- the costly equipment and procedures mandated by governments to ensure the safety of food grown by large, centralized producers.We consumers right here in Metropolitan Boston have choices about what we eat. Exercising those choices thoughtfully takes time and care. We can make the effort to support local farmers, to learn how and where our food is grown and about the benefits of organic food (www.nofa.org). If we don’t do this, and wejust “keep on truckin'", we'll be playing Russian roulette ‘til the cows come in.

Read More...