|· RULES · Portal||Help Search Members Calendar|
|Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )||Resend Validation Email|
|Welcome to Loose Change Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.|
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:
Posted: Jan 6 2007, 12:04 AM
Member No.: 331
Joined: 20-October 06
Saturday, January 6, 2007; Page A07
Two newly published scientific reports suggest that mercury contamination has created at least five "hot spots" in New England and Canada, places where the neurotoxin has accumulated in fish and wildlife to such an extent that it could harm human health and local ecosystems.
The 11 scientists, who work at institutions including Syracuse University and Vermont's Department of Environmental Conservation, analyzed how mercury has accumulated in two indicator species in the northern United States and southern Canada. In both cases, they were able to identify several regions where mercury in yellow perch and common loons was above acceptable levels.
David C. Evans, who heads a Maine-based nonprofit group called the BioDiversity Research Institute and is one of the papers' lead authors, said the study shows that some areas of the country are more susceptible to mercury pollution than others.
"You need to look at the fish and wildlife to understand what areas are problematic," Evans said. "A coal-burning plant in a wetland area would have far greater impact on human health and wildlife than a coal-burning plant in a dry, grassy area."