Germany: salmon go crazy after getting intoxicated with cocaine

It was in June 2020 when a fisheries officer of the agency in the municipality of Kirchhundem observed an atypical behavior in the animals, raised for a species conservation project.

https://twitter.com/VICETV/status/1416404824715825155

After performing an analysis of water samples from the stream and basin, pesticides from agriculture and remains of pharmaceutical products from wastewater were found, all in small quantities. What’s more, The researchers discovered two substances that caught their attention: cocaine and benzoylecgonine, a product that is used to break down the narcotic.

“The salmon were trying to jump out of the water in panic”, said Daniel Fey, head of the Department of Fisheries Ecology and Aquaculture, quoted by Der Spiegel.

WHAT’S MORE:

The Simpsons and great news for Latin Americans

According to the specialist, this behavior pointed to contamination of the inlet water, which the fish instinctively wanted to avoid. “The next day, the salmon returned to their typical behavior” and suffered no permanent damage, he added.

Although the experts did not detect drugs in the tank itself, this could be due to the high degree of dilution in the facility. “It has not been possible to find a clear cause for the behavior of the fish. However, a reaction to the cocaine detected in the water of the stream cannot be ruled out,” the state agency explained in a recent report.

It is still unclear who threw the narcotic into the water. The agency employees found an illegal discharge of sewage in the stream, however, the Police could not determine the origin of this.

.

Düssel floods flooded Gruiten village

.

TROPICAL STORM ELSA: Heavy rain and strong winds reach the east coast of the USA – WELT news channel

  1. TROPICAL STORM ELSA: Heavy rain and strong winds hit the east coast of the USAWORLD news channel
  2. WEATHER: Tropical storm “Elsa” hits the Florida coastWORLD news channel
  3. See “More on Topic” in Google News

.

Dramatic: Video Shows What Happened Before Miami Building Collapse

MIAMI, UNITED STATES.-New elements about the reasons for the collapse of a building in Miami come to light, this time a video of the moments before the collapse.

In the clip taken by Adriana Sarmiento you can see how water falls from the roof of the building’s garage.

Seconds later you can see pieces of cement falling from the ceiling for no reason, eight minutes after that the first part of the 12-story building falls.

READ: Damage from breathing dust from the building that collapsed in Miami warns

+Subtle sinking and carelessness? Possible causes of the collapse in Miami

A minute later the second part of the building that was 40 years old gives way.

Sarmiento recorded with his cell phone seconds after the floors fell and when the dust began to disperse in the area.

You can hear the anguish experienced during the first moments in which the magnitude of the tragedy that occurred at dawn on Thursday, June 24, was not known.

“By God! They all died”, can be heard in the clip that was shared on social networks.

ALSO: ‘Something told me I had to run’: hard stories from survivors of the Miami landslide

+Faces of the disappeared in the collapse of the Miami building

.

‘Mega drought’ on the border fuels disputes between the US and Mexico over water shortages – El Financiero

The United States and Mexico are fighting for their dwindling shared water supplies after years of unprecedented heat and insufficient rainfall.

Sustained drought in the lower-middle Rio Grande since the mid-1990s means that less Mexican water flows to the United States. The Colorado River basin, which supplies seven states in the United States and two in Mexico, is also at record low levels.

A 1944 treaty between the United States and Mexico governs water relations between the two neighbors. The International Boundary and Water Commission he established to manage the 450,000-square-mile basins of Colorado and Rio Grande has done it skillfully, according to our research.


This management kept the water relations between the United States and Mexico, for the most part, free of conflict. But it masked some well-known underlying tensions: a population boom on both sides of the US-Mexico border, climate change and aging waterworks.

1944 al 2021

The mostly semi-arid border region between the United States and Mexico receives less than 18 inches of annual rainfall, and large areas are less than 12 inches. That’s less than half the average annual rainfall in the United States, which is mostly temperate.

The 1940s, however, were a time of unusual abundance of water in the treaty rivers. When US and Mexican engineers wrote the 1944 water treaty, they did not foresee today’s protracted mega-drought.

They also did not anticipate the rapid growth of the region. Since 1940, the population of the 10 largest city pairs that straddle both sides of the US-Mexico border has increased nearly twenty-fold, from 560,000 to about 10 million today.


This growth is driven by a booming water-dependent manufacturing industry in Mexico that exports products to US markets. Irrigated agriculture, ranching and mining compete with growing cities and expanding industry for water scarcity.

Today simply not enough to meet demand in border areas governed by the 1944 treaty.

Three times since 1992, Mexico has not fulfilled its five-year commitment to send 1.75 million acre-feet of water across the border into the United States. Each acre-foot can supply an American family of four for a year.

Water conflicts

In the fall of 2020, the crisis erupted in the Rio Grande Valley after years of mounting tensions and sustained droughts that endanger crops and livestock in both the United States and Mexico.

In September 2020, Texas Governor Greg Abbott declared that “Mexico owes Texas a year’s worth of Rio Grande water.” The following month, workers in Mexico discharged water from a dammed portion of Mexico’s Rio Conchos destined to cross the border to partially pay Mexico’s 345,600 acre-foot water debt to the United States.

Frustrated farmers and protesters in the Mexican state of Chihuahua clashed with Mexican soldiers sent to protect workers. A 35-year-old farmer’s wife and mother of three have died.

Mexico also agreed to transfer the water stored at the Amistad Dam to the United States, fulfilling its obligation just three days before the October 25, 2020 deadline. That decision satisfied its water debt to the United States under the 1944 treaty. , but endangered the supply of more than a million Mexicans living downstream of the Amistad dam in the Mexican states of Coahuila and Tamaulipas.

The United States and Mexico pledged to review the treaty’s Rio Grande water rules in 2023.

The dilemma of the drought on the Colorado River is just as dire. The water level in Lake Mead, an important reservoir for communities in the lower Colorado River, has fallen almost 70 percent in 20 years, threatening the water supplies of Arizona, California and Nevada.

In 2017, the United States and Mexico signed a temporary “shortage sharing solution”. That agreement, forged under the authority of the 1944 treaty, allowed Mexico to store some of its treaty water in US reservoirs upstream.

Save a tense treaty

Water shortages along the U.S.-Mexico border also threatens the natural environment. As water is channeled to farms and cities, rivers are deprived of the flow necessary to maintain habitats, fish populations, and the general health of rivers.

The 1944 water treaty was silent on conservation. Despite all its strengths, it simply allocates water from the Rio Grande and Colorado rivers. It does not consider the environmental side of water use.

But the treaty is reasonably elastic, so its members can update it as conditions change. In recent years, conservation organizations and scientists have promoted the environmental and human benefits of restoration. The new Colorado River agreements now recognize ecological restoration as part of treaty-based water management.

Environmental projects are underway in the lower Colorado River to help restore the river delta, emphasizing native vegetation such as willows and poplars. These trees provide habitat for birds at risk such as the yellow-billed cuckoo and the Yuma clapper, and for numerous species that migrate along this desolate stretch of the Pacific Flyway.

Currently, no such environmental improvements are planned for the Rio Grande.

But now other lessons learned in the Colorado are being applied to the Rio Grande. Recently, Mexico and the United States created a permanent binational advisory body for the Rio Grande similar to the one established in 2010 to oversee the health and ecology of the Colorado.

Another recent agreement allows each country to monitor the other’s Rio Grande water use using common diagnostics such as Riverware, a dynamic modeling tool for monitoring water storage and flows. Mexico also agreed to try to use water more efficiently, allowing more to flow to the United States..

Newly created joint teams of experts will study treaty compliance and recommend additional changes needed to manage the climate-threatened waters along the US-Mexico border in a sustainable and cooperative manner.

Incremental treaty modifications like these could palpably reduce last year’s tensions and revitalize a historic treaty between the United States and Mexico that is collapsing under enormous pressure from climate change.

* Click here to read the original article.

* By Robert Gabriel Varady, Professor of Environmental Policy Research at the University of Arizona; Andrea K. Gerlak, professor at the University of Arizona School of Geography, Development, and Environment; and Stephen Paul Mumme, Professor of Political Science at Colorado State University.

*The Conversation is an independent, nonprofit source for news, analysis, and commentary from academic experts.

.

Probably no life on Venus

Hopes were high at the end of last year: Researchers suspected life in the atmosphere of Venus. But a new study shows that there is a lack of water.

the essentials in brief

  • Previously suspected life on Venus was apparently a miscalculation.
  • The reason for this is a lack of water.
  • But it looks different on Mars.

Researchers recently found the gas monophosphane in the atmosphere of Venus. On earth this is produced by microorganisms or industrially. This is why it has been suggested that Venus harbors life in some form.

The temperatures on the surface of Venus are over 450 degrees. Therefore, it has been speculated that the microbes are in the planet’s atmosphere. But according to a new study, it is extremely unlikely that there is life there.

Significantly too little water on Venus

According to the report in the journal Nature Astronomy, the reason for this is very simple: there is a lack of water. According to the analyzes, the water activity in this area amounts to a maximum of 0.004.

In order to provide a basis for life, a value of at least 0.585 is required on the scale from 0 to 1. Therefore it is impossible that there are microbes in the atmosphere of Venus.

On the other hand, it looks different with our red neighbor: there, the water activity is 0.537. A value that could have been higher in the past.

More on the subject:

Study earth water


.

Water, mud, storm damage: SERIOUS WEATHER in many regions of Germany – WELT news channel

  1. Water, mud, storm damage: SERIOUS WEATHER in many regions of GermanyWORLD news channel
  2. Floods and hail in the southwestMercury online
  3. Violent storms in Bavaria and HesseSouthgerman newspaper
  4. Storm NRW: full cellar in Mönchengladbach – heavy rain in BocholtRP ONLINE
  5. Heavy rain and squalls cause damageMercury online
  6. See “More on Topic” in Google News

.

Öko-Test tests mineral water: 2 fail completely

RTL.de>

26. June 2021 – 11:46 Clock

50 bubbles in the eco-test

Cool sparkling mineral water: there is hardly a more refreshing way to quench your thirst in summer. But is that also possible without hesitation? For the most part yes, as Öko-Test has now established: The magazine rated 25 out of 50 classic sparkling waters with the top grade of “very good”. In the case of some brands, however, the testers criticize excessively high levels of pollutants – two therefore fail with “poor”.

What’s in mineral water?

Mineral water is initially rainwater that has seeped through layers of rock to the source. On the way down, the water can absorb not only minerals but also poisonous substances such as arsenic, uranium and boron. In addition, pesticides can seep into the fields, decompose into decomposition products on the journey down and thus also find themselves in springs.

Apart from that, according to the law, mineral water must come from underground water sources that are protected from contamination. Which sounds like a good thing. Overall, Öko-Test can agree with this. In three waters, however, the testers criticize the (slightly) increased content of chromate, which is classified as carcinogenic, as well as one uranium and two boron levels. Only the San Benedetto mineral water (increased chromate) from Italy and the Marius Quelle Classic (increased boron) from Sachsenheim failed with “poor”.

Five of the best mineral waters

With a very clear conscience and quality, however, those who are thirsty can bottle up the following products, among others:

  • “Adelholzener Classic” (1,20 Euro pro Liter)
  • “Aqua Römer Classic” (0,80 Euro)
  • “Fürst Bismarck Classic” (0.69 euros)
  • “Gerolsteiner Sprudel” (1,07 Euro)
  • “Fresh Breeze Marius Classic” (0.29 euros)

All test results are available on the Öko-Test website.

Environmental sin PET disposable bottles

The laboratory commissioned with the inspection detected pesticide breakdown products in nine products. There is no danger from their inclusion, but Öko-Test understands something else by “original purity”.

The magazine also points out that reusable is the better way. Most of the waters in the test are also available in returnable bottles: glass returnable bottles are refilled up to 50 times, PET returnable bottles up to 25 times. Consumers also carry disposable PET bottles back into the shops, but then they are shredded. Due to this environmental sin, a number of products in the test with impeccable ingredients screw up their overall result. (ntv / rka)

Do you prefer still water? Öko-Test has already checked that too – you can find the results here!

.

Öko-Test tests mineral water: only 25 out of 50 brands are “very good”

RTL.de>

25. June 2021 – 19:20 Clock

50 bubbles in the eco-test

Cool sparkling mineral water: there is hardly a more refreshing way to quench your thirst in summer. But is that also possible without hesitation? For the most part yes, as Öko-Test has now established: The magazine rated 25 out of 50 classic sparkling waters with the top grade of “very good”. In the case of some brands, however, the testers criticize excessively high levels of pollutants – two therefore fail with “poor”.

What’s in mineral water?

Mineral water is initially rainwater that has seeped through layers of rock to the source. On the way down, the water can absorb not only minerals but also poisonous substances such as arsenic, uranium and boron. In addition, pesticides can seep into the fields, decompose into decomposition products on the journey down and thus also find themselves in springs.

Apart from that, according to the law, mineral water must come from underground water sources that are protected from contamination. Which sounds like a good thing. Overall, Öko-Test can agree with this. In three waters, however, the testers criticize the (slightly) increased content of chromate, which is classified as carcinogenic, as well as one uranium and two boron levels. Only the San Benedetto mineral water (increased chromate) from Italy and the Marius Quelle Classic (increased boron) from Sachsenheim failed with “poor”.

Three of the best mineral waters

With a very clear conscience and quality, however, those who are thirsty can bottle up the following products, among others:

  • “Adelholzener Classic” (1,20 Euro pro Liter)
  • “Aqua Römer Classic” (0,80 Euro)
  • “Fürst Bismarck Classic” (0.69 euros)
  • “Gerolsteiner Sprudel” (1,07 Euro)
  • “Fresh Breeze Marius Classic” (0.29 euros)

All test results are available on the Öko-Test website.

Environmental sin PET disposable bottles

The laboratory commissioned with the inspection detected pesticide breakdown products in nine products. There is no danger from their inclusion, but Öko-Test understands something else by “original purity”.

The magazine also points out that reusable is the better way. Most of the waters in the test are also available in returnable bottles: glass returnable bottles are refilled up to 50 times, PET returnable bottles up to 25 times. Consumers also carry disposable PET bottles back into the shops, but then they are shredded. Due to this environmental sin, a number of products in the test with impeccable ingredients screw up their overall result. (ntv / rka)

Do you prefer still water? Öko-Test has already checked that too – you can find the results here!

.