The Environmental Status of the Port of HaminaKotka

This study is a part of the Ecologically Friendly Port Ust-Luga (EFP) project. The purpose of this study is to examine the environmental status of the Finnish ports and, more specifically, the Port of HaminaKotka. An analysis of the environmental status is performed mainly as a literature review, because the Finnish ports must comply with Finnish and EU legislation and with the binding international regulations and conventions created by different organizations. The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has done groundbreaking work in the field of maritime safety and maritime environmental protection. The MARPOL convention has a great impact on decreasing pollution from international shipping and it applies to 99% of the world’s merchant tonnage. Pollution prevention covers: Oil pollution, Chemical pollution, Air pollution and GHG Emissions, Dumping of Wasted and Other Matters, Garbage, Sewage, Port Reception Facilities, Special Areas under MARPOL and Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas. There is also Pollution Prevention for other treaties like anti-fouling systems used on ships, the transfer of alien species by ships’ ballast water and the environmentally sound recycling of ships. There are more than twenty different EU and international regulations that influence ports and port operations in Finland. In addition, there is also national legislation that has an effect on Finnish ports. For the most part, the legislation for ports is common in the EU area, but the biggest and most important difference between the legislation in Finland and other EU countries is due to the Act on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure. The Act states that the environmental impact assessment procedure shall be applied to projects that may have significant adverse environmental impacts, due to the special features of Finland`s nature and environment. In this Act, the term environmental impact refers to the direct and indirect effects inside and outside Finnish territory of a project or operations on human health, living conditions and amenity; soil, water, air, climate, organisms, interaction between them and biodiversity; community structure, buildings, landscape, townscape and cultural heritage; utilization of natural resources. In Finland, the Environmental Permit requires that ports collect all necessary information concerning environmental effects and make required reports to the Finnish authorities, stakeholders and the public. Commonly, environmental reporting is public and environmental achievements are emphasized in reporting and in media. At the moment, the problem in environmental reporting is that it’s difficult to compare data from different ports. There is enough data concerning the environmental effects and performance, but the manner of reporting and the quality of the data varies between ports. There are differences in the units and codes used, in some cases the information is not sufficient and it can even be rather unreliable. There are also differences regarding the subjects that are emphasized in reporting.

The Role of Oxidative Stress in Environmental Responses of Fennoscandian Animals

All aerobic organisms have to deal with the toxicity of oxygen. Oxygen enables more efficient energy production compared to anaerobic respiration or fermentation, but at the same time reactive oxygen species (ROS) are being formed. ROS can also be produced by external factors such as UV-radiation and contamination. ROS can cause damage to biomolecules such as DNA, lipids and proteins and organisms try to keep the damage as small as possible by repairing biomolecules and metabolizing ROS. All ROS are not harmful, because they are used as signaling molecules. To cope against ROS organism have an antioxidant (AOX) system which consists both enzymatic and non-enzymatic AOX defense. Some AOX are produced by the organism itself and some are gained via diet. In this thesis I studied environmentally caused changes in the redox regulation of different wild vertebrate animals to gain knowledge on the temporal, spatial and pollution-derived-effects on the AOX systems. As study species I used barn swallow, ringed seal and the Baltic salmon. For the barn swallow the main interest was the seasonal fluctuation in the redox regulation and its connection to migration and breeding. The more contaminated ringed seals of the Baltic Sea were compared to seals from cleaner Svalbard to investigate whether they suffered from contaminant induced oxidative stress. The regional and temporal variation in redox regulation and regional variation in mRNA and protein expressions of Baltic salmon were studied to gain knowledge if the salmon from different areas are equally stressed. As a comparative aspect the redox responses of these different species were investigated to see which parts of the AOX system are substantial in which species. Certain parts of AOX system were connected to breeding and others to migration in barn swallows, there was also differences in biotransformation between birds caught from Africa and Finland. The Baltic ringed seal did not differ much from the seals from Svalbard, despite the difference in contaminant load. A possible explanation to this could be the enhanced AOX mechanisms against dive-associated oxidative stress in diving air-breathing animals, which also helps to cope with ROS derived from other sourses. The Baltic salmon from Gulf of Finland (GoF) showed higher activities in their AOX defense enzymes and more oxidative damage than fish from other areas. Also on mRNA and proteomic level, stress related metabolic changes were most profound in in the fish from GoF. Mainly my findings on species related differences followed the pattern of mammals showing highest activities and least damage and birds showing lower activities and most damage, fish being intermediate. In general, the glutathione recycling-related enzymes and the ratio of oxidized and reduced glutathione seemed to be the most affected parameters in all of the species.

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and Agroecology in Agricultural Production in the United States - A Comparative Analysis.

The world’s population is growing at a rapid rate and one of the primary problems of a growing is food supply. To ensure food supply and security, the biggest companies in the agricultural sector of the United States and all over the world have collaborated to produce genetically modified organisms, including crops, that have a tendency to increase yields and are speculated to reduce pesticide use. It’s a technology that is declared to have a multitude of benefits. During the same time period another set of practices has risen to the horizon by the name of agroecology. It spreads across many different sectors such as politics, sociology, environment, health and so on. Moreover, it involves primitive organic techniques that can be applied at farm level to enhance the performance of an ecosystem to effectively decrease the negative effect on environment and health of individuals while producing good quality foods. Since both the processes proclaim sustainable development, a natural question may come in mind that which one seems more favorable? During the course of this study, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and agroecology are compared within the sphere of social, environmental and health aspects. The results derived upon a comparative analysis of scientific literature tend to prove that GMOs pose a greater threat to the environment, health of individuals and the generalized social balance in the United States compared to agroecological practices. Economic indicators were not included in the study and more studies might be needed in the future to get a broader view on the subject.