The middle of America boasts some of the best soils in the world, making it “the breadbasket of America”, if not the world. However, that soil is both a blessing and a curse – native species of grasses and the birds, bugs, and bison that depended on the area have been pushed out in favor of human food production. The ecosystem of middle America looks today like miles upon miles of rows of corn and soy, not the shortgrass prairie that once inhabited the area.

Ever wonder why coal-fired power is so much cheaper than the alternatives? Coal-producing communities aren’t paid for their personal health impacts, the environment is not paid for streams turned acid, and mountains are not paid for their removal. More subtle costs are also passed on: rising rates of asthma from particulates in the air, introduction of malaria into previously unaffected areas from a warming world, and the relocation of whole countries due to sea level rise.
Pollution is a classic example of an economic externality – companies choosing not to sequester chemicals in their effluent pass the cost of pollution and remediation on to those downstream. Therefore the cost of production signaled by price does not represent the true cost of production. The contradiction is deeper, however, and forms one of the main critiques of capitalism – the “second contradiction of capitalism”. Capitalism relies on the continual growth of the market, costs determined by the raw material and labor inputs. However, these costs assume limitless availability of what Marx calls “conditions of production” – the infrastructure and environmental services that are required for production. These, however, are not limitless and therefore not cost-free. Rising costs will eventually outpace price and production will therefore cease (O’Connor 1998).
In this week’s edition of Shark Science Monday, Nick Dulvy, co-chair of the IUCN Shark Specialist Group, discusses how researchers determine the conservation status of shark species. If you have a question for Nick, leave it below and I’ll make sure he sees it.
Who are our readers? That is the question we wanted to answer at the beginning of this year. Are you scientists, students, or interested laypeople? Where are you from? What do you like and what don’t you like? Is anybody out there?
So last month we launched a survey to help us find out.
Read More “Reader Survey: Who reads Southern Fried Science?” »

Tomorrow a bill will be introduced into the NC House that allows the use of terminal groins to protect private property along the coast, overturning the 1979 ban on hardened structures along the coast. Although NC would join all of the other eastern seaboard states in allowing such protections, the bill, if passed, would also end a long history of attempting to maintain a natural coastline. This natural coastline is why the Outer Banks have become such a popular tourist destination, bringing millions into the state economy each year.
So why might North Carolina leaders turn their back on historical decisions? This year’s General Assembly is under a new majority – for the first time since 1898, led by Republicans. Rising populations along the coast are using this as an opportunity to demand more permanent solutions to shoreline erosion. Previous strategies of beach restoration, inlet channel realignment, and sandbagging are no longer adequate to coastal property owners. However, though terminal groins may seem like an easy solution, they are not as simple as they seem at first glance. It’s these nuances that make them a really bad idea, both for maritime ecology we’ve worked so hard to protect and for the wallets of North Carolinian taxpayers.
Hark! A noise in the hold like a cough do you Imagine ghosts aboard? Or men, lying in the darkness.
The high seas are a black hole for ocean conservation. They lie beyond the jurisdiction of any single country and are largely open for unregulated exploitation. Even as we begin moving towards a pragmatic high seas conservation framework, we should keep in mind that many territorial waters are still left unprotected and open to illegal … Read More “Weekly dose of TED – Kristina Gjerde: Making law on the high seas” »
According to the National Science Foundation, social scientists might be useful in a multitude of new ways, especially in long-term research. Following on the heels of astronomy and astrophysics, NSF recently sought suggestions for planning the research agenda of social scientists for the next decade. Working on a relatively short time frame, there were three guiding principles for setting this new agenda:
– “big underlying questions” that thus far have been underappreciated
– capacity issues: which stages of the educational process need the most help?
– infrastructure issues, eg. setting up longitudinal surveys on important topics
In response to this challenge, a team at Harvard came up with the “top ten social science research issues“, recently published in Nature. A few of us sitting on the social-ecological divide have noted that there is a distinct lack of environmental issues in the list. In all fairness, the original challenge emphasized that existing research programs would be supported and showcased recent funding for the social aspects of environmental issues as a prime example of ways this research is already headed in a favorable direction. The more optimistic of this bunch note that each of the ten social issues is actually intricately linked with the need for a healthy environment and therefore the environmental link is an underlying grand challenge, if you will.
I have a confession to make. Targeted advertising works. There I was, planning out a long trip to India, thinking, I need some new pants. I get progressively wider with each passing year, and I was not looking forward to flying for 36 hours in a pair of 32-inch pants on a 34-inch waist. And then, like a primal scream from the ether, on the sidebar of The Thoughtful Animal, was an ad for Scott E Vest travel clothes. And, in my shame, I clicked it.
I’ve found that I enjoy certain types of music more when I don’t listen to the words too closely. However, a mild addiction to karaoke and a lifelong inability to “just let it go” has made it impossible for me to avoid knowing the lyrics.
We’ve been known to criticize how science is portrayed in movies and television shows here on Southern Fried Science. Pop music is far from innocent when it comes to scientific misunderstandings, and it seems only fair that I criticize that genre as well. Here are some recent examples that have been driving me crazy.






