<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	 xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>KQED&#039;s Climate Watch &#187; rivers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/tag/rivers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch</link>
	<description>KQED&#039;s multimedia series providing in-depth coverage of climate-related science and policy issues from a California perspective.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:37:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/><atom:link rel="hub" href="http://kqed.superfeedr.com"/>		<item>
		<title>A Source of CO2 That Might Surprise You</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/10/26/a-source-of-co2-that-might-surprise-you/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/10/26/a-source-of-co2-that-might-surprise-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gretchen Weber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carbon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CO2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rivers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterways]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/?p=16075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That babbling brook out back has been holding out on you. <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/10/26/a-source-of-co2-that-might-surprise-you/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>That babbling brook out back has been holding out on you</strong></p>
<div id="attachment_16090"  class="wp-caption module image left" style="width: 285px;"><img class="size-medium wp-image-16090" title="nasa" src="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/10/nasa-300x300.jpg" alt="" width="285" height="285" /><p class="wp-media-credit">NASA</p><p class="wp-caption-text">A satellite view of the Mississippi River shows a mosaic of riverbank land-use patterns.</p></div>
<p>Rivers and streams in the United States are releasing a lot more CO2 into the atmosphere than scientists previously thought, according to<a href="http://nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?org=NSF&amp;cntn_id=121994&amp;preview=false"> a new study</a> by scientists at Yale. In fact, American waterways are discharging the gas into the atmosphere at a rate of 100 million metric tons per year, an amount equal to a car burning 40 billion gallons of gas, researchers say.</p>
<p>The study, conducted by David Butman and Peter Raymond of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, looked at water chemistry data from more than 4,000 rivers and streams. The authors say identifying this significant source of CO2 could change the way scientists model the movement of carbon through ecosystems and the atmosphere.</p>
<p>&#8220;These rivers breathe a lot of carbon,&#8221; said Butman in a <a href="http://nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?org=NSF&amp;cntn_id=121994&amp;preview=false">press release</a> from the National Science Foundation, one of the study&#8217;s funders. &#8220;They are a source of carbon dioxide, just like we breathe out carbon dioxide and like smokestacks emit carbon dioxide.&#8221;</p>
<p>The study is published in the current issue of <em><a href="http://nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?org=NSF&amp;cntn_id=121994&amp;preview=false">Nature Geoscience</a>.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/10/26/a-source-of-co2-that-might-surprise-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/10/nasa-300x300.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">nasa</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Budget Pressure on Rivers, Wetlands</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 23:59:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Craig Miller</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Government & Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rivers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wetlands]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/?p=11579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Witnesses tell an Assembly committee that looming federal cuts would leave state programs adrift <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Witnesses tell an Assembly committee that looming federal cuts would leave state programs adrift</strong></p>
<div id="attachment_11585"  class="wp-caption module image alignleft" style="width: 270px;"><a rel="attachment wp-att-11585" href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/img_0441/"><img class="size-full wp-image-11585" title="IMG_0441" src="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/03/IMG_0441.jpg" alt="" width="270" height="202" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The Yolo Bypass, with Sacramento in the background. (Photo: Craig Miller)</p></div>
<p>An array of state programs to protect and restore rivers and wetlands is endangered by current plans to cut funding on Capitol Hill. That&#8217;s what a string of witnesses told the Assembly Water, Parks &amp; Wildlife Committee in Sacramento this week.</p>
<p>At risk are programs that have leveraged federal money to restore hundreds of thousands of acres of wetlands and wildlife habitat in California, according to speakers for environmental and outdoor groups.</p>
<p>For a nearby example of how federal funds have been used, waterfowl advocate Bill Gaines pointed to the Yolo Bypass, almost within sight of the state Capitol. Gaines, president of the <a title="COHA - main" href="http://www.outdoorheritage.org/">California Outdoor Heritage Alliance</a>, said that over ten years, $5 million in federal money has fueled restoration of 4,300 acres of wildlife habitat.</p>
<p>Kim Delfino, who spoke for the activist group Defenders of Wildlife, told lawmakers that provisions in the federal budget bill known as HR-1 would gut funding for the state&#8217;s <a title="CalParks - LWCF" href="http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21360">Land &amp; Water Conservation Fund</a> by 90%. Allocations have already dropped off precipitously in recent years to the program that funds improvements to local parks and beach access, among other things.</p>
<div id="attachment_11584"  class="wp-caption module image alignright" style="width: 270px;"><a rel="attachment wp-att-11584" href="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/img_0599/"><img class="size-full wp-image-11584" title="IMG_0599" src="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/03/IMG_0599.jpg" alt="" width="270" height="202" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">A hydroelectric dam on the upper Klamath River. (Photo: Craig Miller)</p></div>
<p>Also in jeopardy, according to testimony, are hard-won agreements to restore the San Joaquin and Klamath Rivers basins. The latter deal, which took 18 years to craft, requires the removal of four hydro-electric dams.</p>
<p>Gaines says wildlife refuge areas on the upper Klamath currently line up behind local farms for water allocations. &#8220;Without that money to remove those dams, the entire Klamath basin restoration agreement falls part and along with it, the water rights that the refuge complex up there so desperately needs,&#8221; said Gaines, whose organization represents a coalition of hunting, fishing and wildlife groups.</p>
<p>Zeke Grader, who represents commercial fishing interests, called the  measure a &#8220;declaration of war&#8221; against the salmon fisheries and  communities that rely on them.</p>
<p>Barry Nelson of the Natural Resources Defense Counsel testified that passage of HR-1 would &#8220;threaten the progress&#8221; that California is beginning to make on a host of water issues. Nelson said riders attached to the spending bill would deal a severe setback to current efforts to restore the <a title="San Joaquin River restoration" href="http://www.restoresjr.net/">San Joaquin River</a>, and to secure the future health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011/03/02/federal-budget-pressure-on-rivers-wetlands/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/03/IMG_0441.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">IMG_0441</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/files/2011/03/IMG_0599.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">IMG_0599</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
