Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011 October 17

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 17

Environment, Natural Resources, Species of Trees & Shrubs To Remove Pollution(s)

Suggestion(s) For New Wikipedia Section And Subject Heading For Immediate Information Availability.

Environment, Natural Resources, Species of Trees & Shrubs To Remove All Forms of Pollution. Individual Tree Species Which Specifically Benefit All Natural Resources & Wildlife Species.

What specific trees and shrubs need to be planted in forests, shorelines and communities to benefit all marine species, wildlife species and communities for wildlife and marine habitat(s) shelter, food supply, nutients, remove water pollution and improve the air quality index in each province,region of Canada and each state, region of the USA; listed in alphabetical order.

--Patti CKDU (talk) 09:53, 17 October 2011 (UTC)--Patti CKDU (talk) 09:53, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

See Category:Trees and Category:Shrubs. Each and every one. And they're in alphabetical order. Dismas|^(talk) 10:26, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's going to be the most useful resource for you. Some points:

1. Any tree or shrub is better than no tree or shrub for the environmental benefits you mention.
2. A variety of vegetation is better than a monoculture.
3. The species that already grow in a particular environment are more likely to thrive than exotic species.
4. Trees or shrubs usually spread naturally if their growth isn't hindered; they don't necessarily have to be planted.

Itsmejudith (talk) 10:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I would think it depends on the region in question. Salmonberry is native to the western United States and Canada but not the eastern parts, while Mountain laurel is native to the east not the west. Would either be beneficial outside their native areas? This is just two examples. The question is either too general or asking for too much--you don't really expect anyone to list all the beneficial trees and shrubs for every region of North America, do you? If you really want to get into it, there is regional and local info on natural vegetation regimes at sites like, and links from, [1] and [2]. It is a hugely complex topic though. Pfly (talk) 11:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This is particularly important when dealing with exotic plants as a number of species imported into different countries with good intentions ended up being invasive species that do more harm than good. It's best to use local species.

Anyway, reforestation attempts near our town has been very successful using Acacia mangium, a native of Australia and the southern Malesian ecoregion. They grow very quickly, can halt soil erosion, fix nitrogen, and can establish secondary forests ideal for encouraging the regrowth of native tree species. They're widely used to 'reclaim' deforested areas and there's research on planting them in large numbers specifically for carbon sequestration as well as lumber.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 16:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I've just watched an item on the BBC news about plans to install "green walls" at air pollution hotspots in London. Here's the link. It says of them: "It will be planted with a mixture of evergreen and perennial plants which have been carefully selected to trap PM10 and known to survive in a roadside environment." How they "carefully selected" them, I don't know. Alansplodge (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Here's American resourches on how to attract birds and butterflies[3][4]. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Patti CKDU, see Category:Endemic flora of the United States.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

My Google search for trees shrubs remove pollutants reported 2,580,000 results.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:List of online reference desks/Science#Ecology (577).

—Wavelength (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

You can ask at the talk pages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ecology and Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment, but I can not guarantee that an editor will be willing to take the time to answer.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

What are the coordinates of San Antonio de Choatalun, San Martin de Jilotepeque, Chimaltenango department, Guatemala.

What are the coordinates of San Antonio de Choatalun, San Martin de Jilotepeque, Chimaltenango department, Guatemala? I can find San Martin on the map but I'm having trouble finding San Antonio. It's near another larger part of the city (but well into the San Martin outskirts) that is happens to have a bright yellow church with a lot of live-in caretakers. This however is not San Antonio and I don't even know the name of it. Can anyone help? --137.110.32.134 (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

And just to clarify, I am not referring to the church in Tinamit Ajaw, which seems to come up on searches as possibly being the one I am thinking of. This one has two towers instead of one.--137.110.32.134 (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Currency conversion

I am working on a speech for a 50th school reunion - can you tell me how much 125,000 pounds Australian in 1961 woould be worth today in Australian dollars?

Mant thanks

Ian Diamond — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikdiamond (talk • contribs) 21:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Using a simple retail price index calculator, about three million dollars. (The calculator is here.) However, RPI may not be a very effective calculation tool in this context - it's meaningful for calculating the price of groceries or a shirt, but breaks down for "large items" - and depending on exactly what you're talking about, a real value may be nearer five or six million. There's a good essay on interpreting different kinds of value-over-time calculators here, using British pounds as the example currency. Shimgray | talk | 23:30, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

And, of course, it may be worth less than that for other items. If you had invested that money in a warehouse of TVs, for example, they probably wouldn't be worth much today, being black-and-white, mono, low-def, small screen, analog TVs, likely without remotes. StuRat (talk) 19:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

... and, of course, if you had invested it in certain banks, it would be worth nothing! Dbfirs 19:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

And if you have invested in Microsoft stock, at its beginning... 88.8.75.87 (talk) 12:55, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Astronomy

In all the discussions about the Big Bang that I've heard, I've never heard anyone suggest that there may have been other Big Bangs, not that it makes any difference. If there has been other Bangs, is time relative to each Bang? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garettwice (talk • contribs) 23:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

You may find Big Crunch, Big Bounce, and cyclic model to be interesting reading. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Also Multiverse. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.31 (talk) 15:19, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I've heard multiple big bangs discussed within the same time and "universe" as ours. The conclusion was that, while there may be others, even an infinite number, as long as they are far away that they they don't interact with our space, the existence of other big bangs is both unknowable and irrelevant, more a matter for philosophers than scientists. StuRat (talk) 17:15, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Mass makes time. Before the Big Bang there was no time.
Sleigh (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

That is unknown. Big bang cosmologists are careful to point out that we have no information about the matter, energy, or any information which may or may not have have preceded it. I personally think it will turn out to be something like a collision between multiple pre-primordial ultramassive black holes resulting in an ultranova. Dualus (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)