Environment

Currently, a controversy is swirling over the issues raised by the despoiling of the world’s natural environment. Poet Stanley Kunitz in “The War Against the Trees” depicts a man watching his neighbor, “who sold his lawn to standard oil” (Kunitz 122), laugh as bulldozers ruin the natural beauty of the grounds with its “forsythia-forays and hydrangea-raids” (Kunitz 123). As industry wages war not just against flowers and shrubbery, but also against the town’s pleasant past.

Kunitz’s speaker is angry that this war “against the great-grandfathers of the town” (Kunitz 123) is destroying these ancestors’ attempt to preserve nature, not allow “the green world” (Kunitz 123) to be turned into a “death-foxed page” (Kunitz 123) of barrenness. Some pro-environmentalists, like Sioux medicine man John (Fire) Lame Deer, claim that the damage industrialized society has done to nature is both immense and nearly criminal , the result of greed.

Lame Deer complains that the white men “have not only despoiled the earth, the rocks, the minerals, all of which they call dead’ but which are very much alive; they have even changed the animals, which are a part of us, part of the Great Spirit, changed them in a horrible way, so no one can recognize them” (Erodes 209). On the other hand, conservatives frequently label environmentalists as extremists who despise almost all of capitalism’s practices regarding ecology.

That is, some extremist defenders of the profit motive name call, terming environmentalists “vandals” (Huber2 1) who prefer “forests over jobs” (Huber2 1) that the industrial age provides. Clearly, the issue has been politicized. Nonetheless, no one can deny that the earth, while not on the brink of annihilation, has been polluted and our air contaminated by the inroads created by the mechanized era. Furthermore, no caring person should recommend a “do-nothing” policy regarding the preservation of our environment which we ourselves are in the process of ruining.

The answer to the ecological dilemma is to assess realistically the extent of the damage and work to create a sensible, practical solution to the problem of our eroding environment through cooperative efforts. It is hard to doubt that human beings are wasting or eroding the earth which we all live on. Not only have the industrial nations altered their natural settings by overbuilding dams, destroying rain forests, and driving species out of their natural habitats to die or mutate, but they have pushed the earth close to the limits of its resources.

Lame Deer charges that because certain animals like coyotes, if left alive, “could lose some man a few cents,” (Erodes 212) our fauna are being depleted. We have also divorced ourselves from the healing power of nature and from our innate ” love for all that has been placed on this earth’ ” (Erodes 214) such as vegetation, the waters, the air, and all animals– except homo sapiens, whom out of self-interest we favor. Anyone living in Dallas or coastal areas of Louisiana last summer will find it hard to forget the “smaze” that choked us.

Blowing in from dry regions to the South, such as Mexico, the smoke came from widespread fires caused by aridity and by flammable industrial materials. Consequently, if anyone mocks those who claim our earth is decaying, these doubters should have just taken a whiff of the “smazed” air and then listened to his or her own coughing. We need to preserve not just the beauty of our few remaining wildernesses, but biodiversity, human and animal health, and the very survival of our planet as we know it now.

Most environmentalists and other analysts date widespread concern over ecological balance and conservationism to the appearance of Rachel Carson’s landmark book published in 1962, Silent Spring. From its publication on, “Nature became more than something that existed at a distance from most of human settlement, and nonhuman species were suddenly not the only species at direct risk from human impositions on the natural world. Pollution and human health, shifted to the center of concern, were seen as inseparable from conservation concerns” (Paehlke 261).

Carson indicted human beings for unleashing a “chain of evil” (Carson 324) in the form of pollution: “In this now universal contamination of the environment, chemicals and the sinister and little-recognized partners of radiation are changing the very nature of the world the very nature of its life” (Carson 324) with a “barrage of poisons” (Carson 325). On the NBC Today show on December 4, 1998, scientists reported on a Danish study showing the likelihood that certain pesticides, which remain in the body for decades, significantly increase a woman’s risk for getting breast cancer.

With the visible increase in pollution of the air and water by CO2 emissions and by toxic chemical waste, most alert people have become aware of the long term ill consequences of a reckless technology about to run amuck. With the energy crisis strike in 1973, when the OPEC nations withheld oil from the west, the general public began to realize that there is a third dimension besides pollution and health attached “to environmental/conservation concerns: sustainability- the sustainability of resources, the sustainability of ecological systems, and the sustainability of both industrial economies and human societies” (Paehlke 261).

In short, these “current environmental crises make a systematic, scientific understanding of ecological principles especially important” (Cunningham 248). By 1998, knowledgeable people must be familiar with the assault on the earth and its living creatures resulting from industrial abuse. However, the pragmatic issue of protecting ourselves from ecological disintegration unfortunately has degenerated into a heated political argument, when instead of squabbling and hurling charges, people should collaborate and work out reasonable solutions to our environmental crisis.

Unfortunately, environmentalism has become a set of ideas that many refuse to accept as wholesome or valid: “One way of grasping its meaning is to see environmentalism as a political ideology, in some ways not unlike the classic political ideologies of liberalism, conservatism, and socialism. Ideologies carry and convey a set of social values and seek to alter the societal and political agenda through the expression and interpretation of those values” (Paehlke 260). Some critics of environmentalism object on political, ideological grounds to the movement, insisting it is intent on undermining capitalism.

Since the West probably is still haunted by the ghosts of the Cold War and communism, many of its citizens feel threatened by a perceived attack on mechanization and industrialization from enthusiastic ecologists. Instead of seeing interest in saving rivers, the redwoods, and grey wolves as a subversive attack on the sacred principles of the free marked, private property, and the capitalist’s pursuit of property, conservatives ought to forget politics and support intelligent efforts to clean up chemical wastes, the waters of the earth, and the very air we breathe.

Partisanship should not taint programs to save the environment, and cooperation should be the key word. The existence of charges and countercharges by both sides of the political spectrum have succeeded only in muddling the vital issue of environmentalism and in sparking emotionalism on a crucial problem requiring rational, dispassionate thought for its solution. The extreme right is mistaken when it attacks environmentalism as one of the “intellectual-led movements” (Sowell 1) that are best called moral melodramas’ that “[turn] practical tasks into holy causes and Promethean undertakings” (Sowell 1).

Downgrading intellectuals as melodramatic a term connoting foolish, unjustified exaggeration the ultraconservatives criticize intelligent environmentalists as people who “cannot rely on the mundane” (Sowell 1). Again in his column in Forbes, Thomas Sowell uses a word, conjure, with a negative connotation: when one hears it, one thinks of sorcerers or just ordinary people afflicted by an overactive imagination no one to be taken seriously.

Over a year later than Sowell’s essay came out, the same periodical, Forbes, printed another anti-environmentalist article whose very title employs three emotionally-loaded words, “Green Alchemy: misbegotten environmentalists. ” The word green suggests the political radicals in Europe who advocate extreme measures to preserve the earth as well as the ecological organization Greenpeace, which the author, Peter Huber, ridicules. Then, alchemy refers to quacks in the Middle Ages who deceived people that they could turn any metal into gold as a greedy hoax.

Within Huber’s article, the author lumps environmentalists with other irrational people “of alchemical temperament conspiracy theorists, occultists, central planners. ” (Huber1 2) These unbalanced environmentalist, Huber contends, see free markets as wicked and capitalists as vile in an exaggerated attempt to discredit those who are genuinely interested in saving our health and our planet. This type of hot-headed rhetoric and unnecessary name calling impedes most collaborative programs that intend to benefit the environment and thereby help our children and grandchildren live in a wholesome atmosphere.

With the future of the planet at stake, it is detrimental to the safety of all its organisms to have ranting and raving replace constructive action. In spite of all the thunder on the right and warning signals on the left, one point is clear: we must guard our earth or decline with it. No reasonable person wants the world to time travel back to the Paleolithic Age or even the Neanderthal Age by shutting down industries and trying to survive all species and every tree around the globe. Yet, it is immoral not to be concerned about passing on a legacy of a doomed earth to future generations.

Logically, the best approach is the moderate one that begins at local and state levels and even involves the federal government in a wholesome, effective campaign to pull together our battered planet. Certainly, the federal government and private individuals will come up the funding to undertake a massive clean-up of the environment if only they could debate the question of “how” rather than “Why should we do it? ” The answer to the latter question should be clear: to halt the horrifying possibility that one day, sooner or later, the earth will be unable to support many living species.

Today, we are more concerned with our environment than ever before. Similarly, it is my belief that we are more knowledgeable about our earth’s environment than did previous generations. I do not believe it would be an understatement to say that the planet earth is in serious jeopardy–from the shrinking rain forests, to the polluting of the oceans and land, to the ozone layer problem. Nevertheless, for purposes of this discussion, it is my intent to focus on pesticides as one particularly rampant source of environmental problems.

I particularly favor this subject, because I know that we as Americans can do much to prevent the deleterious impact which pesticides are having upon our environment. This is not some abstract notion that many people have regarding the ozone layer. For example, in one’s own backyard or garden, there is much one can do in this respect. Opposition by environmentalists to pesticide use in general and to certain groups of compounds in particular has grown in recent years, based on the contention that pesticides present a threat to the environment and to health.

First aroused by the book “Silent Spring” (1952) by Rachel Carson, the anti-pesticide movement has had a substantial influence both in the U. S. Congress and in several state legislatures. As a result, severely restrictive legislation has banned the use of many pesticides and restricted use of several others. Also, costly and complicated legislation requirements have been imposed on new compounds. Pesticide legislation has significantly hampered research and development in the field.

The average cost and lead-time needed to recover, research and market a new pesticide has increased from $2 million dollars and four years in the 1950’s to nearly $20 million dollars and ten years in the 1970’s. In recent years, more new pesticides have been banned than have had continued effective use, and there has been a reduction in the number of chemistry companies producing pesticides since the restrictions took effect. Environmentalists, scientists, and workers in the pesticide industry have also contented that some pesticide compounds are hazardous to human health.

Workers in factories that produce some of these compounds have, in the process of bringing legal suits against some manufacturers, received financial compensation for illnesses allegedly caused by exposure to these chemicals. Agricultural workers have also brought suits, claiming that they have suffered physical damage as a result of pesticide exposure. Some pesticide chemicals — recently DBCP, which effects the production of sperm– have had their manufacturing severely restricted. Long range potential dangers of pesticides in the body are also beginning to concern experts.

In 1989, controversy arose over safe pesticide levels for children. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claimed that the U. S. food supplies were safe, the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) produced a study claiming that the safety standards used by the EPA were based on adult diet and physiologies. Some other problems have been attracting public attention. Certain pesticides are lethal to bees, and it is estimated that heavy pesticide use, especially in areas that depend on bees to pollinate crops, have caused substantial reduction in local hive populations.

Finally, it has been suggested that the build up of non-degradable pesticides in the soil and in food chain may be more hazardous, in the long run, than these immediate problems. At this point, however, even the claims made against DDT — which was banned in the United States because of its supposed deleterious effects and its bioconcentration in the food chain — are still denied by many experts. (Baker, pp. 11-13) Frankly, I am more concerned about the solutions than I am with the causes.

Clearly exposure to limits of pesticides in food, and in particular, produce, needs to be given further attention. It was not so long ago when President Clinton and Al Gore first took office, and they both voiced their commitment to the environment. Unfortunately, fruits and vegetables, especially throughout the United States and in particular, California, are exposed to heavy concentrations of pesticides, which inevitably ends up in the food chain, and as well things which people themselves ingest.

It seems as if every where you look, there they are: stirring about in your kitchen, hanging in the hallway, and confronted again and again with the sight of nature’s nastiest, we grab the nearest can of bug-me-no-more and blast the little pests into oblivion. You certainly wouldn’t be the first to do so — or the last: pesticides are a weapon of choice for most bug-hating Americans; as a nation, we are the world’s largest user of pesticides, consuming 2 billion pounds each year — half of world wide usage.

In fact, we may be a little too zealous in our spraying frenzy. The next time you reach for the bug juice, you may want to consider this: “Pesticides are poisons; they are produced as a toxic chemical to kill,” says Jay Flednan, executive director of the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NCAMP). “The question is whether those chemicals are posing hazards to human health and the environment. ” (Wiltz, p. 24) The author indicates that there exist other non-toxic methods one can use in order to get rid of all the pests in your home.

For example, window screens, fly traps, and fly swatters, are items that one can try as an alternative to pesticides. Carefully vacuuming your home and combing your pet with a flea comb may solve your flea problem. Most of these common sense items can be purchased at a hardware store. Another question that is often asked has to do with our drinking water. There exists a direct connection between our drinking water and pesticides. The company or municipal authority that supplies it is required by federal law to give you an analysis and disclosure regarding any violation of health standards.

But even if you can trust the company, the report will not tell you what happens in the water in the dank recesses of your plumbing system. If you are dissatisfied with your municipal water supply, you can always buy bottled water. But it is not always free of contaminants either (even Perrier had that little problem with the chemical benzene). Look for a seal of approval from NSF International an Ann Arbor, Michigan, company that certifies bottled water as safe. Unfortunately, NSF does not analyze all brands. Another option is to buy one of the many filters or other water purifying devices on the market.

Be sure to choose one that specifically removes the toxins turning up in your water. Carbon filters, for example, are good at purging organic compounds such as pesticides and solvents, but they will not remove minerals or most heavy materials, and one of the more elaborate devices, a distiller, is excellent at taking away heavy metals but is not effective against chloroform and benzene. In hopes of possibly reducing the amount of pesticides that are used, the idea of “making” a crop have preferable characteristics has lead to a new breed of farming.

Scientists have been talking about producing better foods through genetic engineering ever since the technology first became available, more than 20 years ago. By mixing and matching bits of DNA — cutting a gene from one kind of organism and placing it into another — they hope to make new, improved plants and animals. Over the years they have put corn’s genes in rice, trout genes in catfish, chicken genes in potatoes, even firefly genes in tobacco (yielding a plant that actually glowed in the dark). A few years ago, the Department of Agriculture researchers tried to produce leaner pork by splicing a human gene into a pig embryo.

What they got was a cross-eyed poker with crippling arthritis and a strangely wrinkled face. Now, after decade of biotech setbacks and controversy, consumers finally have something they can sink their teeth into. The U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) endorsed the most genetically altered food to be sold to consumers — a tomato called the Flavr Savr and billed as offering “Summer time taste” all year long. The biotech industry immediately hailed the government’s decision as the break through it had been waiting for.

The gene splicers have shown no shortage of imagination. Products in the pipeline include chickens that grow faster on less feed, snap peas that stay sweeter longer, bell peppers with fewer seeds and longer shelf life, pineapples that ripen more uniformly, squash and cucumbers that need less water, corn that requires fewer pesticides and herbicides, and grains that have more protein, vegetables oils that are low in saturated fat, coffee beans that have less caffeine, french fries that absorb less cooking oil, and kidney beans that don’t cause flatulence.

Elmer, De Witt, p. A7) Many consumers have not reacted with great enthusiasm, particularly regarding another innovation of recent, and that is radiated food. There are many on one side of the fence who feel that this will give the consumer an advantage in terms of a longer shelf life; while the consumers are automatically frightened of the very idea of eating something which has been radiated. This new breed of genetic farming is still far from being perfect, but in the future it may greatly reduce the dependence of pesticides.

It is my opinion that you, the schools, the entire community, and myself can do much in the way of reversing the damage that pesticides have caused, and through our example, the same may be implemented throughout the rest of the United States. Think carefully before doing something that has just become a habit, and understand the many consequences that may result. As history has shown, chemicals can be a wonderful life saving tool (medicines), or when used carelessly, a damaging blow to the already suffering environment (pesticides).

Thousands of years ago before people built towns and planted crops, rivers cut deep canyons and molded the continents. Often these rivers overflowed their banks and flooded the surrounding areas, depositing mineral rich silt and soil in the surrounding plains and valleys. Because of the way floods enrich soil some of the first cities were built along rivers. The most important ones grew along the Indus River in Pakistan; the Nile in Egypt; the Yellow River in China; and the Tigris and Euphrates in the Middle East. These rivers floodplains are called the cradles of civilization.

Even though floods happen everywhere, there are only four types of floods. River floods occur along rivers and usually happen because of heavy rain over a large area. This can also be caused by melting snow and ice jams and can last for weeks. In most parts of the world dams and levees help keep rivers from flooding by blocking off water and storing it in lakes and reservoirs. Sometimes a dam will break causing another kind of flood. Dam failure floods happen when dams or other manmade structures are neglected, poorly designed, or damaged.

These floods are very dangerous because a huge amount of water is released suddenly and with no warning. Flash floods happen when a large amount of rain falls very quickly. Flash floods generally occur in mountainous areas and are so deadly because they happen with little or no warning. Coastal floods occur along the shores of oceans and seas and are often caused by hurricanes and strong storms. Earthquakes that happen under the ocean or on a coast also cause them the winds produced by these winds whip up huge ocean waves that are together known as a storm surge.

These earthquakes cause tsunamis, which are huge waves. Tsunamis travel long distances across the ocean before reaching land where they flood the coasts, drown people, and smash buildings. (Dennis Fradin) Volcano eruptions can also cause tsunamis like in 1883 when Krakatoa erupted killing 37,000 people making it the worst tsunami in history. China is the largest and most populated country on the earth. It is also where the worst flood in history occurred. In 1887 the Yellow River toped its seventy-foot-tall levees and flooded eleven cities and hundreds of surrounding villages.

This flood became the deadliest flood ever by killing at least 900,000 people. Thousands of square miles of farmland was covered in water that sometimes stood twenty feet deep over farm houses. It took two years for this much water to recede. With crops washed away there was little to eat; it is not known how many starved to death. In 1889 Johnstown Pennsylvania flooded. Fourteen miles away from Johnstown the Little Conemaugh River had been dammed to form Lake Conemaugh. The dam was owned by a country club and was known to be in poor condition. The members sailed and fished on the lake but did little to repair the dam.

May 30, 1889 was Memorial Day and it rained hard. The river and lake rose quickly and the next day the water topped the dam and spilled over the top. By three in the afternoon the dam had broken. The water smashed through several towns including Johnstown killing over 2,200 people. Flooding also causes other natural disasters. (Michael Burgan &Robin Doak) The heavy rains that often cause flooding can also cause mudslides that destroy anything in their path. Floods can destroy crops causing famine or taint water supplies and cause an outbreak of disease. But not all flooding is bad.

Every year the Amazon River in Brazil floods its banks. The forests fill with water and the land animals head for higher ground. Anyone who lives in the Amazon River basin builds their homes on high ground or on stilts. Even family gardens are planted in raised beds several feet of the ground to keep them safe from the rising water. The flooded forests are foraged by fish who disburse the seeds of the trees and other plants. ( Goulding, Smith, & Mahar) Floods can be very deadly and cause millions of dollars of damage every year. But a flood is only dangerous if your in front of it.

Saving resources will help to decrease pressure on the natural environment, ensuring that habitats, landscapes and species are conserved. It will also delay the running out of these essential resources as well as reducing the need for transporting them. The data strongly support the hypothesis that countries with more unequal distribution of factor income redistribute more in favor of the poor – even when the analysis controls for older people’s share in total population (that is, for pension transfers).

But the evidence on the median voter hypothesis is inconclusive even if middle-income groups gain more (or lose less) through redistribution in countries where initial (factor) income distribution is more unequal. Twenty percent of the world’s population (we often hear) consumes more than 80 percent of the earth’s resources, while the other 80 percent consume less than 20 percent. Critics of globalization never tire of reminding us of this injustice. Far less often do we hear a proper analysis of the reason for this state of affairs.

The critics make it sound as though the poor are poor because the rich re rich, as if the richest 20 percent had somehow stolen those resources from the other 80 percent. That is wrong. The affluent world has grown fastest since losing its colonies. And the regions the imperialist countries subjugated grew faster after becoming colonies than they had previously. Several of the world’s richest countries — such as Switzerland and the Scandinavian countries — never had any colonies of importance. Others, such as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and Singapore, were colonies themselves.

On the other hand, several of the world’s least developed ountries — Afghanistan, Liberia, and Nepal, for example — have never been colonies. The main reason for that 20 percent consuming 80 percent of the resources is that they produce 80 percent of resources. The 80 percent consume only 20 percent because they produce only 20 percent of resources. It is this latter problem we ought to tackle. The problem is that many people are poor, not that certain people are rich. Critics of capitalism point out that per capita GDP is more than 30 times greater in the world’s 20 richest countries than in the 20 poorest.

The critics are right to say that this inequality is due to capitalism — but not for the reasons they think. The difference is due to certain countries having taken the path of capitalism, resulting in fantastic prosperity for their inhabitants, while those choosing to impede ownership, trade, and production have lagged behind. Factors such as climate and natural disasters are not unimportant, but most of the gap can still be put down to certain countries having opted for liberalization and others for control.

The 20 economically most liberal countries in the world have a per apita GDP about 29 times greater than the 20 economically least liberal. If, then, we are serious about closing the North-South divide, we should hope with all our hearts that the South will also gain access to a free economy and open markets. Developing countries that have had openness in recent decades have not only grown faster than other developing countries — they have grown faster than the affluent countries too. The world’s inequality is due to capitalism.

Not to capitalism making certain groups poor, but to its making its practitioners wealthy. The neven distribution of wealth in the world is due to the uneven distribution of capitalism. Trade and investment flows in the past two decades have come to be more and more evenly distributed among the economies that are relatively open to the rest of the world. It is the really closed economies that, for obvious reasons, are not getting investments and trade. A quarter of direct international investments between 1988 and 1998 went to developing countries.

Since the beginning of the 1980s, investment flows from industrialized to developing countries have isen from $10 billion to $200 billion a year. If we look only at capital flows to the developing world, we find that 85 percent of direct investment there goes to a mere 10 countries, often the most liberalizing. But because those investments have been growing by 12 percent annually in the past three decades, tremendous increases also accrue for countries not included in the top 10. The affluent countries accounted for 80 percent of world GDP in 1975, a share that has fallen to 70 percent today.

As has already been mentioned, poor countries that opted for economic liberalization and ree trade have had faster growth than the affluent countries in recent decades. Free trade and economic liberalism, it seems, are a way for developing countries not only to get richer, but also, possibly, to catch up with the wealthier countries. As U. N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said at a conference held in February 2000, soon after the demonstrations against the World Trade Organization: “The main losers in today’s very unequal world are not those who are too much exposed to globalization. They are those who have been left out. “

The beautiful mountain ranges surrounding the Los Angeles region make a magnificent view, but unfortunately the smog problem in Los Angeles prevents everyone from enjoying this. Smog is a large environmental problem that needs to be concentrated on to find solutions. The media, which includes television, newspaper, magazines, and organizations, is delivering messages to inform the public concerning smog, but are these messages expressing the true environmental issues about smog? In the present day world, the media does not adequately explain any environmental issue.

Obviously, the medias main objective is to get the best story; and sometimes the media would do anything to achieve that goal, even if it means to alter the truth and perception. Although the truth is Los Angeles has always been known for its severe smog problem, the media has recently began to hype this problem to the extent of positioning it as disastrous, because the media is constantly on the look out for dramatic news stories. The smog problem in Los Angeles has been portrayed as being disastrous as the media dramatizes the harmful health effects of smog.

The severity of health effects depends on the smogs intensity and the amount of smog exposure. For susceptible people with asthma or other lung disorder, any weak level of smog could affect their health. As for healthy individuals, a medium level of smog will be enough to affect them. Smog reduces normal lung function on an individual by inflaming the walls of the lung, and therefore causing chest pains and coughs. This description of smog would be a true news story for the media to cover, but based on todays media standard, this would not be considered a story.

From the medias view, a story is any dramatizing, heart-pounding, or shocking news that would grab the publics attention. By warning people to stay indoors and avoid outdoor activities when there is a smog alert is more of an exciting story than simply stating the facts about smog. Reporting of an increase in hospital visits for lung disorder caused by smog is also a story that is worth covering. The media greatly publicizes stories about smog causing harmful health effects on children.

Children are a symbol of innocence, so a story about them being threatened by smog is unfortunately more of an exciting story than one about children protected from the harmful effects of smog. Recently, the media reported on a big study of 3,600 Southland school kids who had wheezing attacks that are related to nitrogen dioxide found in smog (Cone B1). Smog is now seen as life threatening as it was blamed for the death of a 14 year-old brother of Maggie Perales, a Bell Gardens resident, who died from cancer.

The brother attended Suva Elementary School in the city of Bell Gardens that is next to chrome-plating plants emitting high level of toxic chemicals into the air (Cone B1). It is this constant exposure to these chemicals that have caused the cancer found in Peraless brother. There are many more identical stories about children dying from highly toxic chemicals found in smog, because they either live or attend school near polluting factories. Such a death-related story only personifies smog to be like a murderer as it contaminate our communities and kill our children as Maggie Perales reacted upon the smogs deadly force.

The media has hyped the smog problem by distorting peoples view about smog according to Dr. John Peters, Professor of Preventing Medicine at USC School of Medicine. He said, Ive heard people say that living in L. A. is like smoking a pack a dayclearly, thats nonsense. Whether its like smoking one cigarette a day, half a cigarette a day, a tenth a daywe dont know. That misconception is an example of how the media has hyped the smog problem made by displaying dramatic news stories that alters a persons perception on smog.

As our society has grown to hate cigarettes through campaigns, lawsuits, and those bulletin boards ridiculing cigarettes, Los Angeles is also on the same kind of path dealing with smog. The hatred towards cigarettes is a result of the media constantly delivering messages saying how cigarettes are killers, and how the cigarette companies have no sympathy for the cigarette-related deaths. This same trend is now seen with smog as being a killer, causing the deaths of innocent children.

As a result, it is now a war to fight the smog problem in Los Angeles. Agencies and businesses willing to contribute to programs to help fight the smog war is the kind of story the media wants. The hyped-up media coverage on smog has influenced agencies and businesses to get involve with the fight, because they know that their name of the agency or business will be on the news. The South Coast Air Quality Management District holds annual Clean Air Awards to reward agencies and businesses in their work to fight this problem.

Companies like Costco Wholesale, GTE, and Long Beach Bike Station received big awards in this years Clean Air Award in their contribution in helping to clean the air. A large collaboration of 29 different companies has started a program called Quick Charge L. A. , a $3. 5 million project that will be installing 200 charging stations for electric vehicles throughout the entire city. The media recognized that such stories about funded programs like Quick Charge is a story to show that there are people willing to fight for better air.

In the early fall of 1999, the exciting news about Los Angeles being no longer the Smog Capital of the U. S. has changed what the media has been covering about smog. The media, with all of its hyped stories, has made smog so disastrous that this exciting news was seen as a huge victory for Los Angeles. There was so much media attention on this story that the media began dramatizing how all the hard work and efforts into air quality control have paid off. The way the media presented the news to the public was as if Los Angeles had won the smog war, and Los Angeles no longer has to worry about it.

This was another example of a misconception the media plays on the public, what the media left out was the fact that Los Angeles could very easily become the smoggiest city in the nation. Houston became the nations smoggiest city, only because it had the most stage 1 alerts this year, which was only one more than Los Angeles. Los Angeles still has the very potential to win back its unfortunate title as Smog Capital of the U. S. Even though this city has the toughest anti-smog rules in the world, it was the mild weather this year that was most responsible for the better air quality.

Weather is critical to smog formation, and its conditions can easily vary so much that it takes years to confirm air quality trends. The weather may easily heat up next year, and Los Angeles would once again win back its unfortunate title. According to Bryan Lambeth, a meteorologist with the Texas National Resource Conservation Commission, we arent yet ready to declare a winner and a loser in the smog wars. Tim Carmicheal, executive director of the Los Angeles-based environment group Coalition for Clear Air, believes that even though Houston has won the title, the air in Los Angeles is still bad.

Houston has the title, because it had the most Stage 1 smog alerts in the country, but if you look at the number of days we violate the standards, we still have the worst air in the country. Its still harmful to our health to breathe the air for many, many days this year. The city should be proud that the smog problem is alleviating, but what Carmicheal was trying to say is that this victory should be a motivation to improve the air quality and prevent future severe smog problems. Not only is smog a health disaster according to the media, it is also an economical disaster for businesses causing air pollution.

Because the media has hyped the smog problem, communities and environmental groups have largely emerged to demonstrate against industries and refineries. Business groups are worried about the economic impact of possibly reducing the use of refineries to meet the demands of protestors with their tougher anti-smog regulations. If the new anti-smog rules are passed, companies owning large fleets of diesel trucks will be forced to newly equip their fleets with engines that run on alternative fuel other than diesel.

The use of diesel fuel has been the cause of cancer in Los Angeles and contributes a large part of smog formation. The Air Quality Management District has already spent $25 million on replacing just 800 diesel trucks with cleaner engines to relieve some of the environmental pressures of smog from diesel trucks, however those companies will be paying a much higher amount for converting their trucks to better engines if the new plans pass.

The new anti-smog regulations are still in debate as business groups arguing that the laws are strict enough for smog control, while the environmental groups and communities are fighting for cleaner air. The perception and the outright creation of the smog disaster that the media has played a role in have stirred up contemporary environmentalism based on individualism and self-gratification. Smog is an environmental concern for Los Angeles, and it is good to hear that there is a rise in numbers of environmental organizations and environmentally aware communities demonstrating and protesting to solve this disastrous smog issue.

At the same time, there was also a rise in dramatic smog stories presented by the media to hype the smog issue to the extent as being disastrous and a war enemy. It seems most likely that all aspects on contemporary environmentalism ranging from agencies to communities were started knowing that they will be on the 7 oclock news report on NBC. Contemporary environmentalism is nothing but a selfish act by individuals or groups of individuals taking advantage of what the media has to offer, which is public exposure.

The media is always on the constant look out for potential smog stories to make the fight against smog a huge issue. By hyping the smog problems to the extent as being disastrous, the media builds up dramatic news stories that appeal to the public. It has become to a point where these dramatic news stories have motivated the society of Los Angeles to fight against smog, not because this society wants cleaner air, but it wants media attention.

Humans possess a repertoire of unique gifts which enable them to shape the environment. The most prominent gifts associated with man include adaptation, which is furthermore broken into sub-categories, the conquering of fire, and the ability to foresee thoughts of the future. All of these capabilities of man have had a significant effect on the environment. These main gifts correlated with man are the basis to our physical and cultural evolution. Man is a singular creature which maintains a unique set of gifts for shaping the environment.

The most significant of these gifts, adaptation, covers a broad area of topics. Stereoscopic vision, opposable thumbs, the formation of language, and the ability to walk upright all are branched off of this. These components of adaptation are all of great importance to mans set of unique gifts. Man has the ability to adapt to certain environments and conditions. If the weather became cold man would not just sit around and freeze, but rather build a fire, cover up in animal skins, and retreat to the caves.

By doing this man is changing the surroundings and conditions to adequately supply his needs. Without this gift humans would not have survived; nature would have conquered and nnihilated them. As man evolved and became more human-like, three major biological developments took place which set man above animal. Stereoscopic vision, opposable thumbs, and the ability to walk upright were the most significant evolutionary advancements which put man atop animal. These three gifts also added to the ability to shape the environment.

Stereoscopic vision involves taking two pictures, one from each eye, and forming them into a three dimensional viewing area. This advancement to man gave humans several environmental advantages over the animals. Stereoscopic vision allows man to see ore in depth images. This proved useful in hunting, walking, and other simple concepts. This major evolutionary change has had a great effect on the environment and its surroundings. Opposable thumbs made life much easier for early humans. The opposable thumbs allowed man to grip with a powerful hold, which led to the development and use of early tools.

They also aided in hunting, because spears, rocks, and axes were easily able to be thrown. By using this technique of hunting less injury occurred, which prolonged the life of humans. As cultural advancements followed, the opposable thumb proved quite useful in he building of fire and shelter. The environment was affected greatly by this because tools, fire, and hunting were able to be used where they were not before. The ability to walk upright held a definite edge over animals and the environment. As man began to walk upright, everything became easier.

He could see farther into the distance, and know when danger was near, and man had more versatile movements, which aided in hunting. The environment was easily shaped by upright walking because now had the ability to do more activities, such as seeing danger and fleeing to safety, where as before he would have been killed. Language is also another gift which man possesses. Language was developed through hunting because it was needed for communication. It was also used to express feelings and distress. Language allowed man to communicate when danger was near, and man escaped some danger because of this.

Another significant gift man acquired was the conquering of fire. Fire was brought upon by natural reasons, such as volcanoes and lightning. Humans used fire for warmth, protection, cooking, and a light source. Cooked meat contained more proteins than raw meat, and these proteins caused the brain to grow, thus speeding up ans evolutionary process. Cooked meat was also easier to chew, so the jaw became smaller and language slowly developed. Fire helped man outlast natures coldest weather, and it also prolonged their life by protecting them from animals.

The last of mans major gifts was the ability to foresee thoughts of the future. Man anticipated the future by drawing pictures of the hunt on the cave walls. He foresaw the domestication and herding of animals, as the Lapps did with the Reindeer, and man saw the use of rocks for tools and expanded on that. This type of reasoning and thinking was unique to humans, and through it an greatly changed the environment; either through subtle ways, as with tools, or in the upmost way, as with the domestication and herding of animals.

Since the beginnings of time humans have used a set of unique gifts to shape and configure the landscape and environment which surrounds them. These gifts, adaptation, the conquering of fire, and the ability to foresee thoughts of future, were essential to man and allowed him to shape the environment. These gifts were the basis to our cultural and physical evolution, and they provided a sturdy base for the beginning of man.

The 21st century is an age of environmental awareness. We have commissions and agencies that measure our pollution in minutiae level parts per million. There is study after study of the affects of not only elemental health pollution, but also mental health pollution. Although there is no doubt of the importance of this era of hyper-awareness of this movement, it is a new phenomena in the spectrum of history. In the United States, a vanguard in environmental awareness has only seriously started legislating pollution controls for the protection of its citizens in the past thirty years.

Many detractors, even today, feel that it is a loosing battle and that regulation of pollution control is indirect conflict with the industrial machine that is the backbone of the United States economy. However, there is one example of a region of this country that demonstrates not only the successful combination of environmental control and business, but this relationship was started forty years before the nations first pollution regulations were drafted to Congress.

Pittsburgh’s story is one of suffering and redemption that no city, no community no region can claim to be more tragic and hopeful in its fight against pollution. A city founded in a river valley rich with resources; central access by water, rail and road; and integral to the key to the creation of a nation; Pittsburgh knew days when no vegetation grew from the soil and the sky was permanent midnight twenty four hours a day. That was life in the monikered “Smoke City” until citizens and businesses took fate into their own hands and cleaned themselves up.

Their struggle endured hardship and death, but the residents of Pittsburgh found themselves after two hundred years of darkness living in one of the cleanest major cities in the country. Before Europeans traveled the Monongahela to the confluence of the “Three Rivers” of the Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio, Pittsburgh was a sparsely populated area even by the Native Americans. At best it was a rendezvous point for trade, claimed by no one due to the difficulty in traversing through large waterways and steep hills.

For colonists, the trek over the Appalachian and Allegheny Mountains was enough to make the Pittsburgh region almost unreachable. On November 23, 1753, an officer of the Virginia MilitiaMajor George Washingtonsent to give warning to Britain’s enemy, the French forces, on the Ohio river a warning as a precursor to the French & Indian War- noted in his journal the confluence of the major rivers. “This location is extremely well suited for a fort as it has absolute command of the rivers and all its terrain.

He built Fort Prince George, which was lost to the French within the year and renamed Fort Duquesne. The location of the fort was so remote and difficult to attack that it was largely ignored throughout the war. Three years later, George Washington made his attempt to reclaim the fort and the garrison was so confident of the geography of the fort that they had let the wood dry rot. Rather than risking musket fire burning the garrison to the ground, the French surrendered and abandoned the fort.

It was then renamed Fort Pitt. It was in these modest beginnings that we already see the development and assumption of the power of the locality and the lack of gratitude and care given to the land that offered so much getting nothing in return. With the birth of Pittsburgh, the city, was also the origin of its smoky heritage. As early as 1753, coal was the recognized as the most readily available and best heating source in the area. The region had an almost limitless supply of coal.

The voluminous clouds of blackness were seen as advertisements of the new city’s industrious population in the 18th century. The geographic design on the confluence and high south hills kept the smoke gathered over the city. Between 1780-1830 new settlers carved arable farm land from the surrounding forest and hills to become a self-sufficient community from the rest of the country, but agriculturally the Allegheny region was not a thriving as the central plains of Pennsylvania or the flat lands of Virginia.

The city’s growth was fed by its coal, iron, zinc, and oil and expedited by its major waterways giving easy access from the Mississippi to the Potomac. The city stood as an antithesis to the pastoral values of most of the frontier. One visitor noted in 1829, “After two weeks through white clear, cheerful-looking villages to come all at once upon dirty streets dark houses and filth enveloped in an atmosphere of smoke and soot which blighted everything in sight, was not a pleasant transition. ”

The early 1800s saw no relief from smoke, as the pig iron foundries, rolling mills, coke furnaces, blast furnaces and hot ovens took over the landscape of the city, country and region. The concept of a new industrial aesthetic even spawned an artistic movement as popular as the pastoral art of the Hudson Valley school, creating a Mon Valley school of art showing the romance of steel complexes and starry nights above the glowing furnaces. The growth of the nation also grew the demand on goods, which Pittsburgh had in endless supply. The chief commodity was still coal.

In today’s environment Palm Beach County alone faces many environmental problems, which can turn disastrous if not taken care of. Included in these problems are air pollution, water contamination, and urban explosion. Air pollution is a major factor threatening our health and our environment. Due to the pollutants that circulate in the air, many people can come into contact with cancer causing gases. Atmospheric contaminants are derived from human practices, such as gas from automobiles, factories, and even chimneys.

Pollutants do not only cause damage to our health, but they cause damage to the health of plants and animals as well. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide cause damage to leaves of crop plants and trees when they enter leaf pores. Exposure of leaves to air pollutants can also break down the waxy coating that helps prevent excessive water loss and damage from diseases, pests, drought, and frost. Water pollution is another problem our county faces. There are many causes for water pollution but two general categories exist: direct and indirect contaminant sources.

Direct sources include effluent outfalls from factories, waste treatment plants etc. , which emit fluids of varying quality directly into urban water supplies. Although these practices are regulated, this doesn’t mean that pollutants can’t be found in these waters. Indirect sources include contaminants that enter the water supply from soils/groundwater systems and from the atmosphere via rainwater. Soils and groundwater contain the residue of human agricultural practices (fertilizers, pesticides, etc. ) and improperly disposed of industrial wastes. The effects of water pollution are varied and can be severe.

They include poisonous drinking water, poisonous food animals, unbalanced river and lake ecosystems that can no longer support full biological diversity, deforestation from acid rain, and many other effects. These effects are harmful to everyone either directly or indirectly. It seems as if everywhere you look you either see construction, or a sign confirming construction will soon be present in that particular area. Urban explosion has played a big role in Palm Beach County’s environmental problems. Construction of so many new restaurants and stores has lured many new residents to Palm Beach County.

This urban sprout has slowly deteriorated the natural habitat in many areas where entire forests have been cut down in order to make room for homes and new resident areas. The fast population growth has put additional pressure on water quality as well as air quality. In summary, it seems as if our environmental problems are all around us and usually oblivious to most people. The major ones that I’ve noticed in Palm Beach County are: air pollution, water contamination, and urban explosion. If these problems continue growing in the form that they are, there will be serious consequences for us all.

Currently, a controversy is swirling over the issues raised by the despoiling of the world’s natural environment. Poet Stanley Kunitz in “The War Against the Trees” depicts a man watching his neighbor, “who sold his lawn to standard oil” (Kunitz 122), laugh as bulldozers ruin the natural beauty of the grounds with its “forsythia-forays and hydrangea-raids” (Kunitz 123). As industry wages war not just against flowers and shrubbery, but also against the town’s pleasant past.

Kunitz’s speaker is angry that this war “against the great-grandfathers of the town” (Kunitz 123) is destroying these ancestors’ attempt to preserve nature, not allow “the green world” (Kunitz 123) to be turned into a “death-foxed page” (Kunitz 123) of barrenness. Some pro-environmentalists, like Sioux medicine man John (Fire) Lame Deer, claim that the damage industrialized society has done to nature is both immense and nearly criminal , the result of greed.

Lame Deer complains that the white men “have not only despoiled the earth, the rocks, the minerals, all of which they call dead’ but which are very much alive; they have even changed the animals, which are a part of us, part of the Great Spirit, changed them in a horrible way, so no one can recognize them” (Erodes 209). On the other hand, conservatives frequently label environmentalists as extremists who despise almost all of capitalism’s practices regarding ecology.

That is, some extremist defenders of the profit motive name call, terming environmentalists “vandals” (Huber2 1) who prefer “forests over jobs” (Huber2 1) that the industrial age provides. Clearly, the issue has been politicized. Nonetheless, no one can deny that the earth, while not on the brink of annihilation, has been polluted and our air contaminated by the inroads created by the mechanized era. Furthermore, no caring person should recommend a “do-nothing” policy regarding the preservation of our environment which we ourselves are in the process of ruining.

The answer to the ecological dilemma is to assess realistically the extent of the damage and work to create a sensible, practical solution to the problem of our eroding environment through cooperative efforts. It is hard to doubt that human beings are wasting or eroding the earth which we all live on. Not only have the industrial nations altered their natural settings by overbuilding dams, destroying rain forests, and driving species out of their natural habitats to die or mutate, but they have pushed the earth close to the limits of its resources.

Lame Deer charges that because certain animals like coyotes, if left alive, “could lose some man a few cents,” (Erodes 212) our fauna are being depleted. We have also divorced ourselves from the healing power of nature and from our innate ” love for all that has been placed on this earth’ ” (Erodes 214) such as vegetation, the waters, the air, and all animals– except homo sapiens, whom out of self-interest we favor. Anyone living in Dallas or coastal areas of Louisiana last summer will find it hard to forget the “smaze” that choked us.

Blowing in from dry regions to the South, such as Mexico, the smoke came from widespread fires caused by aridity and by flammable industrial materials. Consequently, if anyone mocks those who claim our earth is decaying, these doubters should have just taken a whiff of the “smazed” air and then listened to his or her own coughing. We need to preserve not just the beauty of our few remaining wildernesses, but biodiversity, human and animal health, and the very survival of our planet as we know it now.

Most environmentalists and other analysts date widespread concern over ecological balance and conservationism to the appearance of Rachel Carson’s landmark book published in 1962, Silent Spring. From its publication on, “Nature became more than something that existed at a distance from most of human settlement, and nonhuman species were suddenly not the only species at direct risk from human impositions on the natural world. Pollution and human health, shifted to the center of concern, were seen as inseparable from conservation concerns” (Paehlke 261).

Carson indicted human beings for unleashing a “chain of evil” (Carson 324) in the form of pollution: “In this now universal contamination of the environment, chemicals and the sinister and little-recognized partners of radiation are changing the very nature of the world the very nature of its life” (Carson 324) with a “barrage of poisons” (Carson 325). On the NBC Today show on December 4, 1998, scientists reported on a Danish study showing the likelihood that certain pesticides, which remain in the body for decades, significantly increase a woman’s risk for getting breast cancer.

With the visible increase in pollution of the air and water by CO2 emissions and by toxic chemical waste, most alert people have become aware of the long term ill consequences of a reckless technology about to run amuck. With the energy crisis strike in 1973, when the OPEC nations withheld oil from the west, the general public began to realize that there is a third dimension besides pollution and health attached “to environmental/conservation concerns: sustainability- the sustainability of resources, the sustainability of ecological systems, and the sustainability of both industrial economies and human societies” (Paehlke 261).

In short, these “current environmental crises make a systematic, scientific understanding of ecological principles especially important” (Cunningham 248). By 1998, knowledgeable people must be familiar with the assault on the earth and its living creatures resulting from industrial abuse. However, the pragmatic issue of protecting ourselves from ecological disintegration unfortunately has degenerated into a heated political argument, when instead of squabbling and hurling charges, people should collaborate and work out reasonable solutions to our environmental crisis.

Unfortunately, environmentalism has become a set of ideas that many refuse to accept as wholesome or valid: “One way of grasping its meaning is to see environmentalism as a political ideology, in some ways not unlike the classic political ideologies of liberalism, conservatism, and socialism. Ideologies carry and convey a set of social values and seek to alter the societal and political agenda through the expression and interpretation of those values” (Paehlke 260). Some critics of environmentalism object on political, ideological grounds to the movement, insisting it is intent on undermining capitalism.

Since the West probably is still haunted by the ghosts of the Cold War and communism, many of its citizens feel threatened by a perceived attack on mechanization and industrialization from enthusiastic ecologists. Instead of seeing interest in saving rivers, the redwoods, and grey wolves as a subversive attack on the sacred principles of the free marked, private property, and the capitalist’s pursuit of property, conservatives ought to forget politics and support intelligent efforts to clean up chemical wastes, the waters of the earth, and the very air we breathe.

Partisanship should not taint programs to save the environment, and cooperation should be the key word. The existence of charges and countercharges by both sides of the political spectrum have succeeded only in muddling the vital issue of environmentalism and in sparking emotionalism on a crucial problem requiring rational, dispassionate thought for its solution. The extreme right is mistaken when it attacks environmentalism as one of the “intellectual-led movements” (Sowell 1) that are best called moral melodramas’ that “[turn] practical tasks into holy causes and Promethean undertakings” (Sowell 1).

Downgrading intellectuals as melodramatic a term connoting foolish, unjustified exaggeration the ultraconservatives criticize intelligent environmentalists as people who “cannot rely on the mundane” (Sowell 1). Again in his column in Forbes, Thomas Sowell uses a word, conjure, with a negative connotation: when one hears it, one thinks of sorcerers or just ordinary people afflicted by an overactive imagination no one to be taken seriously.

Over a year later than Sowell’s essay came out, the same periodical, Forbes, printed another anti-environmentalist article whose very title employs three emotionally-loaded words, “Green Alchemy: misbegotten environmentalists. ” The word green suggests the political radicals in Europe who advocate extreme measures to preserve the earth as well as the ecological organization Greenpeace, which the author, Peter Huber, ridicules. Then, alchemy refers to quacks in the Middle Ages who deceived people that they could turn any metal into gold as a greedy hoax.

Within Huber’s article, the author lumps environmentalists with other irrational people “of alchemical temperament conspiracy theorists, occultists, central planners. ” (Huber1 2) These unbalanced environmentalist, Huber contends, see free markets as wicked and capitalists as vile in an exaggerated attempt to discredit those who are genuinely interested in saving our health and our planet. This type of hot-headed rhetoric and unnecessary name calling impedes most collaborative programs that intend to benefit the environment and thereby help our children and grandchildren live in a wholesome atmosphere.

With the future of the planet at stake, it is detrimental to the safety of all its organisms to have ranting and raving replace constructive action. In spite of all the thunder on the right and warning signals on the left, one point is clear: we must guard our earth or decline with it. No reasonable person wants the world to time travel back to the Paleolithic Age or even the Neanderthal Age by shutting down industries and trying to survive all species and every tree around the globe. Yet, it is immoral not to be concerned about passing on a legacy of a doomed earth to future generations.

Logically, the best approach is the moderate one that begins at local and state levels and even involves the federal government in a wholesome, effective campaign to pull together our battered planet. Certainly, the federal government and private individuals will come up the funding to undertake a massive clean-up of the environment if only they could debate the question of “how” rather than “Why should we do it? ” The answer to the latter question should be clear: to halt the horrifying possibility that one day, sooner or later, the earth will be unable to support many living species.

The greenhouse effect, in environmental science, is a popular term for the effect that certain variable constituents of the Earth’s lower atmosphere have on surface temperatures. These gases–water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4)–keep ground temperatures at a global average of about 15 degrees C (60 degrees F). Without them the average would be below the freezing point of H20. The gases have this effect because as incoming solar radiation strikes the surface, the surface gives off infrared radiation, or heat, hat the gases trap and keep near ground level.

The effect is comparable to the way in which a greenhouse traps heat, hence the term. Environmental scientists are concerned that changes in the variable contents of the atmosphere (particularly changes caused by human activities) could cause the Earth’s surface to warm up to a dangerous degree. Even a limited rise in average surface temperature might lead to at least partial melting of the polar ice caps and hence a major rise in sea level, along with other severe environmental agitation.

An example of a runaway greenhouse effect is Earth’s near-twin planetary neighbor Venus. Because of Venus’s thick CO2 atmosphere, the planet’s cloud-covered surface is hot enough to melt lead. Water vapor is an important “greenhouse” gas. It is a major reason why humid regions experience less cooling at night than do dry regions. However, variations in the atmosphere’s CO2 content are what have played a major role in past climatic changes. In recent decades there has been a global increase in atmospheric CO2, largely as a result of the burning of fossil fuels.

If the many other determinants of the Earth’s present global climate remain more or less constant, the CO2 increase should raise the average temperature at the Earth’s surface. As the atmosphere warmed, the amount of H2O would probably also increase, because warm air can contain more H2O than can cooler air. This process might go on indefinitely. On the other hand, reverse processes could develop such as increased cloud cover and increased absorption of CO2 by phytoplankton in the ocean. These would act as natural feedbacks, lowering temperatures.

In fact, a great deal remains unknown about the cycling of carbon through the environment, and in particular about the role of oceans in this atmospheric carbon cycle. Many further uncertainties exist in greenhouse-effect studies because the temperature records being used tend to represent the warmer urban areas rather than the global environment. Beyond that, the effects of CH4, natural trace gases, and industrial pollutants–indeed, the complex interactions of all of these climate controls working together–are only beginning to be nderstood by workers in the environmental sciences.

Despite such uncertainties, numerous scientists have maintained that the rise in global temperatures in the 1980s and early 1990s is a result of the greenhouse effect. A report issued in 1990 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), prepared by 170 scientists worldwide, further warned that the effect could continue to increase markedly. Most major Western industrial nations have pledged to stabilize or reduce their CO2 emissions during the 1990s. The U. S. ledge thus far concerns only chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

CFCs attack the ozone layer and contribute thereby to the greenhouse effect, because the ozone layer protects the growth of ocean phytoplankton. would probably also increase, because warm air can contain more water than can cooler air. This process might go on indefinitely. On the other hand, reverse processes could develop such as increased cloud cover and increased absorption of CO2 by phytoplankton in the ocean. These would act as natural feedbacks, lowering temperatures.

There are three examples where companies have used The Natural Step and the outcomes prove whether it promotes sustainability. The examples shown are Stena Metall AB, an industrial recycling, trading and shipping company. The second example is Scandic Hotels and example three is Interface, a manufacturer of commercial floor covering. The Natural Step is a non- profit environmental education organisation with sight of the socially and ecologically sustainable society. Karl Henrik Robert, a cancer doctor in Sweden, discovered Natural Step in 1989.

He noticed an increase in childhood leukaemia cases and seen and understood an association between human illnesses and toxins. The approach for The Natural Step is to develop their framework, and put it to use in companies and other organisations. They intend to support it, plus Work towards becoming role models in the domain of sustainable development. Internet. The Natural Step promotes sustainability, and to define sustainability this is when materials are used in continuous cycles, reliable sources of energy is used continuously, and qualities of being human is sustainable.

It is important that organisations and companies move in this direction, as the human population is around six billion. Humans carelessness has caused life-supporting systems such as croplands, wetlands, the ozone layer, forestry, fisheries and groundwater to decline, and companies that close their eyes to environmental reality are likely to hit the wall. In todays society, visible forms of molecular garbage, waste and visible waste is producing and accumulating in the air. What happens is societal demand increases, and room to meet those demands decreases, in other words there is no where to store the resources.

More people are coming in to the world, resources are required to facilitate and there are increased pressures on the capacity of the ecosphere to absorb waste. If we do not create a sustainable society eventually, our businesses will hit the wall. The only option is the restoration of cyclical processes, where wastes become new resources for society or nature. However, if humans realise that the ecosystem has limits, and they work towards the four systems conditions, this could be avoided and chances of a sustainable future might be possible.

In knowing what the framework contains, you also need to keep in mind the four systems conditions that guide companies and organisations in the direction of a sustainable future. Dr. Karl Henrik derived them. The Natural Step concepts and methodology shows the discipline of sustainability in the basic laws of thermodynamics. The purpose of the four systems conditions is to find a framework for discussing sustainable human activities through non-overlapping first order principles. To come up with the principles, research was on human activities, and how they could destroy or deteriorate the ecological system that we depend on.

In a sustainable society, this would not happen. Internet The four systems conditions do not tell the company what to do, it provides the first order principles that must be met for sustainability. The framework where this sustainability can take place are derived through the four system conditions which are as follows: i. Substances from the Earths crust must not systematically increase in nature. ii. Substances produced by society must not systematically increase in nature. iii. The physical basis for the productivity and the diversity of nature most not be systematically diminished, and v.

We must be fair and efficient when meeting human needs. The first order principles four system conditions give companies an idea on how to move towards sustainability. Internet Natural Step provides a route map for any organisation wishing to get to grips with sustainable development. A new area for Natural Step is their involvement with Air BP, Scandic Hotels, Nike Europe, Co-operative Bank, DuPont, Carillion, HP Bulmer, Interface, Microsystems, Tarmac, Wessex Water, Ikea and Yorkshire Water. There are several more companies working with The Natural Step.

Internet Companies working with The Natural Step, seminars and workshops are held to educate staff within your organisation, about the meaning of sustainability and ways to achieve this. The Natural Step workshops prove effective at achieving a shared and new awareness of the principles, which are required in attempt at a sustainable future. Internet For most companies, life is not as simple as it used to be. Businesses get more pressure from government and consumers, because they want them to be more environmentally and socially responsible.

They must make decisions about their future development, in relation to social, economic and environmental impacts of every choice. All businesses must deal with the environment in a way that leads to a sustainable future in not doing so may lead to them not having a future. Internet We need to meet human needs without diminishing the Earths capacity to provide for the needs of future generations. Few people will disagree that sustainability is a good idea, although most find it difficult as it has complex implications.

The problems of social and the environment will not be solved unless we rethink how we interact with the environment, like the for example how the following companies have put these issues into effect. Internet Companies such as the three discussed further down have integrated the environment in to their business reality by using The Natural Step framework. The companies recognise that the economy and the environment are linked and natures limits help profitability while improving their chances of growing in a competitive world.

The costs of resources and environmental legislation such as the resource Management Act, require environmentally sustainable business decisions. In addition, to The Natural step more and more companies are upgrading their environmental Management Systems to conform to International Standards. Such as the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) in Europe or the ISO 14001 Environmental system standard. The creation is by the International Standards organisation. Business customers are increasingly requiring that suppliers become certified according to one of the internationally recognised standards.

They need a guide and that guide could be The Natural Step. Businesses are becoming 1S0 9001 and ISO 14001 certified. Book The Natural Step for business. ISO 14001 standard is implemented to achieve excellence by reducing waste, while the ISO 9001 standard is implemented to reduce waste by achieving excellence. ISO 14001 will change the way we do business. Its main clauses are as follows: General requirements, Environmental policy, and Planning, Implementation and operation, checking and corrective action and management review. The environmental policy gives direction to reduce environment degradation.

Management review is similar to the 1SO 9000 system. Benefits arising from implementation are improvements in bottom line, increased profits, operations, marketing, regulatory, compliance and social, being capable to identify opportunities for improvement, waste reduction, waste reused, recycled or eliminated. Internet The three examples discussed, where the companies are working with The Natural Step to move in the direction of a sustainable future are Stena Metall AB, Scandic Hotels, and Interface. Stena Metall AB is an industrial recycling, trading and shipping company. They recycle scrap metal, i. e. rapped cars, appliances, other steel and collects, process and sells waste paper, etc. Environmental issues are part of their day to day responsibilities.

Recycling and environmental service Company in Stena Metall Group are becoming certified to 1SO 14001. In 1996/1997 they were 1S0 14001 certified and registered according to EMAS (European Unions Ordinance on environmental processing and environmental audits). They were also certified to 1S0 9002. Their goal is for all their companies to be 1S0 14001 certified. Stena Gotthard Atervinning, are one of Stena Mettal’s Group, they are one of the first division to implement TNS.

Natural Step motivates the companies on environmental aspects. Competition is increasing in marketing for recycling and environmental services as organisations and businesses are effected by environmental demands. When the company were looking into environmental training, they decided upon TNS as they found the four systems conditions to be an easy training model and they could easily link them to their daily behaviour. The TNS framework was used for their environmental training internally, and applied to their business operations.

When using the four systems conditions they found they had zero waste. Waste Management today is a vital link to a sustainable society, for waste and recycling companies to be successful, they must be environmentally responsible and safe. In Stenna Metalls annual Reports, they devote two pages to their environmental approach. In addition, in 1996/1997 gross revenues amounted to SEK 292. 8m, which was a 40% increase compared with 1995/1996. Internet Another company Scandic Hotels AB had losses between 1990 and 1992, CEO, Roland Nilson was brought in to improve the company.

He realised that the way forward for the hotel would be to introduce new values towards caring for their guests, workers, shareholders, the community where it was situated, and the natural environment. He realised concern for the earth, and impact of business on natural world was important to many people. He needed to educate management and employees on environmental issues and bring environment issues into practice. He researched environmental values and came to the decision that TNS had credibility in both environmental and business circles.

The CEO met with Dr. Karl Henrik Robert and was impressed with his approach. Dr Karl Henrik Robert give a presentation to introduce TNS and they proceeded with TNS as their environmental, educational program. After their training in TNS, employees made suggestions and some were implemented after meetings on topics. TNS is part of the way Scandic Hotels do business now and in the future. When introducing TNS they produced an environmental guide that contained a description of the Environmental Dialogue process involving visions for 2000, environmental goals, policy and their recent activities.

It also covers principles behind TNS framework and including human activities into natures cycle and the four systems conditions. In meetings they looked at ways in which they could make environmental improvements in Scandic Hotels, they also drew up a program to suggest ways they can reduce their impact on environment through their environmental networker. They came up with, ideas to be carried out and implemented ideas that need further investigation, and ideas that need investment. The program has been produced, and given to employees and guests in the hotel. More than 1500 measures through environmental dialogue have been implemented.

Scandic hotels have reduced their environmental impact by introducing a 97 percent recyclable room, where 1000 rooms produce 60 tons less plastic waste (a reduction of 70 percent), 10 tons less metal waste (50 percent reduction). Scandic saved 40 tons of soap in one year by changing to liquid soap dispensers, reduced fuel and water consumption by using more efficient washing machines and increased its market share due to positive public response to its activities. In addition, they have introduced in typical areas 25 percent light sockets filled with low energy bulbs.

They have made bicycles available for guests and workers to lessen the impact on environment. Any Eco-efficiency and cost saving initiates are resulted in higher profits for the company. This was popular with customers, but not only, that it also contributes to a healthier environment. In relation to 1996, annual cost for energy and water has been reduced by almost 12million SEK (US $1. 4m) Ecological Sustainability is not a cost to the company, it helps profit margins considerably and a competitive advantage. In 1996/1998, their goal was to reduce energy and water consumption by 20% and unsorted waste by 20%.

Their average in this period of energy consumption was reduced by 12 percent per night and water consumption by 12 percent per guest per night, and waste was reduced by 28 percent. Environmental sustainability is a competitive issue, by introducing TNS into their strategy and practices. They continue to win customer and market share from their competitors. The Natural Step is Scandic Hotel’s best team building program they have ever discovered. Internet, and brochure on Natural Step. Interface is a manufacturer of commercial floor covering, there is four manufacturing sites in the UK.

They are committed to becoming sustainable and work with The Natural Step in the USA as well as in the UK, Australia, and throughout Europe. Interface put together a learning and development programme for the company, to encourage people to take responsibilities, make suggestions and take risks with new ways of doing things. The objective of this project was to give training to staff, including those on the shop floor, to learn what sustainability means for Interface and also to contribute to the company becoming sustainable and eventually, restorative.

Interface worked with TNS to create a two day training course, a group were trained and then they went on to facilitate the course to their colleagues, and over 2,500 people have taken a Natural Step within Interface. Employees are ready to contribute to exciting new ideas, including onsite renewable energy generation, accounting for sustainability, and the search for new, less toxic chemicals to use in production. Reductions in waste to landfill have been achieved, an increase of use of post-consumer recycled materials, existing facilities have been redeveloped, reusing much of the material from the old buildings.

In addition, the latest technology has been used for energy saving. Ray Anderson calculated that the company is responsible for 1. 2 billion pounds of petroleum extracted from the crust of the earth each year. One third is used for the materials in carpet, and two thirds is the energy it takes to make carpet. Over 250million pounds of carpet is produced each year from the United States. With an average life of 15 years, most of this material goes to landfills. Their vision is to eventually make all carpet from recycled materials and to use renewable energy resources.

If this strategy succeeds, the indicator will approach zero Since their journey toward sustainability they have watched their sales rise. Interface has also developed one of the worlds first sustainable reports, which says one of their goals is to become the worlds first sustainable enterprise. Interface in recent years with a turnover increasing from $802m in 1995 to $1. 135 billion in 1997. Ray Anderson, chairman and founder of the company says that after attending training in TNS he understands the urgency of redesigning their products. Also he had realised how wonderful the world was but only now realises what a mess we have made of it.

TNS has made him aware of waste streaming not just at home but also at work, his dream is to be committed to leading the way to sustainability. Brochure on Natural step The Natural step organisations have been launched in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the Netherlands. Japan and South Africa are now in the process of establishing Natural Step organisations. The Natural Step framework is considered by Ikea, Scandic Hotels, Interface and Collins Pine to provide the best available organising structure for understanding sustainability.

The Natural Step is relatively young and their impacts and results have not been evaluated or widely communicated. Book The Natural Step, by Brian Nattrass & Mary Altomare. A large part of destruction is mainly due to business activities or through products and services that they provide. Though in my opinion it no longer matters who is to blame, all that matters is, that responsibility is taken towards the direction of sustainability for our society. The Natural step provides the vision that guides a company toward sustainability.

Many individuals today have civilized bodies and barbarous souls. Many are blind to the real sights of this world and deaf to its voice. However, no matter how ignorant one may be, he or she cannot disregard the significance of plastics in his or her life. Although they were not recognized as such, many materials used centuries ago for clothing and elements of construction, were natural polymers based on starch and cellulose. Then, ever since Alexander Parkes concocted the first man-made plastic in 1862, people utilized plastics in verythingautomobiles, homes, entertainment, clothes, and even medicine.

In addition to its many uses in everyday products, plastics can perform functions at a cost lower than other materials, and perhaps more efficiently too. Where would humanity be without the use of plastics? Although there is no way that anybody can deny the fact that plastics enhance everybodys lives, many are unaware how important plastics are to the society. While some people may argue that the invention of computers is the most important development in the last 2,000 years, plastics allow the manufacture of computers to occur.

The more obvious use of plastics is Tupperware, which makes mothers happy all over the world by making the preservation of leftovers more convenient. Along with satisfying the adults, plastics bring smiles to the younger generations with Barbie dolls, footballs, Frisbees, and Hula Hoops. Then, in order to assure that the little girls and boys are playing without the risk of hurting themselves, producers gave rise to safeguards such as helmets and kneepads. Furthermore, in the fashion industry, the discovery of nylon in 1920s created a big craze.

Instead of animal hair in toothbrushes and silk stockings, chemists replaced them with nylon; this caused American women to storm department stores across the country to purchase this latest in womens hosiery. From the first moment a man opens his eyes in the morning to laying his head down on the pillow at night, he is constantly surrounded by the wonderful world of plastics. Besides ameliorating the quality of many lives, the widespread use of plastics also became one of the major contributors to the economy. For instance, in United States, or the largest consumer and producer of the plastics in the world, hipments of plastics totaled $274. billion in 1996.

Also, due to plastics light weight and durability, consumers can purchase economy-size products, inducing cheaper shipping-and-handling fee and yet extremely convenient. Moreover, in plastics industry accounted for 1. 3 million jobs, helping every family to expand their employment opportunities. Less people would have to sleep on the streets; with the steady increase in the past two and a half decades, the plastics industry grants those in poverty another chance to pick themselves off the streets and start new lives.

A lot of people believe that plastics are hazardous to the environment. However, it is not the material that is dangerous to natureit is the people that utilize them. Many will be surprised to hear that plastics are derived from natural resources, and in addition, because plastics are so efficient, their function often conserves other resources. As a result, plastics create less pollution and employ fewer substantially poisonous ingredients. Moreover, plastics toughness permits many products to be reused over and over again, and therefore decreasing the quantity of trash disposed.

Similarly, plastics recycling program grants access to communities to collect plastics products. Therefore, plastics are only precarious to the environment if the users recklessly dump them in the garbage can or throwing it on the streets instead of reusing them. Other than commonplace uses of plastics, most people does not obtain the knowledge that plastics aid in such matters as preserving the great historical remains. A polymer coating protect the Statue of Liberty and other famous monuments worldwide. Another use of plastic that is not usually known would be billiard balls.

Before plastics, hundreds and thousands of elephants were killed for their ivory to make billiard balls. Instead of slaughtering the innocent animals and purchasing the billiard balls for an enormous amount of price, plastics allow people to play with plastic billiard balls with equal amusement. Furthermore, beginning with the dawn of the space age in 1957 when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik I into orbit to the Hubble Telescope at the end of 1999, plastic has permitted man to travel the far reaches of space, fulfilling the scientists dreams.

Without plastics to onstruct vehicles and other equipment that the astronauts need to survive, space exploration would be confined to the use of a land-based telescope. Plastics will definitely be a huge part of the next generations and the far future. Can anybody live without plastics? Probably, but their lives would be quite miserable. Plastics are components of numerous amount of products in society nowadays, and their unique characteristics make them advantageous and easy to use. Furthermore, plastics save time and money, along with the earth’s resources and therefore, improving the lives of people everywhere.

Although our industrial ways seem to be a very progressive step into the future, there are many flaws to the way many things are today. Things have definitely changed over the past century, as we can currently do things much more efficiently then before. The cost of this efficiency may seem inexpensive in many ways, however we do not realize that the cost of these new technologies do not just include money, time and labour, but it also costs us our well being as well as the beauty and comfort of our own home, earth.

Ozone depletion, climate change as well as the direct effects of chemicals from industrial missions and fuel combustion are a great threat to our planet and if nothing is done to resolve this problem soon, the results may be disastrous. There is a layer of chemicals twenty kilometers up in the stratosphere called the ozone layer. This layer protects the inhabitants of earth by reflecting much of the suns harmful ultra violet (UV) rays. Without this layer above us, many living things including humans could not survive. The ozone layer is currently depleting and the reason for this is believed to be caused by a few things.

Deforestation, fertilizer use and fuel combustion are minor ontributors to this problem while chemicals such as chloroflourocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide and hydrochloroflourocarbons (HCFCs) are the major contributors to the deterioration of the ozone layer. These chemicals have industrial halocarbons that break up into chlorine and bromine in the upper stratosphere when they react with the sun’s rays. Chlorine eats up the ozone layer while bromine acts as a catalyst and speeds up the process.

Often found in Antarctica, there are frozen chemical clouds in the upper stratosphere called polar stratospheric clouds. These polar stratospheric clouds destroy the ozone layer at a much faster pace then the industrial halocarbons. The depletion of the ozone layer is a great threat to mankind and all other living things on earth because without this layer of chemicals, we will be exposed to excess UV rays. This excess exposure can lead to many things such as malignant melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer, damage to eyes by means such as snow blindness and cataracts, which is the clouding of the eye that can eventually lead to blindness.

Above all this, excessive UV xposure can lead to symptoms similar to AIDS as prolonged exposure could weaken the human immune system. As far as plants and animals go, plants may die or may not be as healthy as a result of too much UV exposure and animals will suffer similar symptoms as humans. So if the ozone layer that we depend very much on is destroyed, it could be concluded that we as inhabitants of the world are also destroyed. It is believed but not yet proven that we are altering the world climate by releasing chemicals into the atmosphere by a process called “global warming” or the “greenhouse effect”.

Some of the chemicals that are believed to ontribute to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide, halogen gases and CFCs. These chemicals cause the climate of the world to increase by trapping the suns heat in the atmosphere and can last anywhere from one decade to one century. Although chemicals released by man only account for one third of the greenhouse effect, it is our contribution to this problem that will set the world off balance.

It seems now that by the year 2100, carbon dioxide will double, causing global temperatures to rise to anywhere in between one point five to four point five degrees Celsius. Many people may wonder why global warming is such a problem as humans can easily adapt to their environment. If this global warming causes global temperatures to rise, we as humans will be able to cope with this change, however plants and animals may not be able to adapt to this change and as a result they may die and become extinct, resulting in a break in the food chain.

The ocean levels will also continue to rise as they have been at a pace of two to eight centimeters a decade for several more decades. In fact, if Antarctica melts slightly the ocean level can rise up to sixty meters. As the global temperatures rise, the world will become drier and therefore there will be more droughts, and heat waves possibly causing more fires and again producing more CO2 and further contributing to the problem. Ocean temperatures, currents and fish habitats will also change with the climate of the world.

Chemicals however, are not only believed to heat up the world in the process of global warming, chemicals are also the probable cause of an unexplained coolness in some parts of the world. Sulfur dioxide is a chemical that reflects sunlight and because it reflects sunlight it is assumed that ulfur dioxide cools specific areas of the earth that should be warmer. Chemicals cause a lot of indirect damage to all living things on earth, however, it is possible and most frequent that chemicals endanger the lives of living things directly. Unintentionally inhaling chemicals is one way these chemicals can harm us directly.

Carbon monoxide, when inhaled, binds to the blood’s hemoglobin and prevents the necessary oxygen from reaching tissues. When inhaled, carbon monoxide can also dull mental acuity. A deadly chemical cloud at ground level called smog also endangers the health of living things. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions combine to form ozone at ground level. When the sun reacts with this ozone layer at ground level, it produces smog. Every year the ozone layer at ground level has increased by one percent.

As carbon dioxide emissions increase throughout the world, some plants may benefit from this increase and so this excess carbon dioxide may act as a fertilizer, but to other plants, too much carbon dioxide may be a bad thing, causing the plant to die and possibly become extinct. The St. Claire River is now known as “Chemical Valley” because of an accident that had occurred there several years ago. An industrial company near the river had spilled sixty different chemicals mixed together into the river. This accident had sterilized the river and had effected much of the agriculture around it.

The Great Lakes is another example of the direct effect of chemicals on living things. There are chemicals in our body today that there not present back in the early 90’s, the polluted Great Lakes that we locals depend on, are believed to be the cause. Animals reproducing near the great akes and that rely on the great lakes are more frequently unsuccessful then before, female birds are growing crossed bills, males are either immune to this or die in the shell, fish are being feminized because the do not have secondary sex steroids which chemicals from the pulp and paper industry are believed to be responsible for.

For humans, the sperm count in men has decreased fifty percent in the last fifty years, breast cancer has become an epidemic, males experience genetile disorders and children have problems learning. Chemicals released into the atmosphere by industry, vehicles, fertilizer use, etc. an harm plant, animal and even human health, so therefore if this problem is not resolved quickly, the world we live in now could soon turn into a world of chaos.

If a species of any animal becomes extinct the food chain will collapse, if any species of plants become extinct the food chain again will collapse and if that species of plants is used for any type of medication, the people who depend on that medication may also die. There are some organizations in the world that are trying to turn things around, however there are not enough people to support these groups. The general public doesn’t seem to care much bout this problem or is not yet aware of this issue.

Even the government of Canada doesn’t not want to take action against pollution more then likely because of budget limitations. It was concluded by Dr. Gordon McBean that “Humans have already radically altered the composition of the atmosphere and hence it’s radiative properties. In other words, we have quite unintentionally started a long-term, global-scale geophysical experiment with the life-support system of this planet – an experiment that we do not control and, as yet, poorly understand. That, in itself, is cause for concern. “

The large mainstream environmentalism groups started to compromise too much with regulatory agencies and bureaus, starting with the Glen Canyon Dam project. This began an estrangement with the mainstreams that culminated in the rise of more militant groups like Earth First! Glen Canyon represented what was fundamentally wrong with the country’s conservation policies: arrogant government officials motivated by a quasireligious zeal to industrialize the natural world, and a diffident bureaucratic leadership in the mainstream environmental organizations that more or less willingly collaborated in this process.

The mainstream environmental groups and government held the premise that mankind should control and manage the natural world. The radicals held that our technological culture with its intrusions on natural world had to be curtailed, perhaps even undone, to keep the ecology of this planet and our role in it viable. It marked a shift from a rearguard strategy (mainstream) to protect wilderness to an affirmative attempt to roll back the artifacts of civilization, to restore the world to the point where natural processes such as the flow of rivers could continue.

The mainstream environmental movement is now perceived by many as out of touch with people’s deep concern about environmental degradation, has become systematized. The activists use approaches such as industrial vandalism or “ecotage” to foster dramatic results. Some other methods employed are tree spiking, tree sitting, road blockading, demonstrations, tree pinning, ship sinking, dam breaking and outright terrorist-type sabotage (bombing power stations, bridges, power line, etc. )

There may be some complimentary results of the efforts of both mainstream and radical groups. The large environmental organizations, while denouncing the radical’s confrontational activities, have then been able to use their ample finances to take the campaign to Congress or the courts with the impetus of public support the radicals generated. 2. With Soule’s quote, including “Vertebrate evolution may be at an end” it means that the civilization complex has lost its reference point by overwhelming the natural processes it has always used to define itself.

The otherness of nature is disappearing into the artificial world of technology. As the environmental crisis worsens, we can expect increased attention directed at the ecological sciences, resource management, pollution control, and technological supervision of the reproduction of valued species, including man. Toynbee writes that the ecological scarcity of the future will be so severe that the “within each of the beleaguered ‘developed’ countries there will be a bitter struggle for control of their diminished resources”.

This conflict will inevitably lead to the imposition of authoritarian regimes. There is already evidence of “ecological elite’s” where power and status are increasingly measured not merely by economic control, but by control over the ecology. Access to clean water, fresh air, open wild spaces, and natural products is competing with ownership of German autos and Swiss watches. It is becoming the main preoccupation of political debate.

As an example, even when a corporation decides to create a item through genetic or non-genetic engineering, it is often indirectly determining what species will be exterminated to increase profits, which habitats will be sacrificed for economic growth, and whose children will be allocated the toxic water, poisoned food, and radioactive living space. If the environmental crisis is causing us to reexamine and reject the accepted values of the civilization complex in its entirety, a unique event is taking place: the passing of civilization into history.

The greenhouse effect, in environmental science, is a popular term for the effect that certain variable constituents of the Earth’s lower atmosphere have on surface temperatures. These gases–water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4)–keep ground temperatures at a global average of about 15 degrees C (60 degrees F). Without them the average would be below the freezing point of H20. The gases have this effect because as incoming solar radiation strikes the surface, the surface gives off infrared radiation, or heat, hat the gases trap and keep near ground level.

The effect is comparable to the way in which a greenhouse traps heat, hence the term. Environmental scientists are concerned that changes in the variable contents of the atmosphere (particularly changes caused by human activities) could cause the Earth’s surface to warm up to a dangerous degree. Even a limited rise in average surface temperature might lead to at least partial melting of the polar ice caps and hence a major rise in sea level, along with other severe environmental agitation.

An example of a runaway greenhouse effect is Earth’s near-twin planetary neighbor Venus. Because of Venus’s thick CO2 atmosphere, the planet’s cloud-covered surface is hot enough to melt lead. Water vapor is an important “greenhouse” gas. It is a major reason why humid regions experience less cooling at night than do dry regions. However, variations in the atmosphere’s CO2 content are what have played a major role in past climatic changes. In recent decades there has been a global increase in atmospheric CO2, largely as a result of the burning of fossil fuels.

If the many other determinants of the Earth’s present global climate remain more or less constant, the CO2 increase should raise the average temperature at the Earth’s surface. As the atmosphere warmed, the amount of H2O would probably also increase, because warm air can contain more H2O than can cooler air. This process might go on indefinitely. On the other hand, reverse processes could develop such as increased cloud cover and increased absorption of CO2 by phytoplankton in the ocean. These would act as natural feedbacks, lowering temperatures.

In fact, a great deal remains unknown about the cycling of carbon through the environment, and in particular about the role of oceans in this atmospheric carbon cycle. Many further uncertainties exist in greenhouse-effect studies because the temperature records being used tend to represent the warmer urban areas rather than the global environment. Beyond that, the effects of CH4, natural trace gases, and industrial pollutants–indeed, the complex interactions of all of these climate controls working together–are only beginning to be nderstood by workers in the environmental sciences.

Despite such uncertainties, numerous scientists have maintained that the rise in global temperatures in the 1980s and early 1990s is a result of the greenhouse effect. A report issued in 1990 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), prepared by 170 scientists worldwide, further warned that the effect could continue to increase markedly. Most major Western industrial nations have pledged to stabilize or reduce their CO2 emissions during the 1990s. The U. S. ledge thus far concerns only chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

CFCs attack the ozone layer and contribute thereby to the greenhouse effect, because the ozone layer protects the growth of ocean phytoplankton. would probably also increase, because warm air can contain more water than can cooler air. This process might go on indefinitely. On the other hand, reverse processes could develop such as increased cloud cover and increased absorption of CO2 by phytoplankton in the ocean. These would act as natural feedbacks, lowering temperatures.

Coral reefs are one of the oldest types of living systems on earth, and certainly one of the most spectacular. They are massive underwater structures formed by the limestone skeletons of tiny invertebrate animals. Reefs house a greater diversity of body forms, chemistry, and animal phyla (thirty-two compared to the eight that inhabit the most biodiverse ecosystems on land). Phyla comprise the second largest category of living things, after kingdoms. Coral animals begin life as free-floating larvae, but settle on the sea floor in sedentary colonies.

The term “coral” applies both to these animals and to their skeletons, particularly the skeletons of stone-like corals. Many different organisms, including molluscs, sponges, and worms, help shape reefs, but hard corals and various algae are the major architects. In effect, the corals build limestone, because their skeletons are made of Calcium Carbonate. The skeletons deposited by these corals and other organisms accumulate, along with sand and other debris, to form the backbone of the reef. Over tens of thousands of years, chemical and mechanical changes turn the reef into true rock.

The body of a coral animal consists of a polyp, which is the living portion of the coral. A polyp is a hollow, cylindrical structure attached at one end to a surface, the other end is a mouth surrounded by tentacles which gather food and can sting prey to paralyse it. Polyps live in colonies, which grow from 1 to 7 inches, depending on the species. Coral polyps are classified as animals. Microscopic algae live within the animal tissues in a symbiotic relationship. The algae turn sunlight into carbon and sugars, which are then available to the polyp.

In turn the polyp filters particles out of the water and excretes waste (nitrogen and phosphorus) that becomes available to the symbiotic algae. It’s this very tight nutrient recycling within the coral itself that allows these corals to live in very low-nutrient waters. There are three kinds of reefs: atolls, barrier reefs, and fringing reefs. Atolls are formed out in the middle of the ocean by volcanic subsidence, while fringing and barrier reefs form near continents. Florida contains both of these kinds of reefs, not as far offshore as Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, but not terribly close either.

Most are eight to eleven kilometres (five to seven miles) offshore. All three kinds of reefs can have associations, called patch reefs, which are small, shallow-water clusters or offshoots. In Florida, patch reefs can be as close as one hundred meters to the shore. Ancient limestone reefs have occupied the Florida peninsula intermittently over the past 150 million years. Florida’s present coral reefs came into existence 5,000 to 7,000 years ago, when sea levels rose following the Wisconsin Ice Age. The reefs in the Florida Keys are part of the third largest barrier reef system (360 square kilometres from Miami to the Dry Tortugas).

Coral reefs are continuously being both built up and decomposed, so different parts of a reef are in varying stages of succession. Coral reefs are very fragile, because reef-building organisms cannot thrive if the surrounding water changes significantly. Coral reefs require very specific conditions in order to grow: a solid structure for the base; warm and consistent water temperatures (averaging between 20 and 30 degrees Celsius); stable salinity; moderate wave action; and clear water that is low in nutrients and plankton.

The water on a healthy coral reef is clear because there are very few nutrients, so plankton that would cloud the water are few. In general corals grow slowly, but they are extremely efficient at living and reproducing in these conditions Reefs matter in many ways: Links to other coastal ecosystems: such as mangroves and sea grasses. Sources of medicine: Because corals and most other reef-dwelling species move either very little or not at all, they rely on biochemical warfare for both offence and defence.

They have developed strong and very diverse chemical compounds, and a number are proving to have significant anticancer, antibacterial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory properties. For example, cytarabine, derived from the Caribbean sponge Tethya crypta, induces remission in certain forms of leukaemia and is also useful against the herpes virus; pseudopterosins from the Caribbean sea-whip Pseudopterogorgia elisbethae have powerful anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties; and prostaglandins, which have a wide range of clinical applications, can be found in large quantities in the Caribbean sea fan Plexaura homomalla.

About six thousand unique chemical compounds have been isolated from reef organisms so far, and this potential pharmacopoeia has barely been tapped. And coral, which is porous and quickly reabsorbed, is used to repair human bone, with no risk of implant rejection or transmission of infection. Living breakwaters: Reefs protect coastal areas from storms, floods, and erosion. They’re key to many a surfer’s “perfect wave,” and contribute sand to the growth of beaches.

Evaporation basins: Reef flats and lagoons may play a key role in regulation of the sea’s salt content, removing salt by acting as evaporation basins. Shapers of landmass: Reefs play a part in the formation of tropical islands through deposition and accumulation of Calcium Carbonate rock (limestone) and sand. Mediators of global climate: Corals remove large amounts of carbon from the atmosphere as they grow, actually “fixing” 700 billion kilograms a year. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. Coral Reefs are also very important to the Florida economy:

Recreation and tourism: tourists spend about $1. 2 billion annually in the Florida Keys. Food fisheries: the value of reef fisheries (including shellfish and other invertebrates) off the Keys is estimated at $48. 4 million. Other industries: reefs support a large trade in aquarium fish and are a habitat for sport fish. Most present-day reefs have probably been growing for 5,000 to10, 000 years. But their continued survival is now threatened. Reefs around the world are now declining at an unprecedented rate–one that far outstrips our understanding of the problem.

Few long-term studies of coral reefs have been conducted, and there is considerable debate about the overall health of reef ecosystems. Still, most scientists agree that reefs worldwide are in crisis. Caribbean reefs appear to be in worse condition than Pacific reefs. They naturally have lower levels of biodiversity, which makes them more vulnerable to structural change. They house significantly fewer species of fast-growing and reef-building corals, and diseases have affected the entire basin while the far greater size of the Pacific has tended to keep outbreaks reef-specific or regional.

The third largest barrier reef system in the world is located off the Florida Keys. Its recent decline has been attributed to multiple causes, almost all of which involve human activity. Most scientists agree that the greatest threat to Florida’s reefs is degraded water quality. When land is cleared for development or agriculture, fertilisers, pesticides, and eroded soil wash out to sea when it rains. Pesticides can weaken the corals and make them more susceptible to disease. Sediments can smother or scour the reef, impairing coral growth.

The sea is also where most of the sewage and wastewater from Florida Key residents and their one million annual visitors ultimately ends up, and this pollution also degrades the water quality. In particular, fertilisers and sewage have significantly increased the level of nutrients in the water of Florida Bay. As a result, phytoplankton utilise these nutrients and grow exponentially. This causes various kinds of algal blooms: phytoplankton turning the water green, toxic blooms including red tides, and macro-algae overgrowing and smothering the reef. As phytoplankton increases, so does the turbidity of the water.

This cuts down the amount of light reaching the zooxanthellae (tiny one-celled algae that live inside coral polyps), so photosynthesis within the coral is adversely affected. Poor water quality affects other parts of the coastal ecosystem. Coastal ecosystems act as buffers between land and sea, reducing negative impacts in both directions. When stressed, they are less effective. There are three key environments in Florida that are intimately related. First of all, the mangroves along the shore, secondly, the grass beds in shallow water, and finally, the coral reefs at the edge of the shelf.

Water flows through this system, and the health of each system determines the health of the next. Every time somebody cuts down mangroves, it affects the sea grass beds somewhat further off shore. Every time a sea grass bed is destroyed, it affects the coral reef even further off shore. So all these interconnected habitats need to be preserved as a whole. Increased nutrients in the water were blamed for a major sea grass die-off in the bay in 1987, further stressing the reefs. Silt normally held down by the sea grass flowed out of the bay and ended up on the coral reefs, clouding the water.

This sediment hurts the reef in several ways: it impairs photosynthesis; it forces corals to expend energy cleansing themselves; and it can even bury them entirely. Studies showed corals only 4 kilometres from each other grew at dramatically different rates: the corals closer to Florida Bay grew only half as much as offshore corals. The location of the Florida Keys makes them particularly vulnerable. They are close to the heavily populated North American coast, and ocean currents place them downstream of the Caribbean basin.

The Loop Current, which travels clockwise in the Gulf of Mexico from the Yucatan Peninsula, to the Mississippi River, by Tampa Bay, and ultimately to the Florida Keys, carries stormwater and agricultural runoff containing pesticides, heavy metals, oil, and other toxic waste from more than half of the United States. Even sediment from the Amazon finds its way through the Florida straits. Compounding the problem is the fact that most of the bedrock underlying the islands of the Florida Keys is highly porous limestone, the remains of ancient reefs, through which contaminated waters easily flow in and out.

Preliminary studies indicate that ground waters beneath the reefs do contain nutrients, principally ammonia, at levels many times higher than that of normal seawater. These nutrient-rich ground waters can seep into the reef’s water columns with each change of the tide. People harm reefs in lots of other ways: Overfishing: fish and other reef species are caught by subsistence fishermen and overharvested by commercial ones. This has reduced overall populations, and specifically that of certain fish that control algae on the reefs.

Destructive fishing practices also harm reefs badly. These include using crowbars to dislodge clams, abalone, and other marine invertebrates from reefs at low tide, and also the illegal use of explosives and cyanide poisoning Ship groundings: thousands of ships and boats have run into Florida’s reefs since colonial times. Evidence is mounting that reefs struck frequently by boats recover more slowly from storm damage than untouched reefs. Collecting of coral and other reef species: specimens are collected live for aquariums or for curios and jewellery.

Mining of coral rock and sand: These are used for building materials, and coral is mined for jewellery. Redirecting water flow: Cross-sections of Florida reefs show that they began to decline beginning about eighty years ago. That coincides with the completion of Henry Flagler’s railroad across the Keys, and also with the redirection of water flow from the Everglades by developers and government officials. The railroad stopped Florida Bay from flowing into the Atlantic Ocean, while water from the Everglades was redirected towards Florida’s East Coast instead of into Florida Bay.

Alteration of coastal habitats for urban development: mangrove deforestation and dredging, draining, or filling in coastal wetlands all affect water quality. Tourism and recreation: careless divers break coral, kick up sand, feed fish, and remove specimens; careless boaters drop and drag anchors across fragile coral, leak oil, and dump garbage. Corals have been hit by diseases. Since the 1970s, Florida’s corals have been struck by an unprecedented number of diseases: white pox, black band, yellow band, white band, white death, and white plague.

Outbreaks are more frequent, more intense, and wider ranging than ever before. Many of these diseases are new to science and their causes are unknown. The diseases might result from a bacterial or fungal infection from the Pacific Ocean introduced to the Atlantic through bilge water of ships crossing the Panama Canal, or from animals or other materials carried from the Pacific. Unlike Pacific species, Atlantic corals have no immunity to these pathogens. Poor water quality could also be causing disease. The fungus Aspergillus is thought to be transferred by land runoff into Florida Bay and infecting corals directly.

Diseased fish swimming on the reefs may also be contributing. Airborne contaminants could also be a culprit. At first it was thought to be sewage flowing through porous limestone from the Keys that was infecting coral reefs miles offshore. Scientists then began wondering why the same diseases infected coral reefs in remote areas of the Caribbean. They now suspects that red, iron-rich African dust borne by transatlantic trade winds are carrying bacterial spores to reefs, and correlations between dust and disease outbreaks are presently being studied.

The iron also stimulates algal growth, which is bad for reefs (see explanation earlier). Other environmental factors could be causing harm. Hurricanes and storms also damage reefs and devastate coastal areas. While large waves cause severe short-term damage to reefs, recovery is rapid, and part of a cycle of disturbance and recovery that helps shape healthy coral reefs. When the reef is already stressed by pollution or overfishing, though, it may not be able to recover from storm damage. In the early 1980s, a mysterious epidemic killed almost all the long-spined black sea urchins in the Caribbean and South Atlantic.

The “sheep” of the reef, the urchins grazed on the seaweed that competes with corals for space. Whether attributable to global warming, or urban runoff, warmer water affects reef chemistry. For example, it can lead to overproduction of oxygen by zooxanthellae, which damages the polyps. Rising water temperatures also mean a rise in sea levels. Because algae and reef-building corals need sunlight for photosynthesis, the reef must grow relatively near the ocean’s surface to survive (generally within thirty meters). This means that a rapid rise in sea level could “drown” corals that don’t grow fast enough.

One widespread symptom of systems under stress is coral bleaching, which takes place when the microscopic algae that lives inside the coral polyps are expelled. With the loss of these photosynthetic algae, corals lose their coloration and rapidly turn white. Within a number of weeks, the coral animals die and the “bleached” reef is sterilised and no longer regenerates. The causes of coral bleaching are uncertain, but one possibility is the rise in sea surface temperatures. Tropical seawater is generally very stable in its temperature, rarely rising above 31 degrees Celsius.

However, within the last ten years, those maximum temperatures have been exceeded frequently and they’ve stayed hot for a long time, a change drastic enough to kill the algae. (Water that is too cold can also damage reefs. ) Corals may be an early warning sign for global warming. Recently, many reefs around the world have bleached several times, most often when local water temperatures were unusually high. Parts of these reefs are now dying. At least one species of coral may have already become extinct due to bleaching.

The Florida Keys Reef Monitoring Project is designed to assess the health of the reefs in the 2800-square-mile Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. A three-scientist team (Jim Porter, Phil Dustan and Walter Japp) designed and implemented the coral reef part of the program. Fortunately, they combine over sixty years of experience, because the question the study asks–“Are the reefs changing? “- is a complicated one. It’s grounded not just in reef ecology but in population biology, which involves sophisticated mathematical analysis of the equilibrium between births and deaths in a community of organisms.

One hundred and sixty-eight monitoring stations were established in 1996 and the first assessment was conducted in 1997; there will be at least four more. The project’s primary focus is on overall water quality. Parallel studies are examining the health of fish and of sea grass communities. The purpose of the survey is to figure out what’s causing the reef decline in the hopes that it can be arrested and prevented. The best way to determine the health of corals is to monitor over time to see whether the corals are growing or staying the same or possibly even dying.

That’s done by taking a series of still life pictures and a series of Hi8 videos, over time, in exactly the same locations. Forty-two reefs were chosen, each with four video units consisting of two stainless steel survey pins twenty meters apart. Lines are attached to those survey pins and then a video camera or still life camera can be used. That way we’re quite sure that the camera has photographed exactly the same substrate each time. These measurements have to be repeated in a very precise way, because coral reefs are much more dynamic than originally thought.

Without those pins to reference exactly where the camera is, we’d be lost the next time measurements needed to be taken. Images from the video are converted into digital information, and stored on CD-ROMS. At least 20,160 frame-grabbed images will be analysed each year for changes in the colour array, because coral communities that are sick change colour. In the same sense that a doctor can often tell when a patient is sick by a peaked look, we see that on a coral reef. Vibrant colours turn to grey; brilliant hues turn to white.

Marine scientists are always working on other kinds of monitoring, including underwater site-scanning sonar techniques and low-elevation aerial photography, which is useful in evaluating broad-scale geological changes such as sediment movement after hurricanes. Satellite monitoring is also being explored, but the resolution and interpretation of such remote images is still in the early stages. Going out in boats and “sea truthing” information from more remote platforms is time-consuming. At this point there’s no substitute for getting in the water and actually looking at the plants and animals themselves.

The key thing to remember for coral reefs is: Look-, but dont touch! As a boater: Do not dispose of trash, bilge washings, and other debris on or near the reefs! Tie your boat to reef mooring buoys, or anchor in sandy areas; don’t anchor in coral Consult tide and navigation charts, and steer clear of shallow areas As a fisherman: Avoid shallow coral reefs when trawling. Hooks can scar and injure the coral, and leave live coral vulnerable to infection by microscopic organisms. Try to retrieve all fishing gear, especially monofilament line, which animals can swallow or become tangled in.

Observe size and catch limits As a swimmer or diver: Enjoy diving on the reef without touching or bumping into it. Control your flippers and snorkels. Even the lightest contact can hurt sensitive polyps. Wear a float coat so you can adjust gear without standing on or sitting on coral. Avoid contact with the ocean bottom, where fragile organisms can live. Try not to kick up sand, which can smother reefs. Take home photographs and memories instead of seashells. Don’t remove marine specimens; most captured tropical fish die within a year. All coral is protected.

It is against the law to collect, harvest or sell Florida corals in state and adjacent federal waters. Please don’t feed the fish; it disrupts their natural habits. In terms of sheer natural beauty, coral reefs must rank as nature’s masterpiece. They have some of the most bizarre and beautiful forms of life on this planet, certainly the most colourful. Sea fans, various types of corals, brilliantly coloured fish, and invertebrates. They all live in three-dimensional spaces that are some of the most beautiful scenes ever witnessed on earth.

The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Plan, adopted in 1990, will be implemented over the next ten to twenty years to clear up water around the Keys and Florida Bay. Under the plan, some Key reefs will be off limits to visitors, and on others, limits or prohibitions will be placed on how many fish, shells, and other animals can be removed.. The purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency’s five-year Reef Monitoring Project is to determine what causes reef damage so these fragile ecosystems can be protected more effectively.

The purpose of this written report is to inform the reader about the concerns and facts involved with reforestation. Reforestation began in Ontario after World War II. What happened was, professional foresters were assigned to an area and became responsible for its well being. Under the Crown Timber Act, long term management was prepared. Then the many steps needed to rebuild a forest began. Included in this report will be information on the effects of cutting and replanting, such as Carbon Dioxide, and Global Warming.

Following his will be methods for planning a forest, and how they are conveyed before planting in a forest begins. There are many reasons why forests are cut down. One is to benefit economically, with furniture and home building. But there is also another reason. Arguments say “the United States could help slow the atmospheric accumulation of carbon dioxide by replacing old-growth forests with faster-growing young trees”. A new study of young and old forests says how this is in fact not true. Loggers have said that new trees pull the carbon dioxide better than old trees, and this may eem true, but it is not.

There is one point being overlooked from all of this. The older, larger trees can store much, much more carbon dioxide than a new tree could. By cutting and burning these magnificent seasoned trees, the CO2 is being released back into the atmosphere. These releases of carbon dioxide add up in our surroundings, only to intensify Global Warming. Although this shows what happens when one burns and cuts down old forests, one must still plant new trees for long term plans, not letting them grow for a few years, to then cut hem down. There are many methods for planning a forest.

The simplest method of replanting a forest is to leave it to nature. A suitable seed bed in which trees will readily take root is integral for successful regeneration. Reducing competition by eliminating grass, weed or shrubs is another requirement in securing a new crop of trees. These will sprout to produce seedlings. Though the weeds were eliminated before, they still grow back, and because of this poor, quality trees will grow. Another method though, is to create a planned forest, where new onifers are grown from seed in a special nursery.

Seeding is a reforestation technique used mainly in the Boreal forest area where fire or logging tends to leave no or very little seeds for growth. In specific cases, Ministry staff seed the area with treated tree seeds. Following this is the planting. In many cases, planting is the only means of initiating a new forest. Up to 80 000 000 trees are planted annually in Ontario on Crown and private land. Usually immature forests have to be tended to. Once situated, a new crop needs intermittent care for the next 60 to 100 years.

This means continuing protection from fires, disease and insects and routine thinning to focus the growth on selected crop trees. Before a forest can be grown, certain procedures must first occur. Collecting and processing seeds is one of them. Tree flowers fertilized by blowing winds or insects generate seed, in a time of somewhere within 1 to 2 years. Seed collecting from the woods must be timed with periodically occurring good seed years. Angus, near Barrie, is where all forest tree seed collection is co- ordinated. Stock of seeds can value up to $500 000.

Usually this is around 3 billion seeds from 59 tree classes. In summary of the aforesaid, trees are very valuable to the human race economically and for health. Without trees the environment could worsen to the point where we would be living on one large dessert. We must remember that forest do not grow as easily as they used to because of fires and other disasters. This is why many forests are planned, and cared for. Most of us will never now how they turn out because for a forest to completely grow, it needs within anywhere from 60 to 100 years or more.

There are many reasons why we should have reforestation. One being mostly that we need forest to live! Without forests, or any type of plant, the carbon cycle can’t result. There are not many arguments against reforestation, but there can be some opposition for the land being used between a large business company and the Ministry. I feel replanting of forests is very crucial to the human race. The earth depends on many cycles, where one organism depends on the other because of what it does. We, exhale carbon dioxide which the trees take in, while they give off vital oxygen.

Can you picture our earth without forests? Many of us cant. Forests cover approximately one fifth of the worlds land surface and play an important role in our everyday lives (Dudley 4). Forests provide us with many products and services from helping maintain erosion to providing jobs for our citizens. Humanity depends on the survival of a healthy ecosystem and deforestation is causing many social, economic and ecological problems. One ecological problem is Global warming witch is caused when carbon is released into the air after the burning of forests.

Governments and industries must become more aware of these consequences of their activities and change accordingly. They need to cooperate with forest management and work towards a future that benefits all. Humans need to be educated about the current issues of the forests in order for us to save, preserve or sustain these places that provide us with so much. Humans depend tremendously on the worlds forests, but yet were the ones destroying them. For humans, the forests have many aesthetic, recreational, economic, and cultural values. Timber and other products of the forests are important economically both locally and as exports.

They provide employment for those who harvest the wood or for those who make products from the living forest. Forests also provide us with medical drugs, dyes and fabrics. There are many people who are dependent on forestland for their livelihoods. One third of the worlds people depend on wood for fuel as a significant energy source (Dudley). Not only do the forests provide some people with homes, but also provides a popular setting for ecotourism, which includes hiking, camping, bird watching and other outdoor adventure or nature study activities.

All these activities and products the forests provide us are at great risk from deforestation. Not only do forests provide us with all this but also protect soil from erosion and reduces the risks of landslides and avalanches. Trees help sustain freshwater supplies therefore are an important factor in the availability of one of lifes basic needs. Forests affect the climate and are also a very important source of oxygen. One major factor that the forests carry is that they are the home to over one half of the worlds total species (Dudley).

Currently we are discovering 20 new species of insects and 15 species of plants each day (Dudley 13). Recent reports by the World Resources Institute have shown that more than 80% of the plants natural forests have already been destroyed (Hatch). Yes humankind is the cause of deforestation, however us humans are also capable of having a positive effect on this crisis. Tropical forests cover about 10 per cent of the worlds dry land surface, mostly located in South America and Asia (Dudley 6). In the tropical forests of the world, deforestation is occurring for agriculture and livestock pastures.

The main cause is the unequal distribution of land (Anderson). Temperate forests are found in land areas that are warm enough and low enough to support trees but not so hot to be tropical. They are found in North America, Europe and cooler parts of Australia (Dudley 4). The problems in temperate forests are not so much the decrease in overall forest area, but the substantial change in the types of forests and their ecological diversity and stability. Commercial forestry is the main cause of deforestation in temperate forests.

In very broad terms, the total area of forest in Europe, the USSR and North America is likely to decrease only slightly in the medium future, but the proportion of forest existing as plantation is liable to rise sharply (Dudley 66). This however is going to lead to an increase in conflict between the recreational and conservation interests and will also tend to make forestry a more capital-intensive operation, thus providing fewer jobs. Since so many people are dependent on the worlds forests, deforestation will have a social, economical and ecological effect on the world.

Most of these effects are negative ones. The loss of forestlands is connected to desertification, which translates into there being fewer trees, thus decreasing the future forest workers employment. Heavy rainfall and high sunlight quickly damage the topsoil in tropical rainforest, causing them to regenerate slower and also providing insufficient farming grounds. When forests are replanted there will also be a loss in quality. Also the medical treatments, cures and vaccines will never be discovered if there are no forests to discover them in. There may be a loss of future markets for ecotourism.

The value of a forest is often higher when it is left standing than it could be worth when it is harvested (Dudley). Deforestation can cause the climate to change which could cause and increase in floods and droughts. Global warming is a big factor in the destruction of trees. Forests store large amounts of carbon that are released when trees are cut or burned. It is said that deforestation and the burning of biomass will be responsible for fifteen percent of the greenhouse effect between 1990 and 2025 (FAO). Because of global warming ranges of tree species could shift with respect to altitude and latitude (Humankind 2).

Furthermore, the stress of such environmental change may make some species more susceptible to the effects if insects, pollution, disease and fire (FAO). Also, areas of trees may be lost and genetic diversity may decrease. The clearing of forestland results in increase of erosion and landslides. Landslide is a descent of a mass of earth and rock down a mountain slope. Landslides may occur when water from rain and melting snow sinks through the earth on top of a slope, seeps through cracks and pore spaces in underlying sandstone, and encounters a layer of slippery material, such as shale or clay, inclined toward the valley (Encarta).

Logging has directly and indirectly damaged spawning grounds, blocked river channels, raised water temperatures and caused water levels in streams to fluctuate dangerously. Therefore, the removal of tress can reduce the viability of fist stocks in their watershed and down streams environments. People destroy or degrade forests because, for them, the benefits seem to outweigh the costs. Underlying causes include such issues as poverty, unequal land ownership, womens status, education and population.

Immediate causes are often concerned with a search for land and resources, including both commercial timber and fuel wood (Dudley). The government and industry play a huge role in the destruction or stability of forests. The government is the major aspect in controlling and maintaining the forests. They have a huge say on what can and cant be done. For example on March 14th 1996 the senate voted 54-42 against repealing a section of the 1995 rescissions law that allows the forest industry to salvage burned and downed trees from national forests (Shuster 1).

They can restrict loggers by making laws but also are the link between compromising with the environmentalists. High unemployment and job loss is usually blamed on the restrictions set on foresters. However this is a myth. Most of this unemployment is from worldwide economic change. The production of value-added forest products would create more jobs and bring more wealth to these logging communities. The whole goal of this would be to reduce the pressure on the forests. If commercial forestry is to have a future, its methods need to become more ecologically sound and sustainable.

The technique of salvage logging, removing dead and diseased trees from the forest, is good if the loggers dont take advantage of it and know what trees to go after. Another affective method loggers use is known as whole tree harvesting. This uses all of the wood from a tree. The branches and the treetops are converted into wood chips. Whole tree logging provides more jobs for the people and more products to be sold for the economy. The government must play a greater role in forest management to protect the environment and employment.

The government should ensure that the interests of all stakeholders and as well as the long-term effects associated with forest areas are taken into account during forest planning. Governments should stop defending the forest industry from criticism and end the practice of subsidization. Propaganda originating from governments and corporations requires elimination if the public is to be able to make the right choices. Probably only the action of concerned citizens and consumers will compel government and industry to make changes in the forests.

Individuals can communicate their uncertainty about the future of the worlds forests to politicians, corporate executives and non-governmental organizations through personal communication in the form of letters, telephone calls, faxes and e-mails. Deforestation is a serious problem, but humans can make a difference. And individual as well as a business can practice green consumerism. They can make an effort to purchase the most ecologically sensitive products. Recycled paper is always available, which can reduce the demand for timber.

One of the most important ways a person to have a positive effect is to reduce his or her consumption of forest and related products. An increase in the participation of reducing, reusing and recycling is necessary. Education is one of the most effective ways to promote change in our environment. Society should educate people of today to change their ways and teach the younger generations to have respect for nature. The young people in our society should also be taught about the biological, social and economic values of forests. Environmental conservation should be as important as math, physics, and history in school.

Workers should be taught to use technology to enhance forest ecosystems instead of destroying them for reforestation. If humans would just see themselves as a part of nature, they will respect it so much more and not just exploit it for its resources. Humans bear the responsibility for deforestation and the global ecological crisis. But humankind has the abilities and potential to change its ways and prevent the destruction of our worlds forests. If the forests are protected and regenerated they will benefit us all in many ways. Trees will help benefit the land from erosion. Endangered species will have better chances for survival.

Human health will benefit from medicinal compounds that are given a chance to be disvocered. Local economies will benefit from ecotourism and consumers worldwide will gain satisfaction from knowing that their wood products were harvested in a sustainable manner that left four out of five trees standing (Greenpeace). In order for this to occur humans are going to have to undergo some degree of ideological change. Humans are going to have to live more sustainable lives and become closer with nature. Once the crisis of deforestation has passed, humankind will enjoy a finer existence, and will look forward to a bright future.

The Bay of Fundy, which is found off the shores of Nova Scotia, has the highest tides in the world . Extraordinary tides occur when the tidal wave length is two to four times  the length of the Bay. By virtue of blind luck or physics, the tide is amplified into a standing wave, like water sloshing in a bathtub. For a breaking wave to form, the surging tide must meet an obstacle. When the ocean meets the river going in the opposite direction, the sea hesitates, piles up behind the front line, and advances anew in a tidal bore.

Usually the ingredients occur during a new moon with 15 feet tides and he opposing force of the Shubenacadie river to display the true Bay’s magnificence. This part of St. John is divided into 3 main areas: the main Harbor, Courtenay Bay and the Outer Harbor. These areas are influenced by the Bay of Fundy tides and the currents of the  St John River which flow out of the main Habour into the Bay. This section also experiences two high and two low tides each day (semi – diurnal), with a tidal range varying from 15 to 18 feet, depending on the type of tides.

High – water heights vary from 22 to 28 feet and low – water heights vary from 0 to 7 feet above chart data. Because of these semi – diurnal tides and the action of the St John River, slack water in the Habour occurs at approximately tides and not at high or low water as would be the case at other parts. In the Bay of Fundy, the tides are spectacularly large. While the rise and fall of sea level due to tides is the most apparent aspect, it is also the tidal currents that direct magnification of tides, and the sea level rises or declines are due to resulting convergences and divergencies.

These tides rise and fall over a range that is greater than 50 feet; such  massive water movement ombined with accumulation of sediment through erosion has built up a large salt marsh that is a feeding station for migrating shore birds. The low fundy also feeding a ground for marine life including whales. A long time ago between about 15000 and 10000 year ago at the glacier retreated from the last ice age, part of Georges Bank were dry land. Such as fragment of trees and mammoth teeth from this are still found occasional in fishing travels. The sun and the moon are the only important celestial bodies in producing Terrestrial tides.

While the moon is much smaller than the sun, it is nevertheless more important for tidal rocesses, because of its proximity to the earth. There is a small imbalance between the centrifugal force and the gravitational attraction of the moon   on the water column that gives rise to horizontal forces, causing water motion that causes two bulges in the sea surface. One immediately under the earth, and the other on the other side of the earth. These bulges tend to rotate around the globe along with the moon resetting in semi-diurnal tides with a period of half a lunar day (12. diurnal hours) even though the earth’s rotation is a diurnal period of 24 hours. The Bay of Fundy is an area of about 1. (100000 Km2).

The Bay of Fundy is a part of the Continental Shelf off eastern Canada and New England. It also serves as  an extension that divides New Brunswick from Western Nova Scotia. At the Bay of Fundy’s tidal river at the Southwestern tip of Nova Scotia,  sea water overflows the other riverbank in spring to deposit loads of North Atlantic Salt twice daily. In the tidal river, fresh water and salt water are mixed. Fundy of Bay is famous for its tides which is the best and highest in the whole world.

The marsh is a home to mammals, a breeding place for birds and a feeding ground or estuary fish. It is a land that leaves even the most experienced naturalists awestruck by the aerial ballet performed annually by thousands of birds flying wing to wing during annual migration. The first experiment dealing with the consequences of environmental pollution was conducted at Yarmouth. There was a polluted brook on a farm sullied by foul-smelling effluent. Part of problem came from the regional airport where noxious run of f had spilled into the head water of the brook.

This pollution stayed in the brook for over 25 years. The area was  putrid smelling from fish eal and made people sick. The Fundy tides are a renewable source of energy with potentially hundreds of billions of kilowatts generated each year. It has the potential to provide viable energy, as there is a growing need for pollution-free sources. The Bay of  Fundy tidal power has, over half a century, been sparked  interest and successful investigation into the potential of its development. Technological advancement and “the new economy”brought renewed interest into developing energy from the Fundy tides.

While the rhythmic modulation of sea level and its association with the motion f the sun and the moon must have been noticed since prehistoric time, a better understanding had to wait until Sir Isacc Newton applied his theory of gravitation to explain the underlying physical mechanism. He was able to construction an equilibrium theory of tides, that explained the semi-diurnal nature of tides in most parts of the world. If there were infinite time allowed for adjustment of the ocean to the astronomical forces it is the equilibrium tides that would be the result.

This is, however, not the case since the tidal forcing varies quite rapidly with time. Resonance in the oceanic response push tides in certain localities to be above the value predicted by the equilibrium theory. While the equilibrium theory products two bulges to form, one underneath the moon and the other on the opposite side of the globe, in reality the high water may significantly precede or lag the transit of the moon. These differences are due to the dynamic response of the oceans to tidal forcing.

It was Laplace who a century later laid the theoretical and mathematical foundation for modern dynamic theory of ocean tides by considering oceanic tides to be the esponse of a fluid medium to the astronomical forcing by the sun and moon’s gravitational attractions. The transportation of oil from the Bay of Fundy and the generation of nuclear power are two aspects of the same issue in that the supply of energy that present inherent risks to the environment, but opposing arguments against the use of foreign oil and nuclear power might be base on purely economic grounds.

The risk of oil spills with catastrophic and long lasting effects on Marine organisms and the coastal environment is always a possibility. The monumental Mains Basin scheme produces more than twice as much electricity in Nova Scotia at 4560 megawatts from all sources-coal, oil and hydro as the largest water-driven electrical power plant in the world. Nova Scotia produces more power than Newfoundland’s Churchill Falls (about 2660 megawatts) and Ontario Hydro’s Picketing nuclear-power plant ( 2160 megawatts).

Tidal power would not replace conventional electrical energy derived from nuclear or fossil fuels for peak demand. Tidal power has fluctuating peaks so. At 12 noon is when you  need the power might not be quailabler. Utilities would still meet peak demand whether or not tidal power was on the line. The  renewable energy source using lunar gravitation and hydroelectricity has become increasingly important. Compared with a river dam, tidal power has a difficult saltwater environment, where machines are needed to produce of power and also have saltwater durability.

The electric power output is the twice-daily ebb average of tidal electricity less than 40% of the generating capacity of a river dam. In the 15 century, a construction handbook was published ,showing how tidal ater was held behind a dam at high tide so that when a sufficient water level was reached between the land and sea sides of the dam . a mill could use tidal water to mix with the fresh water to turn the waterwheel that provided power for grinding grain. The first mill in the would was built in 1607 by Samuel de Champlain on the Lequille River.

By 1910 Turnbull and an American  engineer, designed a double basin scheme that would cross the  international boundary between New Brunswick and Maine. Given the grave environmental challenges such as global warning or environmental ollution facing many kind in the coming century and because oceans play such a very important role in governing the degree of global warming, fisheries yield, and degrees of pollution along our beaches, the study of the tides through a variety of means such as ship surveys, and remote sensing will lead to a better understanding of how the oceans work.

The hope is that as a result, we will leave behind for our children a world that is both livable as well as enjoyable in all its majesty . If we an avoid oil spills into the ocean the water and environment will be more beautiful and ecologically safe for all living things.

Not many people know of the used-to-be 150-mile excursion that the Glen Canyon had to offer. Not many people know how to sail a raft down a river for a week. Not many people know how to interact with nature and the animals that come with it. We seem to come from a world that is dependent on time and consumed in money. Edward Abbey is what you would call an extreme environmentalist. He talks about how it was an environmental disaster to place a dam in which to create Lake Powell, a reservoir formed on the border of Utah and Arizona.

He is one of the few that have actually seen the way Glen Canyon was before they changed it into a reservoir. Today, that lake is used by over a million people, and is one of the biggest recreation hot spots in the western United States. First of all, Edward Abbey admits to being a certain bias and that he is a, butterfly chaser, googley eyed bleeding heart and wild conservative. So, in other words he is intending this article to be read by environmental activist who will support his opinion and the action that he is trying to take.

Edward Abbey worked as a seasonal park ranger for Glen Canyon National Recreation Area back in 1967, so of course he would be against any environmental action taken to change the canyon. He stated that before the damnation of the canyon that there were streams, waterfalls, plunge pools, and plenty of wildlife. Now you can only find that on a small scale and that these things have been lost, pushed out, drowned, or buried under mud. Abbey highlighted quite a few points; one of them that interested me the most was his description, of the difference between the present reservoir, and the original Glen Canyon.

He stated that it was the difference between life and death. Glen Canyon was alive. Lake Powell is a graveyard. He really seems to be going out on a limb in saying this extreme of a statement. I think that he is wrong in saying that. I feel that he is only looking at one side of the story. I would say the opposite, but for a rhetorical analysis proposes only, I will come from his point of view in researching that he came to that conclusion under the assumption that the wildlife and nature was more alive then the life outside of the dam. Lake Powell is a graveyard in such that there is nothing natural about it.

The rocks are pretty and the water is blue. Abbey talks of a term called bathtub ring, it is left on the canyon walls, after each drawdown of the water level. The park rangers in Glen Canyon consider it to be not of great importance, and that is one of the only illusions that you look at upon a natural lake. To some people seeing that effect is more then they have seen or may ever see in their life when it comes to nature. People come from places where there isnt a lot of wildlife around them. The closest they get seeing that might just be from a book or a video they saw in school.

So what if they dump a ton of striped bass and rainbow trout into the lake every year. One of those fishes could be the first one ever caught by a boy who is having a weekend with his father. The symbol of that fish and what it represents to the bonding between two people may be a lot more then what I think Abbey has analysed. I think Abbey brought up a very controversial/argumentative point in his article. He stated that if Rainbow Bridge is worth seeing at all, then by God it should be easily, readily, immediately available to everybody with the money to buy a big power boat.

Before the Dam was put up to create Lake Powell, Rainbow Bridge was only accessible by walking six miles through the thickets of cottonwood trees, semi-tropical hanging orchids, and ivy, with swarms of insects and birdlife to get there. He seems to argue the wheelchair ethos of the wealthy, upper-middle class American slob. Well, excuse the people who were born paralyzed from the waist down, and would like to experience the forces nature in its natural state of beauty and grace. He seems to generalize the typical population of people who visit Lake Powell on an unscientific basis, upper-middle class American slobs.

So does that mean that a lower class family doesnt have the money to do such recreational activity? And that we are slobs because we like to view nature in its own environment? One last point in which should be heard is that, Edward Abbey states that now that the river is closed up people cannot get a raft, spend about forty dollars, give up 7-10 days, and rely only on the goodness of fresh catfish just to float down a river. In todays society people dont have time. We would rather spend the hundreds of dollars to get a nice speedboat, buy real food, and only take maybe the weekend to enjoy the great outdoors.

We enjoy the freshness of a shower everyday, going to the bathroom with flushable device, eating food with the right bit of garlic taste, in other words the comfort of home. Even if they did take down the dam and offer such rafting trips, do you honestly think a person could leave their cell phone at home? In conclusion, I do think that Edward Abbey made a great attempt at persuading the audience. He had great facts and experience to back up what he was arguing. I did like the fact that even though he was against the damnation he mentions that has been a good source of energy.

But he argues, of course, that as the world becomes more technically advanced that we should use alternate methods of power generation, such as solar. In that, as a society we will learn to adapt to different resources and basic needs in which the demands for electrical power begins to diminish. We can shut down the Glen Canyon power plant, open the tunnels, drain the reservoir, and as he states it The wilderness will again belong to God, the people and the wild things that call it home.