Who is the leader of the pack... or should be?

In the realm of ideas and politics, there are many ideas and much politics
bandied about on all sides in every subject imaginable. One of the most
significant and controversial areas is the realm of environmental awareness and
clean-up. One man stands head and shoulders above all others in this field,
having tirelessly campaigned – literally – for the health and safety of people
everywhere.

Ralph Nader is that man. For over 40 years, he has publically spoken and written
against big business' practice of environmental pollution and on behalf of the
public good. In fact, one reason that cars are safer, with such innovative ideas
as anti-lock brakes and airbags stem directly from Nader's efforts to make cars,
the ultimate ubiquitous tool, as safe as possible, given that manufacturers just
want to give people a moving vehicle as cheaply as possible (Langer, 1966).
Nader's efforts and his lobbying of Washington bureaucrats helped to pass the
1966 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
As one may notice from news reports, Nader has done more.

He pushed for the passage of the 1967 Wholesome Meat Act, which improved the
criteria for inspecting cleanliness at slaughterhouses. He has also founded
several nation-wide organizations that fight for the public's best interest,
such as the Public Interest Research Group (CalPirg is the California Branch),
the Center for Justice and Democracy and the Resource Consumption Alliance
(preserving trees is their mission). Additionally, the Center for Study of
Responsive Law (CSRL), a non-profit organization run university and law
students. known as "Nader's Raiders", study problems and publish reports on many
consumer issues.

So passionate is Nader about helping others, he has never married. Instead, he
has thrown his efforts into a career to benefit mankind. To this end, he has run
for president as the Green Party candidate several times, including 1996, 2000
and 2008. Almost 76, Nader looks little different from when he was 40, both in
appearance and zeal. One can hope that Nader's labors continue to improve
ordinary life for all Americans for years to come. Perhaps, someday, there will
be little need for such ardent finger-pointing, but for now, I am grateful that
Ralph Nader has tried so hard, for so many, for so long.


Langer, E. Auto Safety: Nader vs. General Motors. Science 152(3718), 47-50.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1718765.

Mashawt, J. L. & Harfst, D. L. (1990) The struggle for auto safety. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

http://encyclopedia.stateuniversity.com/pages/18223/Ralph-Nader.html

All aboard! (?)

Last November, California voters passed a measure that would pour billions of dollars into a bond to fund a high-speed rail system connecting northern and southern California. This high-speed train will whisk people away to their destination at speeds of over 200 mph (imagine traveling to San Francisco to San Diego in about three hours), create hundreds of thousands of jobs, and stimulate the state economy (and Nevada’s too if a future leg to Las Vegas is created). This new train will also be environmentally friendly by reducing C02 emissions reducing our dependency on foreign oil.

The new high-speed rail system can be called a technological innovation for Californians. Friedman (2008) shares two ways to stimulate innovation: 1) advancing technology already available to us over time, or 2), a ‘Eureka!’ moment, a moment where a discovery is made through experimentation (p 187). McNeill (2000) states, “big ideas are the ones that somehow succeed in molding the behavior of millions” (p 326). Essentially, McNeill is talking about a paradigm shift. Over the past couple decades citizens from many countries have finally realized that humans are contributing to global climate change. Some could care less, others will do what it takes for change to occur.

For the most part, Friedman is correct on ways to stimulate innovation, but he could have added more to his first suggestion. Advancing technology is a driving force behind our economy. We’re always striving to make things sleeker, faster, smarter, smaller, more efficient, more reliable, sexier…the list goes on and on. What he doesn’t say about innovation is being backed into it. Let’s face it, as a country we really don’t have any choice but to come up with a new system of transportation. Oil is cheap now, but there will be a day when a gallon of gas goes past the 4- or 5-dollar gallon that we saw a few summers ago.

If the high-speed rail system is our response global warming, then we are way too late. For the most part, it is an environmentally friendly system (the building process might be a different story) but it will not be enough to slow down the global warming process, not by a long shot. Other countries will have to stimulate innovation to tackle the growing global warming problem. Some countries already have; Japan’s bullet train was introduced in the 80’s. This technology was available years ago. Who knows if this train will even be worth the money; will we even use the thing? We should have been on board with this idea when France and Japan were constructing theirs. Not the train, but their ideas. Oh well, better late than never.

McNeil, J.R., Something New Under The Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 2000.

Friedman, T. L., Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need A Green Revolution--And How It Can Renew America. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. New York, 2008.

California High-Speed Rail Authority.

The Largest Act of Environmental Terrorism You’ve Probably Never Heard Of

The Mesopotamian marshlands were once one of the world’s largest wetlands, covering more than 20,000 km². Mesopotamia literally translates to “between rivers.” The Mesopotamian marshlands are fed by both the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and were home to approximately 100,000 Marshland Arabs. Many biblical scholar place the Garden of Eden within these marshlands. Once known for its unique biodiversity of macro-invertebrates and birds, Saddam Hussein, in what is considered an engineering feat of the latter 20^th-century, used the restriction of water to reduce the marshlands into a vast area of hardpan.

During the first Gulf War in 1990, the Marshland Arabs of southern Iraq sided themselves with the Coalition forces. When the Coalition forces withdrew from Iraq, the Shia Marshland Arabs were left unprotected against the Saddam’s Sunni regime. Saddam appropriated every single piece of construction machinery to create irrigations systems and dikes to divert the waters from the Tigris and the Euphrates from reaching the southern wetlands. Saddam then ordered his military troops to set fire to the reeds, finalizing the destruction of the once massive wetlands.

With the two main rivers no longer feeding the marshes, the wetlands literally dried up. Consequently, the loss of biodiversity in the region was severe and catastrophic. In the 1980s, the Mesopatamia marshes were home to more than 80 species of birds. Additionally, at its peak the marshes served as flyaway for migrating birds between Siberia and Africa. However, shortly after the fall of Saddam’s regime in 2003 restoration on the marshes commenced. Primarily funded by USAID and the United Nations Environment Programme, restoration works are responsible for 40% of the destroyed lands now having standing water—due to re-flooding.

The methodic and systematic destruction of the Mesopotamian marshlands was undoubtedly an act of terror. 100,000 Marshland Arabs became refugees within their own country within days of Saddam setting fire to their reeds. Today, USAID estimates that as of August 2009 only 10,000 Marshland Arabs have returned to the marshes. The Marshland Arabs represented—and still represent—the periphery of Iraqi society. The plight of the Marshland Arabs—and the wetlands themselves—is put on the backburner to make room for other reconstruction within Iraq. The Marshland Arabs represent a tiny demographic within Iraq. It is unlikely the wetlands will ever fully recover, nor will the majority of the Marshland Arabs move back to the wetlands. Several botanists have state that it is unlikely all the original vegetation will return with the reflooding. This example highlights that those on the periphery are often at the political mercy of those at the core.

Bonn, Dorothy. “Iraq Marshland Restoration Begins.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. Vol. 2, No. 7 (Sep. 2004) p.343. Available from:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3868351

Richardson, Curtis J. and Hussain, Najah A. “Restoring the Garden of Eden: An Ecological Assessment of the Marshes of Iraq.” Journal of BioScience. Vol. 56, No. 6 (June 2006) pp.477-489. Available from:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/38768403

Gatesism

In McNeil’s chapter “Fuels, Tools, and Economics”, he discusses the specific eras of time that revolutionized our society and the environment (umbworld). These two categories or what he calls clusters, created the technological and fossil fuel oriented society that led us to our foundation today. The first cluster is consisted of heavy engineering, powered textile mills, steam engines, and railroads that he categorized as the Coketown cluster while the Motown cluster consisted of the assembly line, oil, electricity, plastics, and chemicals (McNeil 2009). What McNeil failed to mention was the most important and fundamental category that reorganized our socio patterns toward a whole new direction; the information technology era. The new category, in addition to the two, would hypothetically be named Techtown.

McNeil discusses the assembly line created by Henry Ford in the Motown cluster as being the most influential piece of design that effected both the physical environment and the economic status of that era. As “Fordism” was its economic term, the hypothetical Techtown would have a label too. Bill Gates revolutionized the tech industry with his innovative software programs that allowed consumers to surf the internet and use the computer in an organized and efficient manner. By creating an assembly line-like process, he was able to create millions of duplicates from one model. Gates evolutionary process would create the economic impact known as “Gatesism”. According to Richard J. Gilbert and Michael L. Katz, Microsoft used exclusionary behavior to gain a competitive advantage, but in the end hurt their own consumers due to price increases (AEA 2001). By being a monopoly and having a huge market share like Henry Ford did in the Motown cluster, Gates increased the amount of consumption by becoming the only one to provide an operating system for a PC and therefore affected the environment in an indirect way. Although Gates affected the environment indirectly, there are other parts of Techtown that directly impacted the environment.

Semiconductors are fundamentally the backbone products of the Silicon Valley and are highly demanded in the market due to high consumption rates. These products are dangerous to the workers and most importantly to the environment. “More than 220 billion chips are manufactured annually, requiring up to 1, 000 separate chemicals and metals. Many of these materials are known or suspected carcinogens. Jim Harris, 59, worked as a technician at Santa Clara's National Semiconductor Corp. in the mid-1970s. He now has leukemia, something no one else in his family has ever contracted” (SF Chronicle 2005). It’s evident that these chemicals are extremely harmful to the umbworld and has the power to destroy any type of living life.

Techtown has dramatically changed our society from industrialized to social computerization within a significantly small amount of time. The influence of “Gatesism” was the inevitable catalyst for this change, and only time will tell which direction it takes us.





Richard J. Gilbert and Michael L. Katz, An Economist’s Guide to U.S v. Microsoft. The
American Economic Association. Accessed: 12/2/2009
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2696590

David Lazarus, Toxic Technology. The San Francisco Chronicle. Accessed: 12/2/2009
http://www.sfchronicle.com/

McNeil, J.R., Something New Under The Sun: An Environmental History of the 20th Century World. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 2000

Plastic or Canvas?

The debate over whether to use paper, plastic, or more recently canvas bags when out shopping has become a heated debate. Some say that eliminating plastic bags will just make people use paper which is just as detrimental to the environment, while others feel that people will slowly get used to bringing their own reusable bags, therefore, eliminating the problem all together. People are divided on this issue and both sides have convincing arguments.

Ever since the production of plastic surpassed the production of any other material, there have been concerns about its effect on the environment. Plastic does not degrade for a very long time, plastic bags particularly have been said to, "...linger in the environment for more than 1,000 years and are the major debris found on the seabed" (weeklyreader). They are spotted everywhere, flying across the freeway, hanging in trees, blowing along the beach, and, piling up in dumps everywhere. Almost every store hands out disposable plastic bags, so if one travels to multiple stores in one day, they are racking up their supply of plastic bags. Some people reuse them for garbage can liners around the house or for picking up their pets messes, but ultimately, they still end up in the garbage. Proponents of the reusable bag movement hope to put a stop to the overflow of plastic bags in dumps across America and the world.

Using a reusable bag is easy. They are stronger than plastic, they can become a fashion statement, and some stores even offer incentives for using them. Grocery stores across the U.S. have been taking $.05 off a customer's total for every reusable bag that they use, and CVS/Pharmacy offers $1.00 back every four times a customer uses a reusable bag. With offers like this, and the fact that it helps the environment, it is almost impossible to find a negative with using a reusable bag.

The production of plastics was one of the worst things for the environment to come out of the discovery of petroleum. Although plastics do some good, like the fact that many technologies would not be possible without them, they wreak havoc as well. The fact that they take so long to decompose is horrible for the Earth. Obviously, we cannot stop using plastic all together, but if there are small changes here and there, it would make a difference. Remembering to take a reusable bag everytime you go to the store could be that small change that helps out in the long run.

McNeill, J. R. 2000. Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World. W. W. Norton & Company Inc.

Mastiny, Lisa, and Jason Perillo. "Paper or Plastic?" Current Events 107.21 (2008): 1.Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Dec. 2009.

The True Costs of Oil

America has relied on cheap fossil fuels and lots of government funding. Many of the negative externalities associated with fossil fuel burning are not included in the pump price consumers pay. An article written by Chris Nelder explains estimated costs of all the processes involved with oil. “According to a 2000 study for the Department of Energy, there is a significant cost attached to the mere fact of our dependence. Supply disruptions, price hikes, and loss of wealth suffered through the oil market upheavals have cost the U.S. economy around $7 trillion (1998 dollars) over the 30 years from 1970 to 2000” (Nelder 2007). Due to the enormous military cost of protecting Persian Gulf imports, the hidden cost of oil from that region amounts to $7.41 per gallon of gasoline. The cheapest gas out in my part of the Bay Area is $3.11 a gallon for regular. Add them together, and the true cost of my gas is probably around $10.52 a gallon without accounting for government subsidies and environmental degradation. “Government subsidizes the oil industry anywhere between $38 billion and $114.6 billion per year” (Nelder). Environmental costs of oil are devastating to water supplies, soils, air quality, and biodiversity. The Union of Concerned Scientists published an article estimating the total cost in 1991 of environmental externalities to be $54 billion to $232 billion. “Human mortality and morbidity due to air pollution accounts for over three quarters of the total environmental cost and could be as high as $182 billion annually. For the Los Angeles area, one estimates the annual health-based cost from ozone and particulate exposure alone to be almost $10 billion” (Nelder). If carbon costs are accounted for as in a carbon tax of some form, around 30-35 dollars per ton of CO2, then companies would not profit, but loose money. The true cost of oil annually is less than 70 trillion a year.
If Americans consumers were to see pay for the true costs of oil, you could bet that we would transition to creating cleaner energy systems with high efficiencies that would benefit local and global societies. The true costs of oil would cause innovation in new technologies. Some European countries where gas and oil are heavily taxed have already created free markets supportive of new energy technology. America needs to do the same to become energy independent, create new industry, generate revenues, improve the health of the environment, and insure stability and sustainability for future generations.

Nelder, Chris. The True Cost of Oil: $65 Trillion a Year? 2007. Accessed on-line at http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461.

OPEC. Cartel or not?

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was formed in 1960 by the countries of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait and Venezuela. Additional countries have joined OPEC since and currently total 12 members. OPEC members coordinate policies on oil prices and production. These countries produce two-fifths of the world’s oil production and own two-thirds of proven petroleum reserves. There have been debates regarding whether or not OPEC is a cartel. McNeill stated, “...the oil producers’ cartel (OPEC) brought them vast windfall profits” (McNeill 2000, 322). McNeill referred to OPEC as a cartel, however some experts do not agree due to the fact that OPEC does not have specific cartel characteristics. OPEC is not a cartel because non-OPEC countries produce a majority of current world oil production, OPEC members have never agreed on a set price, and OPEC does not have a way of punishing members that break member agreements.

Cartel characteristics include dominance in the market, an agreement among members and also some type of punishment mechanism. OPEC produces 40% of the world’s oil, which is not a dominant portion of the market. OPEC set production quotas for each member depending on reserve amounts, but an agreement on a set price has not been reached. Conflicts between member countries have also affected supply. Alhajji and Huettner stated “the world crude oil market is competitive and that oil price increases can be explained by factors other than cartelization” (2000, 31). Other factors include market conditions, wars, and political factors.


• McNeill, J. R. 2000. Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World. W. W. Norton & Company Inc.
• Alhajji, A.F. and David Huettner.2000. OPEC and World Crude Oil Markets from 1973 to 1994:Cartel, Oligopoly, or Competitive? The Energy Journal, Vol. 21, No 3.

Population and Pollution

Cities across Africa have been expanding at a rapid pace. Over the past two to three decades, fertility rates of African women have remained at "about 6.3 to 6.6 children per woman," which is noticeably higher than most other geographical regions worldwide (Arku 256). High birth rates within the population remained in check with high death rates, but due to modern medicine, nutrition, and hygiene practices, mortality rates among their people have been reduced. Yes, this rapid population growth may be seen as progressive, but only if the larger population can be safely maintained.

Growth has been so rapid in African cities that their government has not been able to fully regulate and manage the urban environment. There are many problems raised by this uncontrolled urban population growth such as "traffic congestion, atmospheric pollution, depletion of natural resources, increase of natural and man made risks, urban sprawl, and other negative environmental and social effects" (Arku 263). The relationship between population growth and environmental pollution is inevitable. The more people that live in a given area the more water, resources, and energy they need and the more "pollutants, garbage, and solid wastes" they pump out (McNeil 287).

African cities are now attempting to solve problems caused by their rapid population boom and adopting ideas to better manage their environment. If the population cannot be controlled then at least there are steps being taken to better manage it. Extensive public transportation systems, water treatment plants, and sewage systems are all crucial in maintaining large populations. Regardless of all policies and plans, however, rapid population growth has far-reaching detrimental effects on the environment in Africa and across the world.


Arku, Godwin. "Rapidly Growing African Cities Need to Adopt Smart Growth Policies to Solve Urban Development Concerns." Urban Forum 20.3 (2009): 253-270. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 23 Nov 2009.

McNeil, J.R. "Something New Under The Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth Century World." W.W. Norton: New York, 2001. Print.

Another Look at Sustainability

As human society seeks to clean its urban centers and adopt more sustainable technology, it fails at addressing the problem of pollution entirely. It is often the assumption that dense urban areas are the source of pollution worldwide. Instead of being measured by the amount of pollution generated within it, a city should be measured by the amount of pollution generated for it.

J.R. McNeill asserts that rapid urbanization is the source of human stress on the environment. Yet, to many city dwellers in the rich nations of Western Europe and North America, cities have dramatically reduced their environmental impact on the local community. McNeill explains that “urban impacts [extend] beyond city limits to hinterlands, to downwind and downstream communities, and in some respects, the whole globe” (McNeill, p 287). Waste disposal and power generation have been relocated far away from their users. The materials used to build and manage cities are also being created elsewhere in cities with less strict regulations. Externalization of pollution allows city dwellers to experience the benefits of pollution caps, but only sweeps the problem under the carpet.

David Satterthwaite writes about the correlation between pollution management and urbanization. The most polluted cities, “are the smaller and less-prosperous cities in lower-income countries or in the lower-income regions of middle-income countries” (Satterthwaite, p 217). He questions the assumption that growth means more pollution and reveals that current pollution regulations lead to “transferring costs to other people or ecosystems” (Satterthwaite, p 216). These lower income cities lack political will to regulate polluters due to a focus on rapid industrialization or capital (Satterthwaite, p 222). Wealthier cities develop more strict regulations than lower income cities in developing countries. The latter manage and create the pollution for the former.

Wealthy cities, such as San Jose, need to stop externalizing pollution. Cities need to bring back their industries—not so that they have to deal with air and water pollution again, but that their pollution is regulated to their own standard and the lower income cities will not bear these burdens for them.

Sources

• McNeill, J. R. Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World. W. W. Norton & Company Inc. 2000
  
• Satterthwaite, David. "Environmental Transformations in Cities as They Get Larger, Wealthier and Better Managed". The Geographical Journal, Vol. 163, No. 2, Environmental Transformations in Developing Countries (Jul., 1997), pp.216-224

Animal related diseases

     Incidences of animal related diseases being spread to humans are not a new development, but the frequency that they are being detected and diagnosed is (Outbreaks, 2003).  According to McNeil, (2000) many human diseases are derived from animals the causes linked to human surges into the tropics bringing humans in closer contact with new species, more domesticated animals as well as synanthropes non-domesticated animals that live in close proximity to humans, and more people.  According to scientific estimates, as many as 75 percent of all emerging infectious diseases are (zoonotic) passed from animals to humans (Outbreaks ,2003).  Clearly there will be mounting problems if necessary measures are not taken to alleviate the rate at which animal to human diseases are being produced and spread.

     Through human interactions with our biosphere we cultivate the ground for further animal to human diseases.  Humans around the globe have increased their geographic range and the ability to transport goods and people to vast locations in record time (Outbreaks, 2003).  Due to these changes in human activity conditions are becoming more favorable for animal related diseases to spread (Outbreaks, 2003).  A recent illness in the U.S. is the West Nile virus, vectorborne it is passed from animals (birds) to humans by way of insects (mosquitoes) (Outbreaks, 2003).  The H1N1 flu a new influenza virus that spreads from person-to-person through sneezing, coughing, and physical contact is thought to have originated in pigs (H1N1 Flu, 2009).  Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) is a neurodegenerative, fatal brain disease of cattle a form of which can be passed to humans through beef consumption (BSE, 2002). These examples serve to demonstrate that animals have become a primary source for modern day emerging infectious diseases (Outbreaks, 2009). 

     With the possibility for more animal related diseases like the fore mentioned to appear, interactions abroad and goods distribution strategies need to be closely monitored and specifically formulated to prevent unwarranted dissemination of new animal to human illnesses.  The behaviors in which humans have chosen to live with animals has strongly influenced our experience with animal related diseases (McNeil, 2000). 

 

 References

 McNeil, J.R., 2000: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World: Something New Under the Sun. Norton & Company, Inc., New York

 (2003) Outbreaks of animal related illnesses – a trend in infectious diseases. Journal of environmental health. 66,4, p35

 (November 5, 2009). H1N1 Flu ("Swine Flu") and You. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm

 (November 2002 ). Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs113/en/

Free Willy!

For 50 million years, the whale has been free to roam the depths of the sea with little to no predators. However, with the arrival of the human species, certain groups of whales are getting close to disappearing due to the once widely popularity of whaling. What began in early prehistoric times with the Vikings and Basques has extended into 19th century where the Dutch, the English, Americans, Norwegians, Icelanders, Japanese and Russians all partake in the business of whaling (McNeill 238).

The market for whale products was big and the rise of the Industrial Revolution made whaling that much more relevant. Sperm oil was essential in lubricating machinery while baleen (or whalebone) acted as plastic in things like corsets and umbrellas. The biggest profit to be made from whaling, beside selling the meat, was the use of the whale oil. A fatty acid, whale oil had three main uses: margarine, dynamite and soap (McNeill 241).

With the money to be made and the amount of whaling being done through out the world, it is no surprise that a noticeable drop in the number of whales swimming the oceans occurred. Between 1610 and 1840 bowhead whale populations were brought to close extinction and by 1860 most of the sperm and right whales were gone. New technologies allowed for the hunting of the faster and the hard to find whales and as a result the blue whale population was down from 150,000 to 500. (McNeill 242)

As the world began to see the effect on whale population, regulations were put into place. At first, these restrictions protected the whale by products and not the whales themselves. But in 1982 the International Whaling Commission IWC passed an act that suspended all commercial whaling (HSUS). Today, 191 nations abide by this act while 3, Japan, Iceland and Norway, continue to kill whales claiming “scientific” reasons (HSC). The problem with this claim is that much of the data Japan acquires has already been collected and does not call for lethal action (Greenpeace). There is much talk about lifting the restrictions on whaling based on the claim that whale populations have been restocked and that there is no longer a threat of extinction. However, because of their constant migration, counting whales can be difficult and if wrong, can result in extinction (HSUS).

The time for whaling to stop is long overdue and despite the majority of the world realizing this, whales are still dying in the name of “science”. What discoveries will be made from a dead whale that will outshine what we can learn from a live, ever-changing mammal that has successfully survived all these years. What can we learn of the whales in the future if there are no more left to be seen?
________________________________________________
McNeil, J.R., 2000: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World: Something New Under the Sun. Norton & Company, Inc., New York

"Whaling | The Humane Society of the United States." The Humane Society of the United States : The Humane Society of the United States. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. http://www.hsus.org/marine_mammals/what_are_the_issues/whaling/

Vanessa. "THREE NATIONS KILL WHALES VS THE 191 NATIONS WHO DO NOT SAYS THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF CANADA (HSC)." Welcome to the Humane Society of Canada. Web. 24 Nov. 2009. http://www.humanesociety.com/news-releases/1042-three-nations-kill-whales-vs-the-191-nations-who-do-not-says-the-humane-society-of-canada-hsc.html

"Scientific Whaling." Iceland Whaling. Web. 23 Nov. 2009. http://archive.greenpeace.org/whales/iceland/Scientific.htm

In The End, We’re No Better Than Blue-Green Bacteria

McNeil states that we may be in the early stage of the Sixth Mass Extinction Event on Earth, but the bright side is that there are always some survivors of mass extinctions. McNeil tells us of the 1/10 of marine life which survived the Greatest Extinction Event on the planet; reminding us that all life which is supported by oxygen owes its existence to the cyanobacteria that increased oxygen concentration in the air from 1 part per trillion to the 1 in 5 we currently enjoy. Humans may have improved life for 40 animals and 100 plant species, but we’ve instigated the most substantial Extinction Event to date, probably. The experts are laying their bets on viruses and bacteria, and maybe some cockroaches as the future inhabitants of Earth.

As chapter 7 and 8 takes us on a tour of the known causes of the destruction of the Biosphere, we learn that one of humanities major challenges has been disease and developing immunities. One of the reasons that viruses may succeed us as the dominant species on the planet is the ability to make rapid evolutionary changes to survive.

“It is possible that the prevalence of influenza in recent centuries derives from the close quarters kept by ever more ducks, pigs, and people, mainly in China.” (McNeil 210)

Before the recent outbreak and health concern over the H1N1 virus was dominating the headlines, the H5N1 avian flu virus stopped traffic into and out of China. Influenza viruses effected the duck population across Asia. Viruses seen in the avian population have crossed over to swine, in the past, (1979, 1998), and then crossed the species barrier once again to humans.

“From late 2003 through January 2004, H5N1 influenza viruses spread in an unprecedented manner across Asia, affecting poultry in Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, China, Japan, South Korea, Cambodia, and Laos. Hundreds of millions of chickens and ducks were culled in an effort to stop the spread. The outbreak appeared largely under control in March 2004. The available evidence shows that H5N1 infection is widespread among domestic ducks in southern China and may therefore be endemic in domestic ducks throughout Southeast Asia.” (Huise-Post 1)

Researchers believe that it is the virus’ ability to evolve and change mode of transmission as well as changing infection cycles that have contributed to the widespread problem.

“Wild waterfowl are generally thought to transmit influenza viruses primarily through fecal contamination of water. However, ducks inoculated with the 2002 H5N1 influenza viruses shed more virus from the trachea than from the cloaca. This property was retained in all of the viruses we tested.” (Huise-Post 3)

McNeil points out that “by 1990 some 25,000 antibiotics existed, curtailing microbial careers and improving human and animal health.” (McNeil 199) Without public health measures, many more masses of people could have perished in the modern era, as we have seen in the past when native populations have encountered colonialists and foreign germs. Public health measures may not be enough to stop MDR viruses and other strains that evolve in one transmission cycle.

“Highly pathogenic H5N1 viruses in our study became nonpathogenic to ducks after extended shedding shows that these viruses are moving toward stability in this host. Because this mechanism increases the potential for spread of these viruses, it is biologically significant, helping to explain the origin of new H5N1 viruses and the manner in which they become the dominant viruses in a quasi-species population.” (Huise-Post 4)

As each day passes we become more and more interconnected due to the decrease in available resources and necessities of life, McNeil asserts that if we don’t make major changes in our aggregate behavior, (on the scale of billions of people), “30-50 percent of terrestrial species may disappear in the next century or two.” (McNeil 263) Wade explained to us that rapid evolutionary change has never been adaptive for humans because our environments, (umbworlds), do not change rapidly, usually. With something new under the sun, it maybe that the organism, (virus), best equipped to change with a rapidly changing environment will be the most fit of them all.

Works Cited:

Huise-Post, D., Sturm-Ramirez, K., Humberd, J., Seiler, P., Govorkova, E., Krauss, S., et al. (2005). Role of domestic ducks in the propagation and biological evolution of highly pathogenic H5NI influenza viruses in Asia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(30), 10682-10687. doi:10.1073/pnas.0504662102.

McNeil, J.R. Something New Under The Sun. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2000. Print.

The Green Revolution

“No other activity has transformed humanity, and the Earth, as much as agriculture, but the environmental effects of high-intensity farming increasingly haunt us. In a small world awash with the waste products of humanity, there is a great need to find new approaches to agriculture.” ~David Tilman

The Green Revolution made its greatest impact during the 1960’s and the 1970’s. International teams of scientists worked together to create high-yielding varieties of crops in order to increase the quantity, quality and sustainability of the species. Their early focus was on the staple crops of wheat, maize, and rice (McNeill 219). The varieties created by the scientists were ones that were responsive to fertilizers, resistant to pests and in the United States and other developed countries, it was important for the variety to be easily harvested by machinery (McNeill 219). With a rapidly increasing population it was imminent for the scientists to create a higher volume of food within the same parameters of land. The new and unknown consequences of mass farmed, single cropped land was a challenge unforeseen by the scientists and is still something that agriculturalists and scientists are dealing with today. New techniques of farming have emerged that have fewer environmental consequences however, not all farmers have adopted these new practices.

The first two major international agricultural research centers created in the 1950’s are the International Center for wheat and Maize Improvement in Mexico (CIM-MYT) and the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines (IRRI). Today there are 16 centers that all operate together supporting over 8500 scientists and staff with a budget around $340 million (Everson 2). The greatest accomplishment of the “Green Revolution” came with the development of dwarf wheat and rice. The variety created was able to produce a heavy grain-packed head with a strong stalk thus yielding “substantially more grain than previous varieties” (Everson 2). This new variety also responded better to fertilizer than the traditional varieties. The institutes also released varieties of sorghum, millet and barley that could be grown in primarily semi-arid and dry-land conditions in the 1980’s (Everson 3). The scientist’s first goal was to derive a productive “plant type” and their second goal was to breed the variety with specific traits for survival in different locations. These traits include disease resistance, responsiveness to fertilizers and resistance to abiotic stresses (Everson 3). With the creation of these varieties farmers had to purchase their seeds, they could no longer cultivate their own. These costs were offset by the reduced amount of fertilizer needed to maintain the crops. However, farmers would often choose just one crop to purchase and grow in order to keep their costs down, creating what is known as a monoculture. “Monocultures invite pest problems” and often end up becoming resistant to the pest it was designed resist (McNeill 224). This lead to increased use of pesticides which lead to unintended consequences such as; intrusion of the water supply, human tissues and other unwanted places. “The World Health Organization estimated in 1990 that pesticide poisoning killed about 20,000 people per year, mostly in cotton fields” (McNeill 224).

Advances have been made to reduce the incidences of poisoning and to create varieties that are less dependent on purchased inputs as well as research on “farming systems, agronomic practices, integrated pest management and other ‘environment-friendly’ technologies” (Everson 7). In the end it is up to the farmer to decide which technology he or she wants to use. The greater the responsiveness to chemical fertilizers the greater the profitability of the crop and with the average caloric intake rising and food prices lowering it has become a challenge for many farmers in underdeveloped countries to turn a profit (Everson 6). With the ever-present budget cuts of the past decade many agencies have had to cut funding to their science and technology developments. This funding crunch has left farmers to rely on the private sector for advances in biotechnology.

“The welfare of farmers and farm workers not reached by the Green Revolution ultimately depends on the extending the Green Revolution beyond present boundaries” (Everson 7). Everson believes that the Green Revolution in on the right track but fears that all have not benefited from the biotechnological advances made by the agro scientists. Is there a better solution than one that relies on greater chemical fertilizer pest-resistant varieties of sustainable crops needed for human survival? According to David Tilman, author of The Greening of the Green Revolution there have been shown two alternative practices for growing maize that have maintained their yields while increasing soil fertility (Tilman 211). These two methods used “organic” alternatives and no synthetic fertilizers or pesticides were used. One method involved using a manure based system where legumes and grasses were fed to the cattle that in turn ‘fed’ the land with their manure. The second system did not use cattle but instead incorporated nitrogen into the soil with a variety of legumes (Tilman 211). “Amazingly, ten-year-average maize yields differed by less than 1% among the three cropping systems (Tilman 211). With continued efforts among scientists it is possible that the use of pesticides harmful not only to humans but to the environment as well as all living creatures, may someday become extinct.

Works Cited

Evenson, R. E., and D. Gollin. "Assessing the Impact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000." Science 300.5620 (2003): 758. <http://search.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9848525&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live>.

McNeill, J.R. “Something New Under the Sun” New York. 2000.

Tilman, David. "The Greening of the Green Revolution." Nature 396.6708 (1998): 211. <http://search.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=1337996&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live>.

The Green Revolution

Dumping and its Impact

Societies have gradually changed their environment to fit the needs and wants of their culture. They have changed their environment to produce goods and or services that will accumulate income. Many societies have undergone changes to urbanize their cities, so that they could increase their income per capita. Population growth has also cause a change in the environment, because it has increase production and consumption of natural resources. The increase of population lead many water bodies to become polluted, because people are using water for energy, agriculture and to dump their toxic waste into. The Industrial Revolution caused societies to believe it is alright for them to dump their toxic waste into the water. Factories were dumping huge amounts of toxic waste in to the waters, and caused the water to become contaminated with high levels of mercury. Dumping has lead the body of water to become undrinkable, unusable and unlivable for species.

An example of the destruction of a land due to industrialization is the Rhine. The Rhine's water was once so clean it accommodate salmon. The water was fresh and abundant. People were able to drink it with out the fear of becoming ill. But since the Industrial Revolution swept the nation, the Rhine become a prime area to industrialize. The German chemical industry threw its toxic waste in to the waters. They dumped harmful chemicals such as sulfur and nitrogen oxides. The Rhine was filled with high levels of mercury, zinc and other toxic chemicals. People became ill after eating fish or drinking water from the Rhine, because it was highly contaminated. Industrialization left the Rhine heavy with pollutants, salmon was rare, and the mayfish disappeared.

Companies want to gain income and will stop and nothing to have a higher net profit, even if it means destroying a land that was once fertile. They believe a body of water is their own personal waste bin, and they can throw their toxic waste into it. Throwing toxic waste into our water system is an easy way to get rid of toxic waste, but it carries out long term affects that affect everyone and everything. Although there are more enforce rules and regulations to control dumping, the condition of the contaminated water remains unchanged. Mankind must realize to preserve their natural surroundings before it is too late to change.

McNeil, J.R., 2000: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World: Something New Under the Sun. Norton & Company, Inc., New York

Anderberg Stefan (1998) Industrial Metabolism and the Linkages Between Economies, Ethics and the Environment. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VDY-3T8365G-10&_user=521825&_coverDate=02%2F03%2F1998&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000059578&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=521825&md5=10fd33aa663442ac3e948f2aff50bad9 from Business Source Complete

Religion: Can it Save the Ganges River That it Destroyed?

River Pollution in the Ganges of India

The people of the Hindu religion make up a large portion of India, and along with population growth, the customs and beliefs of the Hindu religion have been destroying the water supply of the Ganges river. In J.R. McNeil’s book, Something New Under The Sun, he explains that, “in Hindu belief, gods created the Ganges to give people a chance to wash away their sins, Hindus believe that death and cremation at Varanasi (Benares) ensures liberation of the soul, so Varanasi attracts millions of elderly and sickly Indians”(McNeil129).  McNeil also explains that the population of about 10 million around the Ganges river dumps all of their waste directly into the river. The waste, bodies, cremations, animal carcasses, and the washing of sickly and elderly make the “holy waters” of the Ganges a “bacteriological nightmare” of pollution. This bleak situation does however have a possible turnaround with the use of their religion being emphasized for the preservation of the water as opposed to the destruction of it.

            To be able to make this suggestion at all there are aspects about the Hindu religion that should be emphasized. In Vasudha Narayanan’s article, Water, Wood, and Wisdom: Ecological Perspectives from the Hindu Traditions, he describes the aspects of the religious traditions that could be emphasized to turn habits of pollution around.

He explains that, “Many Hindu texts are firm in their view that human beings must enhance the quality of life. A popular blessing uttered in many Hindu temples and homes focuses on human happiness in this life, on this earth: May everyone be happy, may everyone be free of diseases! / May everyone see what is noble / May no one suffer from misery”(Narayanan 181). Perhaps these beliefs could be explained that by polluting the water supply they are in fact causing disease and suffering for many of their people. If they could perceive their beliefs in this manner, then the Ganges will have a better chance of rehabilitation. The Hindu people need to remember that, “the texts on dharma earnestly exhort people to practice nonviolence toward all beings; other texts speak of the joys of a harmonious relationship with nature”(Narayanan 183). This “harmonious relationship with nature”, needs to include not destroying the Ganges with pollution. There is nothing harmonious about dumping tons of waste, bodies, and cremations into the main water supply. It is also important to remind ourselves as outsiders looking in on the situation that they do have strong connections with the water and lasting religious beliefs in the holiness that the water possess, so it would make sense to them to dispose of loved ones’ ashes into it, or bath the sick or elderly, but they are absorbed with the holy properties of water and are not seeing what is happening to their cherished holy water.  Narayanan points out that, “the ashes of the cremated body are immersed in holy waters the same rivers that feed and irrigate paddy fields; the same water that cooks the rice and bathes the dead before cremation. From cradle to cremation, Hindus have long had a palpable, organic connection with nature. But today they must also face the reality of environmental disaster. With the population hovering around a billion in India (with eight hundred million Hindus), the use, abuse, and misuse of resources is placing India on the fast track to disaster”(Narayanan179).

   Anytime that we attempt to understand another culture, we have to be delicate and try as hard as we can to not judge or compare it to our own culture. In this case it seems all to easy to wonder how the Hindus could possibly be so naive to think that they should bath and use the same water that is so heavily polluted by their waste and deceased.  Then once we remind ourselves that this culture is very different from our own, we have to be creative and come up with possible solutions that are relative to their culture. Narayanan ponders the same questions: “What, if anything, can Hindu tradition say about this looming environmental crisis? Are there any resources in the Hindu religious and cultural traditions that can inspire and motivate Hindus to take action?”(Narayanan179).  After considering aspects of Hindu religion and culture, appealing to their sense of love and beauty in nature, the prayers to keep people healthy and free of disease and misery, then perhaps they could begin to alter their customs of abusing their water supply. The Ganges could also use the help of some waste management plans, but getting to the source for the cultural reasons that the river is polluted in the first place, and working on new understandings to change practices will help the river for centuries to come.

 

1)      McNeil, J.R., 2000: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World: Something New Under the Sun. Norton & Company, Inc., New York.

 

2)     Narayanan, Vasudha. “Water, Wood, and Wisdom: Ecological Perspectives from the Hindu Traditions” Daedalus, Vol. 130, No. 4, Religion and Ecology: Can the Climate Change? (Fall, 2001): 179-206. The MIT Press on behalf of American Academy of Arts & Sciences. 18 November 2009. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027723

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Social Impacts of Dams

Large-scale hydrologic engineering, such as dam building, can offer many benefits. This form of clean energy can provide electricity for many homes, for example, in the 1980’s, approximately 15 million people received power from the Hoover Dam (McNeill 2000, 178). Another important benefit is the ability to have water where and when it is needed. There are also many negative effects that dam construction can cause, including both environmental and social. The environmental effects often include habitat loss and alteration. The dams create barriers for the wildlife that depend on the rivers for spawning, migrating, and much more. They also affect the land both upstream and downstream by changing the amount of water in those locations.

The social effects caused by dams can be much more difficult to measure than the environmental effects. A tool that is used to measure the social effects is called a social impact analysis (SIA). The impacts felt by dam construction can result “…in a wide array of subsequent social impacts, including changes in household size and structure; changes in employment and income-generating opportunities; alteration of access and use of land and water resources; changes in social networks and community integrity; changes in the nature and magnitude of various health risks; and often a disruption of the psycho-social wellbeing of displaced individuals” (Tilt, Braun, and He 2009). A more specific example of the types of social effects a dam can cause are those that resulted from the Manwan Dam which was built on the upper Mekong River in China. “The economy of the rural areas adjacent to the Manwan Dam experienced significant impacts, including a decline in productivity in agriculture and animal husbandry, shortages of water for irrigation, increasing costs for electricity, and depletion of forest resources” (Tilt, Braun, and He 2009).

When considering the construction of something as large as a dam, all of the impacts need to be taken into account along with the benefits. In the past this was not done, instead the dams were built hastily without much thought of the consequences. “During the 1960s, more than one large dam was completed per day on average” (McNeill 2000, 159). For future hydrologic engineering projects like dams, we need to look at the past and learn from those mistakes.

McNeil., J.R., 2000: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World: Something New Under the Sun. Norton & Company, Inc., New York.

Tilt, Bryan, Yvonne Braun, and Daming He. 2009. Social Impacts of Large Dam Projects: A Comparison of International Case Studies and Implications for Best Practice. Journal of Environmental Management 90, S3 (July): S249-S257.

Cleaning Up Our Mess for the Better Future

According to Moran (Moran 2008), urban cities have expanded worldwide. In the 1900s, there were 16 cities with more than a million occupants. The number of cities increased to at least 24 by the year 2000, with more than a dozen cities occupying at least 20 million people in each city. According to the author, the urbanization of modern cities resulted in numerous problems, such as excessive pollution, congestion, crime, and wasteful consumerism.

Earth is different from the other seven planets in our solar system due to the fact that it contains water. Because of water, our planet has the ability to sustain life. Without water, life would not exist. Currently, our water supply is facing a great crisis. According to McNeill (McNeill, 2001), urban cities pose a great threat to our water supply. First, urban cities pollute the water supply by dumping wastes into rivers and lakes, leading to the contamination of fresh water sources. Cities like Chicago experience a rapid population growth and such rapid growth threatens the water supply. An increase in population leads to an increase in water usage and water contamination due to the dumping of wastes via sewers into the water supply. As a result, water becomes unsanitary and unsuitable for drinking. Additionally, contaminated water creates waterborne diseases. Second, water pollution is seen in cities that have experienced the industrial revolution. In such cities, factories dump toxic wastes into the water supply. Toxic wastes lead to the death of aquatic animals and, in extreme cases, lead to their extinction. Toxic wastes create inconsumable water and cause sickness to people, plants, and animals that drink it. The third cause of water pollution is eutrophication, which is an increase in phosphorous and nitrogen, due to chemical fertilizer from farm runoff. Eutrophication causes algae to grow rapidly in water. When algae die, their decomposition consumes oxygen, which leads to a decrease of oxygen supply for other aquatic animals. Many of these problems are seen in places such as the Ganges River, India, the Rhine, Great Britain, the Watarase, Japan, and many other areas.
Countries such as Japan have been aware of water pollution and have taken numerous measures to take care of this problem. According to Hayashi (Hayahsi, 1980), the Japanese government enforced numerous laws in order to limit pollution and water contamination. First, the Japanese government enforced the Water Pollution Law to prevent pollution of water in public and private properties and penalizes those who violate the law. Second, The Seto Inland Sea Conservation Law provides a plan for conserving the Seto Inland Sea and reducing discharge into the sea in order to preserve the scenic beauty and fishery resources of the area. Many other laws have been enacted since then and have been proven beneficial to Japan. Japan’s water has been improving ever since the laws were enacted, making it safe for people, plants, and animals to consume.

Water conservation is important and should be acknowledged by our government in order to maintain a clean water supply for future generations. As the world’s population increases, the need for water will also increase. However, our water supply is limited. If we do not take care of our problem today, we will face a water crisis in the future, much like the oil crisis we currently face.

Hayashi, T. (1980). Water Pollution Control in Japan. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation, 52, 3.

Moran, E. F. (2008). Human adaptation. In Urban ecology and urban sustainability (pp 307-324). Boulder, Co: Westview Press.

McNeill, J. R. (2001). Something new under the sun. In The hydrosphere: The history of water use and water pollution (pp. 119-147). New York, N. Y.: Norton paperbacks.