It's a step in the right direction that many of the countries that produce the most greenhouse gases (United States, the EU, the G8, etc.) are setting realistic goals on reducing their emissions. However, most of the goals they've set sound pretty slow-acting (with such deadlines as 2050), so they're still not addressing the problem nearly as fast as they should be. Also, the fact that countries that are growing and developing very quickly, for example China and Brazil, haven't set any emission goals is very sad...(And what do the G8 countries mean by "rich nations"???)
----------------------------------------- "The G8 leaders said at their summit in L'Aquila in July that rich nations should cut emissions by 80% by 2050, while the world overall should reduce them 50% by 2050.
They said they had agreed to try to limit global warming to just 2C (3.6F) above pre-industrial levels.
EUROPEAN UNION
The EU has promised a 20% cut in emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020, compared with 1990 levels. It has said that the target will be increased to 30% if there is a satisfactory international agreement.
It also says 20% of the total energy mix should come from renewables by 2020, and there should be a 20% cut in energy consumption by the same year.
UNITED STATES
President Barack Obama is backing a law which would set a target to cut emissions by 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. But the US Senate might block the proposals or reduce the targets."
McDonald's waste makes up largest proportion of fast food litter on streets
This article is about rubbish in our streets. In Britain Fast Food litter was second to cigarette ends in littering the country’s streets and 29 per cent of that was from McDonald’s restaurants. As McDonalds doesn’t only operate in Britain, other countries might have similar situations to deal with. So should this company be held responsible for this rubbish or the people who drop the rubbish? Probably both. The consumer should use a bin and the company should think about methods of resolution such as reducing packaging and offering money off to people who returned packaging. So please keep that in mind when you’re visiting a fast food restaurant… ---------------------------------------- Ben Stafford, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: “Of course, we should not excuse the slovenly and irresponsible behaviour of people who drop litter but fast food outlets need to raise their game by cutting back packaging, supplying more bins and encouraging customers to eat in rather than taking packaging out on to the streets, where it all too often ends up on the pavement or in the gutter.” The amount of rubbish dropped in Britain has risen by 500 per cent since the 1960s, with fast food waste the most common problem after smoking-related litter. The findings of Keep Britain’s Tidy are another blow to McDonald’s, which has been criticised in the past for fuelling childhood obesity and damaging the environment. ------------- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/4223106/McDonalds-waste-makes-up-largest-proportion-of-fast-food-litter-on-streets.html
„Reusable bags – paper, plastic, or something better?“
This article is about the use and consequences of plastic bags compared to paper bags. Unlike then perhaps often intended that paper bags would be the better alternative to plastic bags, they also carry a lot of environmental problems. Furthermore it is written about really alternatives to these two common bags made out of materials that don’t affect the environment during production process and don’t need to be thrown away after each use. One the one hand, I think that this is a really important step and I appreciate that, for example, the Irish government imposed a plastic bag consumption tax. Thus has reduced consumption by 90% and saved about 18 million liters of invaluable oil. But one the other hand I think it’s sad that government has to go such a radical step to enforce alternatives to plastic (or paper) bags. Are we really that unenlightened and heedless towards our environment???
---------------------------------------------
“Plastic bags end up as litter that fouls the landscape, and kill thousands of marine mammals every year that mistake the floating bags for food.” … “Paper bags, which many people consider a better alternative to plastic bags, carry their own set of environmental problems.” … ”Meanwhile, some eco-friendly companies are voluntarily exploring ethical alternatives to plastic bags, turning to biodegradable bags made from corn. The corn-based bags cost several times more than plastic bags, but are produced using much less energy and will break down in landfills or composters in four to 12 weeks.“
"Early Civilizations' Agriculture May Have Altered Global Climates"
The article talks about how people from early civilization used much larger area to produce much less food in comparison with current usage of farmlands. It goes on and says that this popular practice of "Slash-and-burn" might have altered current global climates in some extends. From this example, we can say that how we use our land today may leave longer lasting effects on climates of tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------
"Researchers at the University of Virginia and the University of Maryland-Baltimore County say that today’s 6 billion people use about 90 percent less land per person for growing food than was used by far smaller populations early in the development of civilization. Those early societies likely relied on slash-and-burn techniques to clear large tracts of land for relatively small levels of food production.
“They used more land for farming because they had little incentive to maximize yield from less land, and because there was plenty of forest to burn,” said William Ruddiman, the lead author and a professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia. “They may have inadvertently altered the climate." "
Copenhagen Climate Summit: A Cold Maldives President
The Maldives is the most urgent country which threatend by global-warming and rising sea levels in the world. But global society has taken no particular actions. So the president of Maldives refuse to attend the Copenhagen climite summits because he needed to call the world's attention about their imminent situation and also wanted to express his complaints aganist a process of climite summits. The world should understand and accept this, his sincere message. ----------------------------------------------
President has said that, even though his country is under threat from climate change, he cannot afford to go to a summit on the issue. President Nasheed said the Maldives needed to be defended from the effects of global warming and rising sea levels. He clarified his nation would only go to the December talks in Copenhagen if someone offered to pay for the trip. But he added that the country would have to do much of the work itself.
Climate summits are now more or less ritual exercises to meet friends, have sumptuous intercontinental foods/cosines and pose for group photos. President Nasheed, a former human rights activist who came to power 10 months ago, said climate change summits were at times "childish" because countries tended to blame each other over past misdeeds rather than think practically. He hoped the Copenhagen summit would come out with positive plans, like renewable energy promotion, rather than stressing what he called negative ones like capping carbon emissions.
No part of the Maldives island state's territory lies more than 2.5m above sea level, and 50 of its islands are already severely eroding. The president said this showed that climate change was not just an environment issue, but a security issue as well. "I keep saying this: if the Europeans thought it was important to defend Poland in the '30s and '40s - in any threat you really have to look after your frontline states. Now, the Maldives is a frontline state.
I'd like to question a central distinction that Elinor Ostrom makes in her article about the "tragedy of the commons". She (?) keeps on talking about the difference that there is between a central government and, for example, the local arrangements made by the inhabitants of Hirano, the rural village in Japan. On p. 28 she finally makes her point by saying that "the users of the commons are also the governors of the commons". But what else is a government supposed to be than "the representives of the users of the commons". So I don't see a big difference between the success story of this village and the succes story accomplished by my government by taxing the plastic bags with a surrealistic amount of 50 cents a bag. (900 won) I assume that Elenor Ostrom emphasises the initiative taken by a few, but it has nothing to see with the final result which is ... success!
Source: 'How inexorable is the "tragedy of the commons?"; Elinor Ostrom. Textbook p. 265-316
This article mainly talks about the importance of honeybees and the causes the dramatic decline in honeybee populations in recent years. Without honeybees there could be a major environmental imbalance, effecting our agricultural food supply. Researchers and biologists suggest reasons that contribute to the decline of the honeybee population which includes increase use of chemical pesticides and herbicides, genetically modified crops, growing numbers of cell phones and wireless communications towers, and global warming. They claim that combination of all these factors are killing the honeybees and the federal government must spend tons of money and time to solve this problem.
---------------------------------------------
Bee populations may also be vulnerable to other factors, such as the recent increase in atmospheric electromagnetic radiation as a result of growing numbers of cell phones and wireless communication towers. The increased radiation given off by such devices may interfere with bees’ ability to navigate. A small study at Germany’s Landau University found that bees would not return to their hives when mobile phones were placed nearby. Further research is currently underway in the U.S. to determine the extent of such radiation-related phenomena on bees and other insect populations.
It's a great step that some Developed countries are starting to levy Tax on the Pollution. I do not think it's a good idea that Government support Companies financially for this tax which is alrady going on in some countries though. I think it's quite fair that Advanced Countries pay more taxes levied on Pollution than underdeveloped countries. Advanced countries are more responsible for environmental pollution nowadays and now it's time for underdeveloped countries to grow, but now we are talking about this pollution and trying to push them to do something as the others do. So I hope this tax-paying for carbon thing is also going to be Globalized and going to become cumulative taxation depending on the stage of development.
-------------------------
France is likely to begin taxing carbon-dioxide emissions by both households and companies starting next year in the hope that consumers and producers gradually shift to more environmentally friendly goods.
From Jan. 1, a special tax of €17 ($24.74) will be levied on each metric ton of CO2 emitted by fossil fuels such as heating oil, gasoline, coal and natural gas, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in a speech Thursday. "We cannot keep on taxing labor, taxing capital and ignore taxes on pollution," he said.
Parliament has yet to approve the measure, but it is likely to pass as part of the wider annual budget plan.
A very down to earth* kind of guy. I'm an environmental sociologist interested in establishing material and organizational sustainability worldwide. I'm always looking for interesting materials/technologies, inspiring ideas, or institutional examples of sustainability to inspire others to recognize their choices now. To be fatalistic about an unsustainable world is a sign of a captive mind, given all our options.
*(If "earth" is defined in a planetary sense, concerning comparative historical knowledge and interest in the past 10,000 years or so anywhere...) See both blogs.
Alexandra Vorobyova
ReplyDelete"Climate Targets Around the World"
It's a step in the right direction that many of the countries that produce the most greenhouse gases (United States, the EU, the G8, etc.) are setting realistic goals on reducing their emissions. However, most of the goals they've set sound pretty slow-acting (with such deadlines as 2050), so they're still not addressing the problem nearly as fast as they should be. Also, the fact that countries that are growing and developing very quickly, for example China and Brazil, haven't set any emission goals is very sad...(And what do the G8 countries mean by "rich nations"???)
-----------------------------------------
"The G8 leaders said at their summit in L'Aquila in July that rich nations should cut emissions by 80% by 2050, while the world overall should reduce them 50% by 2050.
They said they had agreed to try to limit global warming to just 2C (3.6F) above pre-industrial levels.
EUROPEAN UNION
The EU has promised a 20% cut in emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020, compared with 1990 levels. It has said that the target will be increased to 30% if there is a satisfactory international agreement.
It also says 20% of the total energy mix should come from renewables by 2020, and there should be a 20% cut in energy consumption by the same year.
UNITED STATES
President Barack Obama is backing a law which would set a target to cut emissions by 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. But the US Senate might block the proposals or reduce the targets."
------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8142342.stm
Anna Maislinger
ReplyDeleteMcDonald's waste makes up largest proportion of fast food litter on streets
This article is about rubbish in our streets. In Britain Fast Food litter was second to cigarette ends in littering the country’s streets and 29 per cent of that was from McDonald’s restaurants. As McDonalds doesn’t only operate in Britain, other countries might have similar situations to deal with.
So should this company be held responsible for this rubbish or the people who drop the rubbish? Probably both. The consumer should use a bin and the company should think about methods of resolution such as reducing packaging and offering money off to people who returned packaging.
So please keep that in mind when you’re visiting a fast food restaurant…
----------------------------------------
Ben Stafford, of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said: “Of course, we should not excuse the slovenly and irresponsible behaviour of people who drop litter but fast food outlets need to raise their game by cutting back packaging, supplying more bins and encouraging customers to eat in rather than taking packaging out on to the streets, where it all too often ends up on the pavement or in the gutter.”
The amount of rubbish dropped in Britain has risen by 500 per cent since the 1960s, with fast food waste the most common problem after smoking-related litter.
The findings of Keep Britain’s Tidy are another blow to McDonald’s, which has been criticised in the past for fuelling childhood obesity and damaging the environment.
-------------
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/4223106/McDonalds-waste-makes-up-largest-proportion-of-fast-food-litter-on-streets.html
Nicole Niedermeier
ReplyDelete„Reusable bags – paper, plastic, or something better?“
This article is about the use and consequences of plastic bags compared to paper bags. Unlike then perhaps often intended that paper bags would be the better alternative to plastic bags, they also carry a lot of environmental problems.
Furthermore it is written about really alternatives to these two common bags made out of materials that don’t affect the environment during production process and don’t need to be thrown away after each use. One the one hand, I think that this is a really important step and I appreciate that, for example, the Irish government imposed a plastic bag consumption tax. Thus has reduced consumption by 90% and saved about 18 million liters of invaluable oil. But one the other hand I think it’s sad that government has to go such a radical step to enforce alternatives to plastic (or paper) bags.
Are we really that unenlightened and heedless towards our environment???
---------------------------------------------
“Plastic bags end up as litter that fouls the landscape, and kill thousands of marine mammals every year that mistake the floating bags for food.” … “Paper bags, which many people consider a better alternative to plastic bags, carry their own set of environmental problems.” … ”Meanwhile, some eco-friendly companies are voluntarily exploring ethical alternatives to plastic bags, turning to biodegradable bags made from corn. The corn-based bags cost several times more than plastic bags, but are produced using much less energy and will break down in landfills or composters in four to 12 weeks.“
--------
http://environment.about.com/od/recycling/a/reusablebags.htm
"Early Civilizations' Agriculture May Have Altered Global Climates"
ReplyDeleteThe article talks about how people from early civilization used much larger area to produce much less food in comparison with current usage of farmlands. It goes on and says that this popular practice of "Slash-and-burn" might have altered current global climates in some extends. From this example, we can say that how we use our land today may leave longer lasting effects on climates of tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------
"Researchers at the University of Virginia and the University of Maryland-Baltimore County say that today’s 6 billion people use about 90 percent less land per person for growing food than was used by far smaller populations early in the development of civilization. Those early societies likely relied on slash-and-burn techniques to clear large tracts of land for relatively small levels of food production.
“They used more land for farming because they had little incentive to maximize yield from less land, and because there was plenty of forest to burn,” said William Ruddiman, the lead author and a professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia. “They may have inadvertently altered the climate." "
http://www.usnews.com/articles/science/2009/08/19/agricultural-methods-of-early-civilizations-may-have-altered-global-climate.html
--------------------------------------------
Hyun-deok, Park
ReplyDeleteCopenhagen Climate Summit: A Cold Maldives President
The Maldives is the most urgent country which threatend by global-warming and rising sea levels in the world. But global society has taken no particular actions. So the president of Maldives refuse to attend the Copenhagen climite summits because he needed to call the world's attention about their imminent situation and also wanted to express his complaints aganist a process of climite summits. The world should understand and accept this, his sincere message.
----------------------------------------------
President has said that, even though his country is under threat from climate change, he cannot afford to go to a summit on the issue. President Nasheed said the Maldives needed to be defended from the effects of global warming and rising sea levels. He clarified his nation would only go to the December talks in Copenhagen if someone offered to pay for the trip. But he added that the country would have to do much of the work itself.
Climate summits are now more or less ritual exercises to meet friends, have sumptuous intercontinental foods/cosines and pose for group photos. President Nasheed, a former human rights activist who came to power 10 months ago, said climate change summits were at times "childish" because countries tended to blame each other over past misdeeds rather than think practically. He hoped the Copenhagen summit would come out with positive plans, like renewable energy promotion, rather than stressing what he called negative ones like capping carbon emissions.
No part of the Maldives island state's territory lies more than 2.5m above sea level, and 50 of its islands are already severely eroding. The president said this showed that climate change was not just an environment issue, but a security issue as well. "I keep saying this: if the Europeans thought it was important to defend Poland in the '30s and '40s - in any threat you really have to look after your frontline states. Now, the Maldives is a frontline state.
-----
http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2009/09/10/copenhagen-climate-summit-cold-maldives-president
Sam Wijnants
ReplyDelete"Fake distinctions by Elinor Ostrom"
I'd like to question a central distinction that Elinor Ostrom makes in her article about the "tragedy of the commons". She (?) keeps on talking about the difference that there is between a central government and, for example, the local arrangements made by the inhabitants of Hirano, the rural village in Japan. On p. 28 she finally makes her point by saying that "the users of the commons are also the governors of the commons". But what else is a government supposed to be than "the representives of the users of the commons". So I don't see a big difference between the success story of this village and the succes story accomplished by my government by taxing the plastic bags with a surrealistic amount of 50 cents a bag. (900 won)
I assume that Elenor Ostrom emphasises the initiative taken by a few, but it has nothing to see with the final result which is ... success!
Source: 'How inexorable is the "tragedy of the commons?"; Elinor Ostrom. Textbook p. 265-316
Hyun A Kim
ReplyDeleteWhy are Honeybees Disappearing?
This article mainly talks about the importance of honeybees and the causes the dramatic decline in honeybee populations in recent years. Without honeybees there could be a major environmental imbalance, effecting our agricultural food supply. Researchers and biologists suggest reasons that contribute to the decline of the honeybee population which includes increase use of chemical pesticides and herbicides, genetically modified crops, growing numbers of cell phones and wireless communications towers, and global warming. They claim that combination of all these factors are killing the honeybees and the federal government must spend tons of money and time to solve this problem.
---------------------------------------------
Bee populations may also be vulnerable to other factors, such as the recent increase in atmospheric electromagnetic radiation as a result of growing numbers of cell phones and wireless communication towers. The increased radiation given off by such devices may interfere with bees’ ability to navigate. A small study at Germany’s Landau University found that bees would not return to their hives when mobile phones were placed nearby. Further research is currently underway in the U.S. to determine the extent of such radiation-related phenomena on bees and other insect populations.
-----
http://environment.about.com/od/biodiversityconservation/a/honeybees.htm
Sujin Kwon // Sue
ReplyDeleteFrance Moves to Levy Carbon Tax on Fossil Fuels
It's a great step that some Developed countries are starting to levy Tax on the Pollution. I do not think it's a good idea that Government support Companies financially for this tax which is alrady going on in some countries though. I think it's quite fair that Advanced Countries pay more taxes levied on Pollution than underdeveloped countries. Advanced countries are more responsible for environmental pollution nowadays and now it's time for underdeveloped countries to grow, but now we are talking about this pollution and trying to push them to do something as the others do. So I hope this tax-paying for carbon thing is also going to be Globalized and going to become cumulative taxation depending on the stage of development.
-------------------------
France is likely to begin taxing carbon-dioxide emissions by both households and companies starting next year in the hope that consumers and producers gradually shift to more environmentally friendly goods.
From Jan. 1, a special tax of €17 ($24.74) will be levied on each metric ton of CO2 emitted by fossil fuels such as heating oil, gasoline, coal and natural gas, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in a speech Thursday. "We cannot keep on taxing labor, taxing capital and ignore taxes on pollution," he said.
Parliament has yet to approve the measure, but it is likely to pass as part of the wider annual budget plan.
----
http://hpb.online.wsj.com/article/SB125259026423099435.html