What would you do if someone tries to build something inside your property? How would you react if you are asked to give up some of your property because is for the benefit our society? Who will determine what is the benefit for society when your property is used in ways that you don't like? How can be assessed the damage to your property by the use of it for common good?
The Oregonian on Friday August 29th, 2014 has an article that addresses this questions. For more information click here.
Landowner Bill Gow is facing 'eminent domain' as a canadian oil pipeline company has obtained the rights to bury a 36-inch diameter high-pressure pipeline through his land. Eminent domain is the lawful act through which a government can forceful purchase land from private owners for use in a way that has communal value. That would be the case of constructing new roads, bridges, or infrastructure that will benefit the whole community. In this case the land will be used by a privately own company that claims that the jobs created will benefit the whole community.
Where would you draw the line? How can we assess the benefit of a community when benefiting a private enterprise?
There is another aspect of 'not in my backyard'. This one is related to how laws and regulations are applied to industries that create a lot of jobs but at the same time externalizing some to the costs caused by pollution. Take Title V of the Clean Air Act. http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/title5.html that sets the need for industries to get a permit to pollute.
For those living in the Hillsboro OR neighborhood what is now happening with the new Intel D1X plant being build relates to the same question of having an industry that supports the local economy and uses resources human and environmental in its activities. You have to read Luke Hammill who has been reporting news related to Hillsboro OR to see how Intel may benefit by Supreme Court ruling http://www.oregonlive.com/hillsboro/index.ssf/2014/08/intel_may_avoid_strict_federal.html
that will allow it not the have to get a Title 5 CAA permit for its emissions of fluoride for which it was fined $143,000 this year.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Scott Buser's view on things to come
August
11, 2014
ENVIRONMENT STUDIES
Finally,
after 5 weeks I get the opportunity to share the information I have learned by
attending the Environment Studies class at Warner
pacific College. Five weeks really is not enough time to master all that someone
would need to be an authority on the environment, but what I have learned is a
good start. Who know that a vehicle powered by hydrogen would produce water
from its emissions? Maybe that’s the answer to our vehicle smog issues.
I’ve
thought about how I leave a footprint on the environment; I recycle plastic,
cardboard and the oil from the vehicles my wife and I drive. The garbage we
send to the land fill from our house is very little. Although we are a part of
helping the environment with recycling there is more we can do. My wife and I
have also made some commitments to not driving as much, conserving the use of
fossil fuels. This year instead of going camping on our vacation, we’re staying
home to clean our home and send unwanted items to recycling centers.
The Bureau of land
management (BLM) has more influence than any of our 50 states. The BLM
oversees 945 million acres of land, a force of thousands employees that oversee
landslides, mineral production, land policies and restoration of forest. I
believe their mission is a good one for the planet. I also believe that with
government support we could build on their programs that help preserve nature.
After all, isn’t taking care of our environment about taking care of nature?
I have learned over the last 4 weeks more about the environment
then I have over 55 years. What’s more startling is learning how bad the world
will be if we don’t do something about it. If we continue to cut down the CO, 2 makers, (trees) we will certainly
suffocate from lack of oxygen. As humans, if we continue to pollute our H2O, (water) we will die of thirst.
In
searching the web I found that you can actually make oxygen, right in the
kitchen of your home. “How to Make Oxygen and Hydrogen
from Water Using Electrolysis.” For $249 you can even buy a kit
for your car that produces hydrogen. What is interesting is that to produce the
oxygen in your kitchen, you must use DC power, which is a batter, manmade;
which is very harmful to our environment. It just boggles my mind; we take
manmade discoveries to make what nature has already provided to us. Why don’t
we trust nature, arrest the systems that destroy our existents.
Look at all the millionaires that built their homes on the edges
of a coast. The architects looked over the land; they bought permits, and paid
someone to build. Then one year a strong storm comes in and washes the costal
line away. Soon their property is destroyed and gone. Who was really the
designer of the costal edge? Surely not the architect, or the home builder. It
was, and is nature! Those that build their homes on hill sides, reap the same
rewards as the edge dwellers. Although we can never predict Mother Nature, we
can save ourselves agony by not presuming she won’t have an effect on our
lives.
The few watersheds we have should be preserved. Here in Portland, Oregon,
we have several open water reservoirs. On Mount
Tabor, there is one that has continuously been violated by vandals.
Sometime urinated in, or dead animals thrown in just to make some kind of dumb
statement or anger towards life in general. What about the companies that have
a history of creating toxins and hiding the factory excretion in our oceans and
rivers? How do we balance our effects on nature, yet provide life to those that
oppose change and accountability to the environment? Here’s one thing I thought
about! I have a fences around my property, about 175 feet. Now, with my understanding
of my foot print, I’m refuse to stain my fence. Why? Because the stain that’s
put on the fences, country wide, are eventually washed away by the rain. From
the rain water it can seep into our ground water, which eventually will return
to us though evaporation, condensation or well, river water. Another aspect of
change for our house is to not use lawn fertilizer on our property. The same
results and negative impact on our rivers and streams. United States geological surveys. (USGS). There is so much water on
our planet. How do we continue to live with all the pollution and survive?
I would challenges everyone to take a longer look at their own
environmental footprint. Others will say that one person can’t change the total
of many. I think that the change in one can, by hope. I believe that from this
class at Warner collage, there’s 6 people that will change how they see and
change how they impact the environment. There is also hope by the influence we
each have on others around us. Stop, remove a tossed plastic bottle from the
garbage and place it in a recycling can. One person can learn, others can too.
My children, grown up now, continue to tell their children to shut off the
lights, don’t throw paper in the garbage, and put it in the recycling bin. Once
a year I load up my truck with scrap metals, on my way to the mental scrap yard
I stop and both my daughters to get any metal. Once recycled I split the funds
between them both. Kind of a reward for not filling the garbage with recyclable
materials.
Reference
Warner Pacific College. (2014).
retrieved from http://www.warnerpacific.edu/admissions/adult-degree-program/
Wiki How To. (2014). retrieved
from http://www.wikihow.com/Make-Oxygen-and-Hydrogen-from-Water-Using-Electrolysis
The City of Portland Oregon. Mount
Tabor (2014). Retrieved from http://www.portlandoregon.gov/parks/finder/index.cfm?PropertyID=275&action=ViewPark
USGS for a changing world. (2014).The USGS Water
Science School. Retrieved from http://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthgwquality.html
The Future: by Matthew Sluman
Environmental
Studies
Abstract
The future is in our hands and the earth
contains plenty of recourses to sustain life in better fashion than we even
know it now. Sure the earth’s
human population is of over seven billion and counting, but we use less than
32% terrestrial surface. This needs to change and through creativity we can
change that. Man and nature can live together harmoniously. In fact they can
cohabitate better and have richer more meaningful and fulfilling lives when
living together if man can learn to be respectful of the environment. Man does
not have to intrude on the ecosystem, man can harmonize with it. We can feed all of the people of the
world with plenty if we would just change our value system and concern
ourselves with enriching our neighbors.
The current population of the world is
now at 7.045 billion and according to the article, World Population Balance, the earth is already over reaching
its limits by three times its ability to sustain, and is currently using more
than 50% of the recourses that the earth is producing. The article claims that
studies show that the earth is only capable of sustainability for about 2.0
billion at European rates of consumption (world 2014, p.1) In addition,
according to official UN estimates the earth’s population will swell to around
9.1 billion by 2050 (press 2005, p.1).
Certainly this is a dilemma that needs
to be addressed, and in short order as one can see. Science and socialist,
environmentalist, and entire nations are all concerned with the emphatic truth
staring mankind and the servile of the earth down, eye to eye. It seems each group has their own way of
describing the issues, and everyone has a different way of addressing the
crisis. For example, In China fetal and gender genocide is an ethical method of
controlling their growing population, as recognized by Wikipedia (Wikipedia
2013p.1).
In the United States population control
is looked at through urban renewal programs and urban reform to reduce urban
sprawl. The idea is to move everyone into the inner cities to reduce the human
footprint along with Planned Parenthood programs to reduce reproduction and
eliminate unwanted births. In all of this I wonder how many young Einsteins
have been systematically eliminated and how Thomas Edisons is the world missing
out on. If only 3% of the population is produced is inherently evil than
certainly these tactics are not the correct answer to the dilemma. Man must
begin to look outside of his conventional methods, and I purpose that the
conventional methods of population control are not the answer.
I believe that the answer lies at least
in part with education reform. According to Annenberg Learner only 37% of the
earth’s terrestrial footprint is inhabitable, and available for agriculture
(Annenberg 2000, p.1). That deems 63% of the earth’s land mass as unusable and
I believe that the earths sustainability lies in the recourses yet untapped in
those regions. Therefore, there is much more land available for utilization
than is accounted for. We must educate ourselves regarding those recourses and
discover methods of harnessing their bounties. This seems far more reasonable
to me than the easy answer of killing off people who are deemed without purpose
or value.
One example that comes to mind has
taken place in Israel in recent decades, in which Jewish people have renewed
their desolate homeland into a poetic gesture of agriculture wonder. It is
truly an oasis created out of education and vision, as recorded in the
following extract (Israel 2014 p.2).
Israel’s agriculture scientists have revolutionized the way
farmers irrigate and store crops, protect plants from drought and disease, keep
pests away naturally, and purify and reuse wastewater. The most advanced
irrigation and fertilization technologies coming out of Israel will be
presented at Agritech by Yuval Elazar, head of special training activities at
the Cooperation. Based in Rishon LeZion, CINADCO implements Israel’s
agricultural cooperation policies with more than 140 developing nations,
working through MASHAV, the Israeli agency for international development.
Multilingual training sessions in Israel and abroad cover water resources
management, irrigation and fertilization, sustainable market-oriented
agriculture, intensive livestock and dairy production.
There
are numerous examples of how Israel has shared its agricultural technology
breakthroughs practically since the founding of the state. Across the globe,
countries use Israeli methods for raising crops and farm animals.
Israel’s breakthroughs only scratch the
surface of what is truly possible for sustaining the earth’s future population,
but it is one great example, and an excellent start. For, they have literally
taken waste lands and converted them into viable recourses and renewed
ecosystems in just over 45 years.
My mind’s eye runs ramped with thoughts of how the earth can
sustain its human population growth.
To begin with, so much of the land we consider uninhabitable is desert
waste land. What if we took those kinds of regions and irrigated them with
reverses osmosis seawater and created aqueducts that supplied water for fish
farms which would then feed hydroponic vegetable gardens. We could recreate
land sprawl in wasted zones and create inhabitable living arrangements that the
inhabitants of third world nations could live in and manage.
We would create entire new communities
and install educational systems to teach the people to manage and care for
themselves and the land. We could
build huge community solar panels in the deserts that would feed power to all
in a sustainable way with very low impact on the ecosystem. In fact the
ecosystem and humanity and cohabitate better if they work together and when man
is mindful of the environment (Jonson Creek). We have to put aside a little
greed. Profits won’t seem automatic, but in time it will come, and the best pay
out of all... people can lead vibrant harmonious lives. Using methods such as vertical farming helps
save space on the ground by growing the crops vertically while drip irrigation
saves almost 90 percent of water. These methods are revolutionary and by them WE
CAN FEED THE WORLD if we would just care enough.
In addition to my above crazy scheme I
think we can generate power by creating off shore storms in the Polar Regions.
Here is my plan, I call it a storm in a can...pun intended, as in, we can put a
storm in a can. What we would do is build huge solar panels like 15 x15 miles
and place them in strategic cold locations over the sea. We would create high
floating walls around the panels and when the magnified heat reaches the cold
temperatures it would create a storm system inside of the circular pontoon.
Then by using floating combines that serve as generators as they catch the
storms power we can generate a lot of off shore power that way.
Finally, I can’t pretend to know it all,
obviously I don’t, and my ideas may seem simple and elementary, but I suggested
saving rain water and runoff in barrels for irrigation when I was a kid because
the sewer systems always overflowed and everyone was worried about conserving
water. I could see very early that
we should be recycling metal paper and plastic, but they said it couldn’t be
done. I thought about agriculture and I asked why don’t we plant gardens on the
roof or collect sunlight on our roof tops they said it didn’t make any sense
and that it would weigh too much. I
wonder why we can’t see that if we install cellular towers it makes a perfect
location for large wind mills as well, why not diversify right where we are it
seems to make sense to me.
I may not know much, but I know this, that the human will to survive is insatiable, and if we
gave members of the third world nations a chance to survive in relative peace
without hunger they would likely be willing to carry the irrigation water on
their backs from the ocean to desert to sustain life. Know this, it can be done
we just need a different value system and rewards need to be for those who
promote life not exploit it.
Works Cited
Annenberg (2000), Web Retrieved, 2014 http://www.learner.org/courses/envsci/unit/text.php?unit=7&secNum=2
Jared Walker's analysis of the future
During this class (Environmental Studies at Warner Pacific College) we have discussed many different aspects of the environment and I have learned
a lot about ways that we can help sustain the world we live in. I am sure that in
this class we have only scratched the surface of the ways we are able to
maintain our environment. In this paper I will discuss three ways in which we can
preserve our ecosystem. But before I do I would like to tell a short story
about myself when I was first in college. I was helping out with the Junior
High age group at my local church. Every other Sunday I would give a message to
the kids and hope for the best. The Junior High age can be difficult to please
so it was always nerve wrecking trying to get them to respond to the message presented
so that they might hopefully grow in their relationship with Christ. One
particular Sunday I was asked to give a word on the environment. I thought this
was an absolute waste of time. Why would I use valuable church time to talk
about why we need to environmentally friendly? It did not make sense to me. I
preached the message and the youth group was about as interested in the topic
as I was. I wish I could preach that message again; I would have a lot more to
say. God has given us a beautiful world and we are to be good stewards of
it.
The first way
we can help with conserving our environment is recycling. I do not just mean
throwing away your garbage in the right bins. I mean being less wasteful in
general! There are so many easy ways to do this. I always thought that this was
so insignificant but after researching and finding all the ways that we are
able to help in this area is very eye opening. Here are just a few examples.
Using less paper napkins could save over 1 billion pounds in landfills each
year! There are 63 million newspapers printed each day in the U.S. about 69%,
of them will be thrown away. If we recycling just the Sunday papers we would
save more than half a million trees every week. Another fun fact is that if all
households in the U.S. paid their bills online and received electronic
statements instead of paper, we would save 18.5 million trees every year, 2.2
billion tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, and 1.7 billion
pounds of solid waste. It is crazy how such little things could make such a
large impact. Like I said it is not just about using the proper trash bin, the
idea is much bigger! Being less wasteful can integrate into every part of our
lives. Transportation is one, think of all the ways we could make an impact,
using public transit, carpooling, consolidating our trips, these are all very
practical. The problem is they are also inconvenient. With the way our society
is today inconvenience is not tolerated. We want things fast. But if we looked
at being less wasteful as an opportunity rather than an inconvenience think of
all that we could accomplish!
The second
way we can make less of a negative impact is to buy local. Unlike recycling I
did not know how big of an impact this could make on our world. I have always
known that recycling was a good idea and we should do it, I just didn't
practice it myself. It was not until this class that I heard of how much of a
difference this could make. It is not that there is some magic in the way local
produce is grown. Our local farms create just as much pollution as others. But
when you consider the amount of pollution created to get your food from the
farm to your table that is where we can save. Whenever possible, buy from local
farmers or farmers' markets, supporting your local economy. This will reduce
the amount of greenhouse gas created when products are flown or trucked in. Not
only is buying local going to help out the environment it will also give you a
much healthier and chemical free body!
The last and
most important way in which we can help preserve the environment is education.
Just like the way we are all being educated by our professors we are to do the
same for others. If we do not have a positive influence on the upcoming
generations we will be even worse off than we are now. It is also just as
important to practice what we preach. One way to inspire a younger generation
is to lead by example. G.K. Chesterton said “Education is simply the soul of a
society as it passes from one generation to another” If we do not value the
environment with our actions we are not being effective. We must not only
educate on the importance of preserving the environment but show how important
it is by living it out ourselves.
Throughout
this class we have discussed many ways that we can help reduce our footprint on
our environment. Although I only mentioned three ways in this paper, there are
many more. I believe that many people think just as I did when I was asked to
preach that message to the youth ministry. They think that their personal actions
are not affecting others and that the problem with the environment is blown way
out of proportion so that the media has something to talk about. The fact is we
do play a part in this and we should be good stewards of our planet. I believe
that this is another way that God can teach us stewardship not only with the
environment. I believe God has given us many gifts and talents that we are to
be good stewards of. He has a plan for each of us that goes well beyond preserving
our world and it would be a shame to waste the plan he has for us. This class
has been very enlightening for me and I plan on not only sharing the
information I received but to live in out in my own life as well. I believe
this relates to all of us in our future careers because how we live and treat
the planet today will impact all we do in the future.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Andrew Curry's view on Natural Hazards
Environmental Studies, PHS 100
OD 1-37
Aug 12, 2014
Human society and the natural environment have become
increasingly vulnerable to natural hazards, such as earthquakes, hurricanes,
droughts, and flooding. These recent natural
hazards around the world have raised awareness of our vulnerability, challenged
our scientific understanding, and questioned our ability to predict and prepare
for such events. As a society we need to continue to strive to be more
conscious of the resources we are using and taking from our planet that could
be causing such devastating events.
One
such that I did not experience but was a part of was the 2010 Haitian
earthquake. This particular earthquake was a catastrophic 7.0 that took place
in the town of Léogâne west of the Haitian capitol of Port-au-Prince. Not only
was the main quake a 7.0 but, fifty two aftershocks of a 4.5 or greater were
also recorded. Over one hundred thousand died and a quarter of a million homes
or more were destroyed. Poverty was already wide spread due to several factors,
the earthquake only added more. Many countries responded to Haitian appeals for
aid. The United States responded by sending supplies and military personnel to
help relieve air traffic congestion. I worked hand in hand with these
controllers coordinating intelligence and efforts in order to help relief
efforts and get aircraft carrying much needed supplies to those in need. At a
peak of 600 flights per day these controllers were able to take the rate of
planes being diverted down to three, possibly saving ten of thousands of
lives. The super carrier USS Carl Vinson arrived
at maximum possible
speedon 15 January with 600,000 emergency
food rations, 100,000 ten-liter water containers, and an enhanced wing of 19
helicopters; 130,000 liters of drinking water were transferred to shore on the
first day. The US Navy listed its resources in the area as "17 ships, 48 helicopters and 12
fixed-wing aircraft" in addition to 10,000 sailors and Marines. The Navy had
conducted 336 air deliveries, delivered 32,400 US gallons of water, 532,440
bottles of water, 111,082 meals and 9,000 lb of medical supplies. UN and United States
formalized the coordination of relief efforts by signing an agreement giving
the US responsibility for the ports, airports and roads, and making the UN and
Haitian authorities responsible for law and order.
Though
I was not personally affected I was able to see the devastation and damage that
the earthquake had caused through pictures and reports sent back by military
air crews. One has to wonder if something within our society may have helped
push this earthquake into reality. Did offshore drilling upset the balance
under the sea floor? The effect could have come from an unbalance hundreds of
miles away or more. This is where the understanding of our environment comes
into play. A better understanding could change the way we operate in finding
resources. Because we do not know exactly how some of our processes of
acquiring resources effects our environment we need to strive to create better
ways to sustain our lives and how we operate.
Resources:
"PAGER – M 7.0 – HAITI REGION" United States Geological Survey, 12 January
2010
Lin, Rong-Gong; Allen, Sam (26 February 2011). "New
Zealand quake raises questions about L.A. buildings".Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 3 March 2011. Retrieved 27
February 2011
Columbia Journalism Review, "Two Years Later, Haitian Earthquake Death Toll in
Dispute", 20 January 2012
Medicine, Conflict and Survival Vol. 26, Issue 4, 2010, Mortality, crime and access to basic needs
before and after the Haiti earthquake
"USGS
Magnitude 7.0 – HAITI REGION".Archived from the original on
15 January 2010. Retrieved 13 January 2010.
"As Haiti mourns,
quake survivor found in rubble". New York Daily Times. 24 January 2010.
Retrieved 1 February 2011.
Eileen Shaw asks: IS THERE REALLY AN INCREASE OF NATURAL DISASTERS?
Environmental Studies/PHS 100A
Warner Pacific
August 7, 2014
While I was doing research for this
paper it crossed my mind how many near misses of disasters I have been in; this
lead to wondering if there was an increase in disasters or not. In 1979 I was
with the US Army stationed in Leavenworth, Kansas-right in the midst of what is
nicknamed “Tornado Alley”, 1980 saw me getting married in Lakewood, Washington
2 weeks after Mt. St. Helen’s blew, 1989 was a year that a 6.7 earthquake
happened in Los Angeles while I was living in San Diego, and just recently I
was living in Florida for 2 years 2012-2013 during hurricane season. Thankfully
I was not hurt in any of these, but just on the fringe where I got the effects
of each disaster, but not the trauma of it.
Disasters
are split into three different categories:
·
Geophysical-earthquakes,
volcanoes, rock falls, landslides & avalanches.
·
Climate
related-floods, storm surge & coastal flooding.
·
Meteorological-storms,
tropical cyclones, local storms, heat/cold waves, drought & wildfires.
“According
to the New England Journal of Medicine, the scale of disasters has expanded,
owing to increased rates of urbanization, deforestation, environmental
degradation and to intensifying climate variable, such as higher temperatures,
extreme precipitation and more violent wind/water storms”. (Steady
Increase in….. 2013, November 15). An article in Epic Disasters says, there is
not an increase in disasters, it’s basically that our monitoring equipment has
gotten better and more sensitive It pointed out in 1920 there were 500, 00
people living on the Florida coast whereas
now there is 13 million. In 1925 there were 625 casualties from a tornado
compared to the 22 deaths in 2005.
In 1931 there were 350 seismograph and now there is 8,000 stations
detecting earthquakes. And, of course the media and communications systems have
improved alongside
the detecting systems.
The Trumpet
reports, “The evidence of natural disasters has risen dramatically over the
past 20 years. To close observers of current events in relation to both History
and Bible prophecy, this is no mere coincidence. What muddies the water as soon as Bible prophecy is
mentioned in relation to natural disasters is the fact that there is a literal
abundance of kooks, screwballs and fanatics out there who instantly seize on
the latest catastrophe to declare “the end is nigh” (Fraser, R. 2010, March 3).
Bible prophecies speak of the world reaching a time when catastrophic events
that were once delayed would be fulfilled for a greater purpose. The events
were predestined to allow a greater purpose to happen. It is all just a matter
of perception then?
Image below courtesy
of EM-DAT International Disaster Database, Center for Research on Epidemiology
of Disasters, University of Louvain.
References
Epic Disasters: The World's Worst Disasters. (2009, January
1). Retrieved from
http://www.epicdisasters.com/index.php/site/comments/has_there_been_an_increase_in_the_number_of_natural_disasters/
Fraser, R. (2010, March 3). Why Have Natural Disasters
Increased? Retrieved from
http://www.thetrumpet.com/article/7020.28734.0.0/world/environment/why-have-natural-disasters-increased
Steady Increase in Climate Related Natural Disasters. (2013,
November 15). Retrieved from
http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-blogs/climatechange/steady-increase-in-climate-rel/19974069
Scott Buser's view on: "Society’s Vulnerabilities to Hazards"
August
11, 2014
I completed a quiz on line, “My foot Print”, and was surprised to
find that we would need 5.63 planet earths to survive living the way that I
currently am using my ecological behaviors. Although I rated low on carbon use,
70.3, compared to the country average of 91.4, I rated high in my food foot
print. My foot prints on how I live; my home rated average to the country yet
my use of goods, and services rated high.
It is interesting to
see how one person can affect our environment. If we think about the effects us
as humans have on the planet we don’t have long before it’s too late for
reversing our effect. The current issues
we are facing today are global warning, ozone depletion, pollution, loss of
natural resource, nuclear problems, loss of biodiversity, energy problems, and
waste management.
The impact on our
environment is at a stage of no return. We can only hope that with new
inventions to curb the damage, and new behaviors to change our effect on the
environment, that we can survive longer.
We hear in the news
of the hillsides that collapse; killing people who chose to live next to
something so beautiful. It is however, those same people that change to
hillsides to meet their own needs of comfort, energy and human perspective of
beauty. The rivers are full of human pollution; discarded medications, human
waste, even fuels taken from other parts of the land that are flushed down the
street sewers.
The ozone that
surrounds our planet which protects us from the suns radiation is slowly
melting away because of our greed to use manmade chemicals. We know that
deodorant sprays are harmful, so why do we still make them, and use them? Our
bodies thrive, and have to have water to survive. Now we’re buying water from a
plastic bottle because the water pumped to your home might now be good for you.
We have no new source of water, it’s the same water we drink that we see fall
from the sky, come into our toilet and rivers.
In the 1970’s we
began realizing that we are being destructive to mother earth; our living room.
Is it too late?
I think we have
slowed the impact of our behaviors, but I think we also have a long ways to go.
None of our four legged relatives that were killed by our footprint well never is
coming back. It’s not too late to save future impacts. We have stronger laws
protecting our environment. We are providing more education of the impact
pollution is having on nature. We have organizations like the bureau of land
management that oversees how we use the land we live on. I hope in the near
future we find alternatives to energy and heal the environment before nature
calls it quit time for humans.
I think more
education, involvement for people, smarter use of nature and less fossil fuel
will help improve our impact on the environment. It scares me to think my
children’s children won’t have the life they deserve, because we didn’t take
care of what the creator gave us.
Mother earth!
Reference
My Foot
Print, retrieved from http://www.myfootprint.org/
Current
Environment Issues (2010) retrieved from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/current-environmental-issues.html
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Deborah Levi: Environmental Regulation and Conservation of Wildlife
Warner Pacific
College
August 11, 2014
Environmental
Regulation and Conservation of Wildlife
Enacting
environmental policy through environmental regulation is an imperative exploit
to protect biodiversity, implement conservation and preservation and uphold ethical
obligations. “The need to regulate international trade in wildlife has been
seen as an important component of biodiversity policy and practice for over 25
years, with regulations operating at various levels” (Oldfield, 2003, p. xvii).
In this paper, I will discuss my views on the role of environmental regulation
in the conservation of wildlife.
“Biodiversity
at all levels is being lost to human impact, most irretrievably in the
extinction of species” (Withgott & Laposata, 2014, p. 281). As human
population grows and by our increasing individual consumption of resources, the
extirpation (Withgott & Laposata, 2014) of wildlife species continues at
accelerated rates. Through habitat loss, overharvesting and climate change
(Withgott & Laposata, 2014) species populations are declining rapidly.
Regulation of human impact is crucial for biodiversity to flourish. To combat
these negative factors governments have “passed laws, signed treaties, and
strengthened anti-poaching efforts” (p. 285).
Laws,
treaties and acts have been implemented to help aid in conserving and
protecting of wildlife. CITES (the Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is the most well-known and has the
most members among the conservation agreements. CITES is an international
agreement adhered to by countries voluntarily. CITES was formed because the
trade in wildlife crosses borders between countries and in efforts to regulate
it, requires international cooperation (CITES, 2014). “Its aim is to ensure
that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not
threaten their survival” (CITES, 2014). The implementation of such efforts has
“helped African nations gain economic benefits from ecotourism with their
wildlife preserves” (Withgott & Laposata, 2014, p. 297).
As the
government tackles the issue through the laws and system, the corrupt and illicit
trade of animals is underway and thriving. Poaching is a highly political and
detrimental crime focused on the population of African Elephants. The ivory
tusks of an elephant have become a high commodity in the black market and the
illegal distribution and selling are central contributors to transnational
organized crime. Such crime drives and is facilitated by the pervasive erosion
of governance structures through corruption and the breakdown in the rule of
law (WWF, 2014). Regulations can be disadvantageous in this situation because
the rules and laws exacerbate the value of the ivory and create an illicit
profitable commodity for the criminally motivated.
Added to
the regulatory obligations, humans have an ethical obligation to protect and
conserve our wildlife. As the most dominant and powerful species on the planet,
humans have an obligation to view our wildlife as a distinct and important
aspect of resource and value. As worldviews change, so must our view of
conservation and value of our wildlife to reflect the notion that other species
have rights and are biologically important to our planet and our existence. As
the need for regulatory action persists and widens, the ethical views of
society will focus on ecofriendly measures and shape conservation policies. ”The management and use of wild animals
generates ethical disagreements and dilemmas in which human needs, preferences,
and interests, concern for individual animal welfare, and the value of
biodiversity, ecosystems, and wild nature are part of the discussion. The way
in which these different values are prioritized will determine policy” (Gamborg
et al., 2012).
Environmental regulation is crucial
to conserving and protecting the world’s wildlife. But more critical is the upholding
of these regulations by humans. Dr. Dame Daphne Sheldrick, conservationist and
owner of the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust explains it best:
Saving wildlife and wilderness is the responsibility of all thinking
people. Greed and personal gain must not be permitted to decimate, despoil and
destroy the earth’s irreplaceable treasure for its existence is essential to
the human spirit and the well-being of the earth as a whole. All life has just
one home — the earth — and we as the dominant species must take care of it.
–Dr. Dame Daphne Sheldrick, Kenyan author and conservationist
References
CITES [website]
(2014). What is CITES?. Retrieved from: http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.php. August 6, 2014
Gamborg, C., Palmer, C. & Sandoe, P. (2012) Ethics of Wildlife Management and
Conservation: What Should We Try to
Protect? Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):8 Retrieved from: http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/ethics-of-wildlife-management-and- conservation-what-80060473. August 6, 2014
Oldfield, S. (Ed.).
(2003). The trade in wildlife: Regulation
for conservation. Sterling, Virginia: Earthscan.
ISBN: 1 85383 954 X
Withgott, J., & Laposata, M. (2014). Environment: the science behind the stories
(5th Ed.). New York, NY.
Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
WWF [website]. African elephants. Retrieved from: http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/ August
6, 2014
How Environmental Regulation is Vital for the Economic Development of the United States by Tanya Marie Cope
Environmental Studies
Warner
Pacific College
August
10, 2014
Contrary to
‘common knowledge’, environmental regulation is vital for the economic
development of the United States. Rick Melberth, from the Center for Effective
Government, says that studies and reports from economists, business
strategists, Office of Management and Budget, Congressional Research Service,
and the Clean Air Council illustrate that “industry messaging on the
regulations is misleading and that the benefits of key public protections far
outweigh their costs to business.” (2011). Studies show that environmental
regulation in fact, does not harm the economy, but rather aids it, spurring
innovation and new sectors growth.
Studying the
economic impact of environmental regulations is difficult given the complexity
of both the environment and the economy. Stephen Meyer (1995), Professor of
Political Science at MIT, notes that nation level studies have a variety of
methodological issues as we cannot control for “coincidental political,
economic, technological, and social changes” (p. 2). Meyer goes on to explain
that state studies, however, control for many of the variables in national
studies. Thus Meyer’s hypothesis that environmental regulation does not
negatively impact the economy focuses on state economies with and without
strong environmental regulations. His findings support that while specific
environmental regulations do have real effects on individual businesses, “these
effects are limited in scope and duration and are fewer in number than popular
political mythology allows. They do not rise above the background noise of
state economies either singly or cumulatively” (p. 15).
We do have
tangible evidence of national environmental regulation and its impacts on a
national economy as well. Focusing on the Clean Air Act (CAA) we can see the
very real implications of environmental regulation on the economy. The CAA was
originally passed in 1963 and was a research program but major regulatory
amendments were passed in 1970, 1977, and 1990. The act was created to control
air pollution nationally and throughout the years has been amended to focus on
emissions from various sources and different chemicals as well as ozone
protection. A peer-reviewed 2011 EPA report looking at the results of the CAA
from 1990 to 2020 found the “central benefits estimate exceeds costs by a
factor of more than 30 to 1” (2011). The CAA has been found to protect from
pollution-related health problems and premature death, thereby improving the
health and productivity of the U.S. workforce. The CAA has been a good
investment as well showing that the benefits exceed costs on average by a factor
of 30 to 1. With 40 years of experience we can reasonably predict that cleaner
air and a healthy economy go together and are not exclusive of one another. We
also see that the CAA has encouraged technology investments that have put
unemployed or under-employed Americans to work. And lastly, environmental
technology and services has grown exponentially giving the United States a head
start in new industries. (2011)
We have
demonstrated that with thoughtful planning paired with a thorough understanding
of the intricacies between our actions and the environmental consequences, we
can create environmental regulation that does helps out economy.
References
Melberth,
R., (2011). Business economists: Current regulatory environment good for
business and economy. Center for
Effective Government. Retrieved from http://www.foreffectivegov.org/node/11832
Meyer,
S., (1995) The Economic Impact of Environmental Regulation. Journal of Environmental Law and Practice. Retrieved
from http://crywolfproject.org/evidence/economic-impact-environmental-regulation
Environmental
Protection Agency. (2011). The benefits and costs of the Clean Air Act from
1990 to 2020: Summary Report. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/summaryreport.pdf
Friday, August 8, 2014
Dana Nault: Scientific Method and Western Culture
Environmental Studies
Warner Pacific College
August 7, 2014
When one mentions ‘western culture’ our mind often associates it to mean western civilization. But the
term ‘culture’ really refers to the legacy of social norms, values,
customs, and beliefs which set it apart from other societies. So the term western culture is really
meant to indicate the parts of the world populaces that are considered as
advanced societies, this
is because its ideas and values encourage the improvement and support of developed
civilization. The
western culture is essentially a body of knowledge that is derived from reason,
and it is not limited to the continent of North America. In fact it applies to all populations whose
histories have been shaped by European immigration or settlement.
These roots have their basis in ancient
Greece; the Roman Empire then built on this, and it was further evolved by a
mixture of Germanic, Slavic and Celtic cultures. These principles spread to the new world through generations
of explorers and missionaries. Today, the mixture of all of these viewpoints
has formed what is now known as the modern western culture.
Science
is now and has always been a core value of western culture, which has been
advancing dramatically in the past decade. Things our children and grand-children take for granted
today were not even in our dreams during our childhood. Cable TV, Cell phones, computers,
internet… these items have changed the way we live our lives. Each advancements builds on the last,
and progress moves faster as time moves on. Think of the progress of communications from the pony
express to the telegraph, party line, individual land line, to today’s cellular
technology. Or in the case of transportation;
from the wheeled cart drawn by a horse, to steam and then gasoline powered cart,
motorized vehicles and finally to today’s eco vehicles. The scientific method has played a
fundamental role in all of these developments, which have in turn assisted in
the advancement of western culture.
The
scientific method is the formalized version of the process anyone might use to
develop an idea, answer a question or troubleshoot an issue. We naturally want to find out “what
if”, and our natural manner of testing our ideas through observation is the
basis of this formal process. We
are fortunate that our society not only encourages this scientific
inquisitiveness, it urges us to push the limits.
The
accumulation of western cultures advances has been extraordinary to our quality
of life, but many have caused numerous dilemmas for our environment. Because of this we must now look to our
accrued knowledge for the solutions. Now we have the opportunity for further innovations in a new direction,
one that preserves our environment rather that depleting it.
With
all of this in mind, the question one must really ask is not how western
culture has been influenced by the scientific method, but would either exist
without the other. History has
shown that it is a mutually beneficial affiliation.
References
Makarevicius, D. A. (n.d.). Western Culture.
Retrieved from Western Culture - Learning Materials for Students.
What is Western
Culture? (2009). Retrieved from
Western Culture Knowledge Center:
http://www.westerncultureglobal.org/what-is-western-culture.html
Withgott, J., &
Laposata, M. (2014). Environment the Science Behind the Stories (5th
edition ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)