The Pros and Cons of Population Control
Floyd Wills
Environmental Studies
PHS 100A
Professor David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 9, 2011
“The hungry world cannot be fed until and unless the growth of its resources and the growth of its population come into balance. Each man and woman- and each nation- must make a decision of conscience and policy in the face of this great problem.” –Lyndon B. Johnson
For the past several thousand years the world population has grown at an incredibly fast rate. A recent estimate on the About.com Geography website (2011), puts the current total to around 6,852,472, 823. When I was born in 1971, the total world population was around 3.7 billion people. Since that time, the population has almost doubled!
If we look beyond the falsities of the neoclassical economic views of our planet, we can see that we live in a world that does not have an infinite amount of resources for us to haphazardly exploit. With our population increasing at a dizzying rate, what if anything can we do to achieve the balance that Lyndon Johnson spoke about? Some believe the answer to this question is population control. In this essay, I will explore the pros and cons of population control and hopefully provide a balanced view on the subject. Before I begin, let me define the term “Population Control.” According to TheFreeDictionary.com, it is defined as: A government program to limit or slow population growth, as by birth control education, the wide availability of contraceptives, and economic incentives.
The issue of population control is not new. A number of ancient philosophers and writers shed light on this issue before the birth of Christ. In about 300 BC an Indian philosopher named Kautilya, considered population as a source of political, economic, and military strength. In ancient Greece, Plato and Aristotle believed the best population size for Greek city states should be small enough to provide efficient administration, but large enough to defend themselves against their enemies.
In the 1960’s and 70’s there was a large population control movement taking place. Paul R. Ehrlich, a US biologist and environmentalist, published the book, “The Population Bomb,” in 1968, advocating population control policies.
Advocates of population control site some of these benefits:
• In the online article by Katherine Mieszkowski, “Do we need population control?”(2008), Paul Ehrlich says that controlling population will help keep more children alive once they are born. According to The World Food Bank, there are around 1.4 billion people living on less than $1.25 a day. Many millions of children die of malnutrition.
• Birth control education and the availability of contraceptives can help control population. According to The CDC website, half of all pregnancies in the US are unplanned.
• In the article by Niki Fears titled, “New study suggests benefits of population control to reduce carbon emissions,” a recent study released from the London school of economics suggests that population control could help reduce the effects of carbon emission.
• Overpopulation has been blamed for a variety of issues such as: increased poverty, environmental depletion, high unemployment, famine, and even genocide.
Those in opposition of population control point out these cons:
• In his book, “Population Control,” Steven Mosher, opposes it based on the belief that each person has a unique value, more people mean more for all of us- more economic production, more potential for creative and scientific achievement.
• In The Washington Times article, “Taking on the overpopulation myth,” (2008), Steven Mosher talks about how population control could lead to human rights abuses by governments eager to meet their population reduction goals. In China for example, unauthorized births are punished by fines. There have even been allegations of illegal forced abortions and sterilizations.
• According to Ehrlich as quoted in Mieszkowki’s (2008) article, reducing the size of the population does not address the subject of consumerism. “If we cut the population in half over the next 50 years by any means, and we double each person’s consumption, we are exactly back to where we are now”. (p.1)
Both the supporters and opponents of the population control issue have some valid points. I believe our answer does not lie on one side or the other, but more likely somewhere in the middle. Learning to develop alternative sources of energy, educating people on how to live a “greener life,” preserving specific areas of wildlife, and providing education on contraceptives is a starting point. Our creator made us stewards over this planet, and it is our responsibility to take good care of it. We owe it to our children and the future generations.
“Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect. –Chief Seattle, 1854.
References
Fears, N. New study suggests benefits of population control to reduce carbon emissions. Retrieved June 7, 2011 from http://www.examiner.com/environmental-news-in-national/new-study-
Mieszkowski, K. (2008). Do we need population control?
Retrieved June 7, 2011 from http://www.salon.com/news/environment/feature/2008/09/17populati
Mosher, S. (2008).Taking on the overpopulation myth
Retrieved June 7, 2011 from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/27/taking-on-the-ove
Rosenberg, M. (2011). Current World Population
Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://geography.about.com/od/obtainpopulationdata/a/worldpopulation.htm
Friday, June 10, 2011
Assessing Natural Resources and Environmental Regulations by Leanne Clark
Assessing Natural Resources and
The Impact of Environmental Regulations
Leanne Clark
EN120A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 9, 2011
As a society, the depletion of our natural resources and pollution of our environment has become an issue of great concern in the past few decades, more than ever before. From the kitchen table to government committees, we are paying closer attention to how we can take care of the earth and our lives through prudent use of our natural resources.
Effective assessment of our natural resources is the cornerstone of forming any movement to protect them. Natural Resources, as defined by the United States Geological Survey, are “water, minerals, coal, oil, gas, living things, and the land itself” (Assessing Our Natural Resources, 2005).
Through the years, technology has made great strides in our ability to observe and measure our natural resources, both their depletion and how effective programs are in preserving them. Technology such as the Geographic Information System provides an invaluable tool with which scientist can map, track and predict the depletion and restoration of our natural resources.
However, some assessments are still done in the most rudimentary fashion. For the purpose of this paper let us examine the counting of salmon, and other fish in the salmon family, along the rivers in our region. The decline and restoration of our salmon population has been a long standing environmental concern and effective assessment of this population is key. This assessment however, at its origin, is not done by computers, but rather by human hand.
At 8 dams located throughout the region (Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day, McNary,
Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite), fish ladders are present. As the fish move through these ladders a single person, located in a viewing room, counts the types of salmon family fish which come through each day (Building Strong, 2011)
From this data, the US Army Corps of Engineers then uses mathematical formulas, and of course computers to track our salmon population. This also allows us, as a society, to assess the effectiveness of current programs to preserve the salmon and what additional steps may need to be taken.
Looking at another area of environmental concern, let us examine the question of how environmental regulations impact our cultural and lifestyles. To do so, it would be wise to start with the work done through the US government’s Environmental Protection Agency.
The Environmental Protection Agency provides environmental regulations on a federal level. It is fair to say that on a large scale, these regulations improve the quality of our lives. By providing laws which hold industry and agriculture accountable for their impact on our most crucial environmental areas, air and water, the EPA has consistently made our country a better place to live.
As an example let us examine The Clean Air Act, which started as The Air Pollution Control Act of 1955. This first version established funds for the United States government to research air pollution. In 1963 The Clean Air Act was established as our government’s first voyage into air pollution control. In 1967 the Air Quality Act was enacted to expand federal activities in this area.
The original Clean Air Act has received many amendments over the years. These amendments, as well as the base act, have established standards and practices in our country to monitor pollutant heavy industry and consumer use. A great example is the requirements for control of motor vehicle emissions in the 1970 act. In the 1990 amendments, a program was established to phase out the use of chemicals that deplete the ozone layer. (History of the Clean Air Act, 2010).
Of course, these regulation do cost consumers more in the way of taxes, fees and end product consumer prices, in my opinion, having cleaner air to breath is invaluable.
It is clear that as a society, the protection of our natural resources is crucial. This protection begins at the basic level of assessment, or understanding of what we have and where the problem areas exist. From this data, our country, and hopefully all world governments, can work to regulate and manage our resources in an effective manner.
References
Assessing Our Natural Resources. (2005, July 20). Retrieved June 7, 2011, from USGS science for a
changing world: http://www.usgs.gov/themes/factsheet/094-99/index.html
Building Strong. (2011, June 6). Retrieved June 6, 2011, from US Army Corps of Engineers:
http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/environment/fishdata.asp
History of the Clean Air Act. (2010, November 16). Retrieved June 6, 2011, from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency: www.//www.epa.gov/air/caa/caa_history.html
The Impact of Environmental Regulations
Leanne Clark
EN120A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 9, 2011
As a society, the depletion of our natural resources and pollution of our environment has become an issue of great concern in the past few decades, more than ever before. From the kitchen table to government committees, we are paying closer attention to how we can take care of the earth and our lives through prudent use of our natural resources.
Effective assessment of our natural resources is the cornerstone of forming any movement to protect them. Natural Resources, as defined by the United States Geological Survey, are “water, minerals, coal, oil, gas, living things, and the land itself” (Assessing Our Natural Resources, 2005).
Through the years, technology has made great strides in our ability to observe and measure our natural resources, both their depletion and how effective programs are in preserving them. Technology such as the Geographic Information System provides an invaluable tool with which scientist can map, track and predict the depletion and restoration of our natural resources.
However, some assessments are still done in the most rudimentary fashion. For the purpose of this paper let us examine the counting of salmon, and other fish in the salmon family, along the rivers in our region. The decline and restoration of our salmon population has been a long standing environmental concern and effective assessment of this population is key. This assessment however, at its origin, is not done by computers, but rather by human hand.
At 8 dams located throughout the region (Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day, McNary,
Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite), fish ladders are present. As the fish move through these ladders a single person, located in a viewing room, counts the types of salmon family fish which come through each day (Building Strong, 2011)
From this data, the US Army Corps of Engineers then uses mathematical formulas, and of course computers to track our salmon population. This also allows us, as a society, to assess the effectiveness of current programs to preserve the salmon and what additional steps may need to be taken.
Looking at another area of environmental concern, let us examine the question of how environmental regulations impact our cultural and lifestyles. To do so, it would be wise to start with the work done through the US government’s Environmental Protection Agency.
The Environmental Protection Agency provides environmental regulations on a federal level. It is fair to say that on a large scale, these regulations improve the quality of our lives. By providing laws which hold industry and agriculture accountable for their impact on our most crucial environmental areas, air and water, the EPA has consistently made our country a better place to live.
As an example let us examine The Clean Air Act, which started as The Air Pollution Control Act of 1955. This first version established funds for the United States government to research air pollution. In 1963 The Clean Air Act was established as our government’s first voyage into air pollution control. In 1967 the Air Quality Act was enacted to expand federal activities in this area.
The original Clean Air Act has received many amendments over the years. These amendments, as well as the base act, have established standards and practices in our country to monitor pollutant heavy industry and consumer use. A great example is the requirements for control of motor vehicle emissions in the 1970 act. In the 1990 amendments, a program was established to phase out the use of chemicals that deplete the ozone layer. (History of the Clean Air Act, 2010).
Of course, these regulation do cost consumers more in the way of taxes, fees and end product consumer prices, in my opinion, having cleaner air to breath is invaluable.
It is clear that as a society, the protection of our natural resources is crucial. This protection begins at the basic level of assessment, or understanding of what we have and where the problem areas exist. From this data, our country, and hopefully all world governments, can work to regulate and manage our resources in an effective manner.
References
Assessing Our Natural Resources. (2005, July 20). Retrieved June 7, 2011, from USGS science for a
changing world: http://www.usgs.gov/themes/factsheet/094-99/index.html
Building Strong. (2011, June 6). Retrieved June 6, 2011, from US Army Corps of Engineers:
http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/environment/fishdata.asp
History of the Clean Air Act. (2010, November 16). Retrieved June 6, 2011, from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency: www.//www.epa.gov/air/caa/caa_history.html
Paper or Plastic? by Angela Avey
Paper or Plastic? Assessing our resources and changing our culture.
Angela Avey
PHS 100A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 9, 2011
Paper or Plastic? Assessing our resources and changing our culture.
The ability to assess our natural resources is necessary for many reasons. First and foremost, the assessment can tell us how quickly we are using, damaging or producing God’s gift of priceless natural resources. The methods which can be used to measure our resources come in many different forms. After the disastrous oil spill last year in the Gulf of Mexico, dollar amounts were used to assess the damage that had been done to the immediate ecosystem and the resulting necessary cleanup efforts. But many times, as demonstrated in our first workshop, we use measurements to assess just how clean our air and water is, or how fertile the soil or dense the grow trees in the forest. Knowing how much we can use and how much we have left will enable us to take steps towards keeping our consumption of resources at a renewable level.
In researching my topic for this paper, I was overwhelmed by the amount of trees and oil we use each year to produce paper and plastic bags for use in the United States alone. I imagine the world total would be staggering. In the U.S., 14 million trees and 12 million barrels of oil are used to create bags. That is the figure for raw materials only and there are many more hazardous and unnatural components which are necessary to turn the raw materials in usable products. For instance, to create paper bags, trees must be harvested, and then moved by logging trucks or helicopters to a production factory. The trees must then be dried for up to three years in order to have the correct moisture level for manufacturing. Once they are dry, they must then be shaved of bark, chopped into pieces and mulched. This requires the use of heavy machinery which in turn uses precious fossil fuels and electricity. Sulfurous acid and limestone is then added to the mulch and the mixture is essentially cooked to the proper consistency. Bleach is another chemical which is used in the production of paper. As you can see, the result is something that we use each and every day, but at what cost?
It’s true, plastic bags take less electricity to produce than paper bags, but they are far worse for the environment once made. Not a day goes by that one cannot find a discarded plastic bag caught in a tree or wadded into a ball in a gutter. In some areas of the world, paper bags wash up on beaches like driftwood and countless numbers of marine life are killed by becoming entangled in or consuming the plastic. It’s clear that something must be done to lessen the use of these items.
Regulations for banning the use of plastic bags are not a new idea. In 2007, San Francisco became the first major U.S. city to ban their use. Oregon is also mulling over a possible statewide ban as well, which I support. In fact, most people I know support the ban, but surprisingly there are many folks who do not support it. I know of an elderly neighbor who was furious that the bags were eliminated from our neighborhood Fred Meyer store because she walks the 12 blocks from our street to the store and back and it is difficult for her to balance heavy groceries in a paper bag while walking the distance home. I can understand this (and in fact, purchased 4 new reusable bags for her as a gift), but she is not alone in her unhappiness. The largest proponent of the ban is led by the plastic bag manufacturers, such as Hilex Poly. They have led vigorous campaigns against the state of Oregon in its attempt to bring the issue to legislators. The debate is sure to rage on as time passes and the inevitable questions are asked.
In all, it is our jobs as consumers and inhabitants of this great planet to make the right decision for our environment. This is not easy for all, but our culture must change from a nation of convenience to that of a sustainable and thoughtful society. It may not be the most convenient thing to carry your cloth bags to the store with you, but what it will do for our world will be measured in the air we breathe, the oceans we swim in and the forests we hike.
References
Cernansky, R. (2010, Aug. 17). How many cities have a ban on plastic bags? PlanetGreen.com Retrieved from http://planetgreen.discovery.com/work-connect/how-many-cities-have-a-ban-on-plastic-bags.html?print=true
Har, J. (2011, June 1). Oregon bill to ban plastic bags may live; situation is ‘fluid’. The Oregonian
Pirraglian, W. (2009, March 12). Paper vs. plastic – which is better? Eco-wisdom.com Retrieved from http://www.eco-wisdom.com/articles/lifestyle/paper-vs-plastic-which-is-better_printer.html
Thompson, A. (2007, May 7). Paper or plastic – what’s the greener choice? Msnbc.com Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18538484/ns/nightly_news/t/paper-or-plastic-whats-greener-choice/
Angela Avey
PHS 100A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 9, 2011
Paper or Plastic? Assessing our resources and changing our culture.
The ability to assess our natural resources is necessary for many reasons. First and foremost, the assessment can tell us how quickly we are using, damaging or producing God’s gift of priceless natural resources. The methods which can be used to measure our resources come in many different forms. After the disastrous oil spill last year in the Gulf of Mexico, dollar amounts were used to assess the damage that had been done to the immediate ecosystem and the resulting necessary cleanup efforts. But many times, as demonstrated in our first workshop, we use measurements to assess just how clean our air and water is, or how fertile the soil or dense the grow trees in the forest. Knowing how much we can use and how much we have left will enable us to take steps towards keeping our consumption of resources at a renewable level.
In researching my topic for this paper, I was overwhelmed by the amount of trees and oil we use each year to produce paper and plastic bags for use in the United States alone. I imagine the world total would be staggering. In the U.S., 14 million trees and 12 million barrels of oil are used to create bags. That is the figure for raw materials only and there are many more hazardous and unnatural components which are necessary to turn the raw materials in usable products. For instance, to create paper bags, trees must be harvested, and then moved by logging trucks or helicopters to a production factory. The trees must then be dried for up to three years in order to have the correct moisture level for manufacturing. Once they are dry, they must then be shaved of bark, chopped into pieces and mulched. This requires the use of heavy machinery which in turn uses precious fossil fuels and electricity. Sulfurous acid and limestone is then added to the mulch and the mixture is essentially cooked to the proper consistency. Bleach is another chemical which is used in the production of paper. As you can see, the result is something that we use each and every day, but at what cost?
It’s true, plastic bags take less electricity to produce than paper bags, but they are far worse for the environment once made. Not a day goes by that one cannot find a discarded plastic bag caught in a tree or wadded into a ball in a gutter. In some areas of the world, paper bags wash up on beaches like driftwood and countless numbers of marine life are killed by becoming entangled in or consuming the plastic. It’s clear that something must be done to lessen the use of these items.
Regulations for banning the use of plastic bags are not a new idea. In 2007, San Francisco became the first major U.S. city to ban their use. Oregon is also mulling over a possible statewide ban as well, which I support. In fact, most people I know support the ban, but surprisingly there are many folks who do not support it. I know of an elderly neighbor who was furious that the bags were eliminated from our neighborhood Fred Meyer store because she walks the 12 blocks from our street to the store and back and it is difficult for her to balance heavy groceries in a paper bag while walking the distance home. I can understand this (and in fact, purchased 4 new reusable bags for her as a gift), but she is not alone in her unhappiness. The largest proponent of the ban is led by the plastic bag manufacturers, such as Hilex Poly. They have led vigorous campaigns against the state of Oregon in its attempt to bring the issue to legislators. The debate is sure to rage on as time passes and the inevitable questions are asked.
In all, it is our jobs as consumers and inhabitants of this great planet to make the right decision for our environment. This is not easy for all, but our culture must change from a nation of convenience to that of a sustainable and thoughtful society. It may not be the most convenient thing to carry your cloth bags to the store with you, but what it will do for our world will be measured in the air we breathe, the oceans we swim in and the forests we hike.
References
Cernansky, R. (2010, Aug. 17). How many cities have a ban on plastic bags? PlanetGreen.com Retrieved from http://planetgreen.discovery.com/work-connect/how-many-cities-have-a-ban-on-plastic-bags.html?print=true
Har, J. (2011, June 1). Oregon bill to ban plastic bags may live; situation is ‘fluid’. The Oregonian
Pirraglian, W. (2009, March 12). Paper vs. plastic – which is better? Eco-wisdom.com Retrieved from http://www.eco-wisdom.com/articles/lifestyle/paper-vs-plastic-which-is-better_printer.html
Thompson, A. (2007, May 7). Paper or plastic – what’s the greener choice? Msnbc.com Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18538484/ns/nightly_news/t/paper-or-plastic-whats-greener-choice/
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Environmental Regulations and Hydraulic Fracturing by Alan Schill
Environmental Regulations and Hydraulic Fracturing
Alan Schill
PS 100A Environmental Studies
David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 7, 2011
Environmental Regulations and Hydraulic Fracturing:
In the case of Hydraulic Fracturing, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is one of the government agencies given the authority to monitor and regulate the waste disposal of flowback and the injection of fracturing chemicals and fluids used in the process. Although there are also state regulations on hydraulic fracturing and the production of fossil fuels, the federal government is the main authority (EPA, 2010).
The disposal of the flowback into United States surface waters is also regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program (Water: Hydraulic Fracturing, 2010). There are several statutes that can be leveraged to protect the quality of water; however, the EPA relies on the Safe Drinking Water Act as its central authority to regulate (EPA, 2010).
Hydraulic Fracturing, commonly referred to as fracking, is a proven technological advancement used by gas and oil companies to safely obtain natural gas and oil from deep shale formations below the Earth’s surface. This discovery may potentially reduce our reliance dramatically on foreign imports while greatly reducing our national carbon footprint (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
The process of Hydraulic Fracturing creates fractures in formations underground that allow natural gas and oil to flow. The process uses high pressure, to pump water, sand, and other additives into the shale formations to cause fractures to be created. Typically, in modern Hydraulic Fracturing, the fluid used is 98% water and sand, with small amounts of special-purpose additives (Chesapeake Energy, 2011). This process forces the fractures to open which allows the natural gas and oil to be collected at the water’s surface.
Scientists have known for many years that natural gas and oil deposits were released from deep shale formations; however, until recently they have always thought we could not recover the deposits. Now, because of fracking, combined with sophisticated horizontal drilling, large amounts of natural gas and oil deposits are safely being produced from across the United States (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
Fracking has become a key element of natural gas and oil development throughout the United States and the remainder of the world. The process has been used by the natural gas and oil industry since the 1940’s. According to one article the process of hydraulic fracturing is used in almost every natural gas wells that are drilled in the United States. The process of fracking, when properly conducted, is a highly engineered, controlled, sophisticated and safe procedure (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
According to the textbook when comparing the costs of environmental regulations to the benefits, the benefits far outweigh the financial impact. One EPA study on clean air found the benefits to be 6-10 times greater than the cost of complying with the regulations. We as consumers saved in hospitalization cost reductions and emergency room visits, premature deaths, along with less sick days at work, all combined accounted for an estimated $118-177 billion in financial savings (Withgott & Brennan, 2010, p. 180).
Today’s environmental policy is focused on environmental sustainability and global warming, or climate change. In many of its studies the EPA consults scientists, specialists, and local officials to determine the best way and most cost effective way, to change or regulate environmental processes. The command-and-control policy used by the EPA is oftentimes criticized for making changes costly and ineffective. However, the policy mandates solutions to the problems; thus, it allows the private marketplace to compete, resulting in better solutions at a lower cost (Withgott & Brennan, 2010, p. 178). Their goal is to keep the air we breathe and the water we drink, along with other natural resources in harmony.
Many times, the studies conducted by the EPA determine the health benefits alone are a savings to us, not to mention we have a cleaner environment, fresh air and clean water. We all need to take responsibility for a cleaner environment. It is important that corporations are responsible with their carbon footprint and sustainability measures; nevertheless, it is important that all citizens do their part. Simple things like recycling and picking up trash are only a small part of what we can do on a more global scale to make an impact.
References
Chesapeake Energy (2011). Hydraulic fracturing: Fact sheet, Retrieved June 04, 2011, from
http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Regulation of hydraulic fracturing by
the Office of Water, Retrieved June 04, 2011, from http://water.epa.gov.
Withgott, J. & Brennan, S. (2010). Environment: The Science Behind the Stories (4th ed.).
New York. Pearson Benjamin Cummings. ISBN: 13: 978-0-321-71534—0.
Alan Schill
PS 100A Environmental Studies
David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 7, 2011
Environmental Regulations and Hydraulic Fracturing:
In the case of Hydraulic Fracturing, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is one of the government agencies given the authority to monitor and regulate the waste disposal of flowback and the injection of fracturing chemicals and fluids used in the process. Although there are also state regulations on hydraulic fracturing and the production of fossil fuels, the federal government is the main authority (EPA, 2010).
The disposal of the flowback into United States surface waters is also regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program (Water: Hydraulic Fracturing, 2010). There are several statutes that can be leveraged to protect the quality of water; however, the EPA relies on the Safe Drinking Water Act as its central authority to regulate (EPA, 2010).
Hydraulic Fracturing, commonly referred to as fracking, is a proven technological advancement used by gas and oil companies to safely obtain natural gas and oil from deep shale formations below the Earth’s surface. This discovery may potentially reduce our reliance dramatically on foreign imports while greatly reducing our national carbon footprint (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
The process of Hydraulic Fracturing creates fractures in formations underground that allow natural gas and oil to flow. The process uses high pressure, to pump water, sand, and other additives into the shale formations to cause fractures to be created. Typically, in modern Hydraulic Fracturing, the fluid used is 98% water and sand, with small amounts of special-purpose additives (Chesapeake Energy, 2011). This process forces the fractures to open which allows the natural gas and oil to be collected at the water’s surface.
Scientists have known for many years that natural gas and oil deposits were released from deep shale formations; however, until recently they have always thought we could not recover the deposits. Now, because of fracking, combined with sophisticated horizontal drilling, large amounts of natural gas and oil deposits are safely being produced from across the United States (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
Fracking has become a key element of natural gas and oil development throughout the United States and the remainder of the world. The process has been used by the natural gas and oil industry since the 1940’s. According to one article the process of hydraulic fracturing is used in almost every natural gas wells that are drilled in the United States. The process of fracking, when properly conducted, is a highly engineered, controlled, sophisticated and safe procedure (Chesapeake Energy, 2011).
According to the textbook when comparing the costs of environmental regulations to the benefits, the benefits far outweigh the financial impact. One EPA study on clean air found the benefits to be 6-10 times greater than the cost of complying with the regulations. We as consumers saved in hospitalization cost reductions and emergency room visits, premature deaths, along with less sick days at work, all combined accounted for an estimated $118-177 billion in financial savings (Withgott & Brennan, 2010, p. 180).
Today’s environmental policy is focused on environmental sustainability and global warming, or climate change. In many of its studies the EPA consults scientists, specialists, and local officials to determine the best way and most cost effective way, to change or regulate environmental processes. The command-and-control policy used by the EPA is oftentimes criticized for making changes costly and ineffective. However, the policy mandates solutions to the problems; thus, it allows the private marketplace to compete, resulting in better solutions at a lower cost (Withgott & Brennan, 2010, p. 178). Their goal is to keep the air we breathe and the water we drink, along with other natural resources in harmony.
Many times, the studies conducted by the EPA determine the health benefits alone are a savings to us, not to mention we have a cleaner environment, fresh air and clean water. We all need to take responsibility for a cleaner environment. It is important that corporations are responsible with their carbon footprint and sustainability measures; nevertheless, it is important that all citizens do their part. Simple things like recycling and picking up trash are only a small part of what we can do on a more global scale to make an impact.
References
Chesapeake Energy (2011). Hydraulic fracturing: Fact sheet, Retrieved June 04, 2011, from
http://www.hydraulicfracturing.com.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Regulation of hydraulic fracturing by
the Office of Water, Retrieved June 04, 2011, from http://water.epa.gov.
Withgott, J. & Brennan, S. (2010). Environment: The Science Behind the Stories (4th ed.).
New York. Pearson Benjamin Cummings. ISBN: 13: 978-0-321-71534—0.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Connection between Scientific Method and Western Culture by Mellisa Conlon
Melissa Conlon
Environmental Science
Dr. T
Warner Pacific College
June 3, 2011
The scientific method is the technique in which we try to draw a theory based off of our observations and test its consistency. Within the scientific method we try to ascertain that, within reason, something we discover will have an exact or similar result.
The breakdown of the scientific method is as follows:
Firstly, our Observation of something within our environment prompts us to want to explain it. We the ask a question about our observation; when we apply this to an environmental scientist’s methodology, they would break down the questions, taking into account such things as what happens when a variable, “X” has some sort of action or change, do we always get “Y”? Or, as the example in the book presents, the curious nature of us as human beings leads us to want to answer the question, “WHY”.
We then make a hypothesis when we have established our variables. With hypotheses, there’s multiple different ways to test it. Manipulation of the environment can provide the strongest type of evidence. It can demonstrate causal relationships with changes in the variables. There are limitations to this version of testing, however as we cannot use it on a massive scale. For things on a larger scale, often researchers use natural experiments which will compare the dependent variables in natural occurrences and in these they try to find a correlation. The evidence can be weaker than causal link that is established with the manipulatation of the environment. As it states in the text book Environment, by Withgott and Brennan (2011); “Good correlative studies can make for strong science, and they preserve the real-world complexity that manipulative experiments often sacrifice” (p. 13). The hypotheses will be the statement we try to explain the observation we established as the question.
We will then make a prediction that can be un-equivocally tested. Do we truly always get “Y” when “X” increases? Testing our predictions is how we can develop a correlation with the initial questions and hypothesis we establish as the foundation of our research. If the outcome holds to what we hope to be our theory, or if it doesn’t, we are then evaluating our results. The obtained information from the research and testing will be recorded as our results.
A theory is developed upon testing the hypothesis repeatedly and when it is proven to predict the expectation consistently. Once the theory is established to hold up, we may then apply the results to our experiment. Theories, once applied, may also change over the course of time. Our accepted understanding of something may shift, in other words, the scientific paradigm view is abandoned for another.
Western Society, as a United States Citizen means to me the land and the carbon foot print we have left behind in our wake as a society. Our nation, the biggest in comparison to the rest of the world looks like it has the biggest carbon foot print when in actuality France is by far, much small and third on the scale of leading foot prints. So, I ask this question, what makes a country that is so much smaller than the United States of America, relatively larger on the scale of carbon foot prints then us with much more land? And, why do we have such a large foot print? Is this because of population, land size, growth of companies, landfills, or a combination of them all. What makes a country like Haiti, with the smallest carbon foot print so much less? Is it clean living, education, recycling? What makes this carbon foot print and how as a nation do we stop it?
Reference Page:
Withgott, J., & Brennan, S. (2011). ENVIRONMENT the science behind the stories (fourth Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Environmental Science
Dr. T
Warner Pacific College
June 3, 2011
The scientific method is the technique in which we try to draw a theory based off of our observations and test its consistency. Within the scientific method we try to ascertain that, within reason, something we discover will have an exact or similar result.
The breakdown of the scientific method is as follows:
Firstly, our Observation of something within our environment prompts us to want to explain it. We the ask a question about our observation; when we apply this to an environmental scientist’s methodology, they would break down the questions, taking into account such things as what happens when a variable, “X” has some sort of action or change, do we always get “Y”? Or, as the example in the book presents, the curious nature of us as human beings leads us to want to answer the question, “WHY”.
We then make a hypothesis when we have established our variables. With hypotheses, there’s multiple different ways to test it. Manipulation of the environment can provide the strongest type of evidence. It can demonstrate causal relationships with changes in the variables. There are limitations to this version of testing, however as we cannot use it on a massive scale. For things on a larger scale, often researchers use natural experiments which will compare the dependent variables in natural occurrences and in these they try to find a correlation. The evidence can be weaker than causal link that is established with the manipulatation of the environment. As it states in the text book Environment, by Withgott and Brennan (2011); “Good correlative studies can make for strong science, and they preserve the real-world complexity that manipulative experiments often sacrifice” (p. 13). The hypotheses will be the statement we try to explain the observation we established as the question.
We will then make a prediction that can be un-equivocally tested. Do we truly always get “Y” when “X” increases? Testing our predictions is how we can develop a correlation with the initial questions and hypothesis we establish as the foundation of our research. If the outcome holds to what we hope to be our theory, or if it doesn’t, we are then evaluating our results. The obtained information from the research and testing will be recorded as our results.
A theory is developed upon testing the hypothesis repeatedly and when it is proven to predict the expectation consistently. Once the theory is established to hold up, we may then apply the results to our experiment. Theories, once applied, may also change over the course of time. Our accepted understanding of something may shift, in other words, the scientific paradigm view is abandoned for another.
Western Society, as a United States Citizen means to me the land and the carbon foot print we have left behind in our wake as a society. Our nation, the biggest in comparison to the rest of the world looks like it has the biggest carbon foot print when in actuality France is by far, much small and third on the scale of leading foot prints. So, I ask this question, what makes a country that is so much smaller than the United States of America, relatively larger on the scale of carbon foot prints then us with much more land? And, why do we have such a large foot print? Is this because of population, land size, growth of companies, landfills, or a combination of them all. What makes a country like Haiti, with the smallest carbon foot print so much less? Is it clean living, education, recycling? What makes this carbon foot print and how as a nation do we stop it?
Reference Page:
Withgott, J., & Brennan, S. (2011). ENVIRONMENT the science behind the stories (fourth Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Floyd Willis' view on Western Culture and the Scientific Method
What is The Scientific Method and how it relates to the foundation of Western Culture
Floyd Wills
Environmental Studies
PHS 100A
Professor David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 2, 2011
According to The Science Buddies website (2011), “The scientific method is a way to ask and answer scientific questions by making observations and conducting experiments”. The steps of the scientific method consist of:
• Observation- According to Withgott & Brenan (2011), “Advances in science usually begin with the observation of some phenomenon that the scientist wishes to explain” (p. 11). When Sir Isaac Newton observed an apple falling from a tree he began to think about a specific kind of motion. He understood that an object with greater matter exerted greater force, or pulled smaller objects to it. Newton’s observation of this naturally occurring event laid the foundations of his discovery of the universal law of gravitation.
• Questions- Questions are the starting point of learning. My four year old son, Spencer, asks me at least a hundred questions a day! He does this because he is curious about the world around him and wants to learn and interact with his environment. Like children, scientists are curious about the world in which they live. They ask questions like: how, what, when, who, which, why, or where?
• Hypothesis- A hypothesis is an educated guess about how something works. It must be stated in a way that can be easily measured and constructed in a way that can help you answer your original question.
• Predictions- Predictions of the outcome can be made based on your hypothesis. They are specific statements that can be directly tested.
• Test- You test your hypothesis by doing experiments. This process helps determine if your hypothesis is true or false. It is essential that the experiments you conduct are fair. This can be accomplished by making sure only one factor at time can be changed while keeping all other conditions the same.
• Results- At this stage, you analyze your data from the experiment and draw a conclusion. Once the experiments are complete, collect measurements and analyze them to see if your hypothesis still holds true or not. Many times scientists discover their hypothesis does not hold up and end up developing a new one based on their discoveries. Even if your hypothesis is true, you may want to test it again another way to confirm the results are accurate.
The scientific method directly relates to the foundation of western culture. Its introduction to the western world evolved over time. Elements of the scientific method was introduced by Aristotle and the Greek philosophers of old, but the primary source of the scientific process that resembles the one we use today was developed by Muslim scholars between the 10th and 14th centuries. Al-Haytham was a great Muslim scientist credited with founding the scientific method. Al-Haytham’s method consisted of: observation of the natural world, stating a definite problem, formulating a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis through experiments, access and analyze the results, interpret data, draw conclusions, and publish findings. His process laid the foundation for the scientific method adopted by western civilization.
The scientific method found its way into Europe at the beginning of the Renaissance period and helped bring Europe out of the Dark Ages. Roger Bacon (1214-1284) is credited as the first European scholar to promote inductive reasoning. Roger’s method consisted of: observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and verification. Later on, Francis Bacon (1561-1626) and Descartes (1596-1650) continued to expand the west’s knowledge of the scientific method. Sir Isaac Newton further refined the method, and his process is the one we use today (Shuttleworth, 2009).
Science plays such a vital role in our daily life; from finding how we can maximize our natural resources to helping us live longer healthier lives, we owe thanks to a long line of great thinkers that stretch back through the centuries to the Middle East. It was these eastern and western pioneers who painstakingly developed and refined the scientific method in hopes that we would have a better understanding of the world in which we live in and to use this knowledge to make the world a better place.
References
Shuttleworth, M. (2009). Who Invented The Scientific Method? Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Experiment- Resources.com Web site: http://www.experiment-resources.com/who-invented-the-scientific-method.html
Withgott, J. & Brennan, S. (2011). Environment, The Science Behind The Stories. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education Inc.
(2011). Steps of the Scientific Method. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Science Buddies Web site: http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml
Floyd Wills
Environmental Studies
PHS 100A
Professor David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
June 2, 2011
According to The Science Buddies website (2011), “The scientific method is a way to ask and answer scientific questions by making observations and conducting experiments”. The steps of the scientific method consist of:
• Observation- According to Withgott & Brenan (2011), “Advances in science usually begin with the observation of some phenomenon that the scientist wishes to explain” (p. 11). When Sir Isaac Newton observed an apple falling from a tree he began to think about a specific kind of motion. He understood that an object with greater matter exerted greater force, or pulled smaller objects to it. Newton’s observation of this naturally occurring event laid the foundations of his discovery of the universal law of gravitation.
• Questions- Questions are the starting point of learning. My four year old son, Spencer, asks me at least a hundred questions a day! He does this because he is curious about the world around him and wants to learn and interact with his environment. Like children, scientists are curious about the world in which they live. They ask questions like: how, what, when, who, which, why, or where?
• Hypothesis- A hypothesis is an educated guess about how something works. It must be stated in a way that can be easily measured and constructed in a way that can help you answer your original question.
• Predictions- Predictions of the outcome can be made based on your hypothesis. They are specific statements that can be directly tested.
• Test- You test your hypothesis by doing experiments. This process helps determine if your hypothesis is true or false. It is essential that the experiments you conduct are fair. This can be accomplished by making sure only one factor at time can be changed while keeping all other conditions the same.
• Results- At this stage, you analyze your data from the experiment and draw a conclusion. Once the experiments are complete, collect measurements and analyze them to see if your hypothesis still holds true or not. Many times scientists discover their hypothesis does not hold up and end up developing a new one based on their discoveries. Even if your hypothesis is true, you may want to test it again another way to confirm the results are accurate.
The scientific method directly relates to the foundation of western culture. Its introduction to the western world evolved over time. Elements of the scientific method was introduced by Aristotle and the Greek philosophers of old, but the primary source of the scientific process that resembles the one we use today was developed by Muslim scholars between the 10th and 14th centuries. Al-Haytham was a great Muslim scientist credited with founding the scientific method. Al-Haytham’s method consisted of: observation of the natural world, stating a definite problem, formulating a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis through experiments, access and analyze the results, interpret data, draw conclusions, and publish findings. His process laid the foundation for the scientific method adopted by western civilization.
The scientific method found its way into Europe at the beginning of the Renaissance period and helped bring Europe out of the Dark Ages. Roger Bacon (1214-1284) is credited as the first European scholar to promote inductive reasoning. Roger’s method consisted of: observation, hypothesis, experimentation, and verification. Later on, Francis Bacon (1561-1626) and Descartes (1596-1650) continued to expand the west’s knowledge of the scientific method. Sir Isaac Newton further refined the method, and his process is the one we use today (Shuttleworth, 2009).
Science plays such a vital role in our daily life; from finding how we can maximize our natural resources to helping us live longer healthier lives, we owe thanks to a long line of great thinkers that stretch back through the centuries to the Middle East. It was these eastern and western pioneers who painstakingly developed and refined the scientific method in hopes that we would have a better understanding of the world in which we live in and to use this knowledge to make the world a better place.
References
Shuttleworth, M. (2009). Who Invented The Scientific Method? Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Experiment- Resources.com Web site: http://www.experiment-resources.com/who-invented-the-scientific-method.html
Withgott, J. & Brennan, S. (2011). Environment, The Science Behind The Stories. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education Inc.
(2011). Steps of the Scientific Method. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from Science Buddies Web site: http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Curiosity and Reasoning by Pat Holzbach
Curiosity and Reasoning
Pat Holzbach
Environmental Studies, PHS 100A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
May 31, 2011
Curiosity and Reasoning
Western culture is based on reasoning, with a sprinkling of freedom and the pursuit of happiness, a dash of curiosity and imagination, and is rooted in faith in a higher power. The same is true of the scientific method.
A Brief History of the Scientific Method
In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the works of Aristotle, who lived 350 B.C., re-emerged in Europe. According to Aristotle, knowledge was based on investigating “a question by a) examining what everyone else had said about the matter, b) making several observations, and finally, c) deriving either general or probable principles on the matter from both a and b.” This “empirical” manner of thinking was revolutionary at that time. (Hooker, 1996)
In the late thirteenth century, Roger Bacon developed a very early version of today’s scientific method. His trial and error experiments (or “controlled experiences”), were defined as: “if the experience of a natural phenomenon is controlled in a certain way, that experience will be identical to any repeated experience that is controlled in precisely the same way.” (Hooker, 1996)
When Galileo started peeking through a telescope in the seventeenth century, he discovered the heavens were much larger, much more amazing, that any of his peers ever dreamed. It challenged everything they knew, and enlarged their way of thinking. (Hooker, 1996) This independent thinking may be, at least somewhat, attributed to his father, who said:
“It appears to me that those who rely simply on the weight of authority to prove any assertion, without searching out the arguments to support it, act absurdly. I wish to question freely and to answer freely without any sort of adulation. That well becomes any who are sincere in the search for truth.”
(Fowler, no date) Obviously, Galileo was in search of truth.
In the seventeenth century, two ideas basic to the Scientific Revolution were: a) the idea that the universe, and everything in it, works according to laws of nature, established by a higher being; and b) the idea that the laws of nature are discoverable by means of reason. (The Scientific Revolution, 2011)
Isaac Newton was among those scientists who believed that it was God who set everything in motion, and that the universe could be explained through mathematics. (Hooker, 1996)
Today’s Scientific Method
Today’s scientific method is logic in action. Much the same way as a reasonable person may trouble-shoot an everyday problem, the scientific method walks through an observing-and-testing model, only with much more documentation. The typical steps are (Withgott, 2008):
1. Making observations: this initial step of observing recurs throughout the process;
2. Asking questions: this is where the freedom part is displayed—the freedom to question how things work, or how they might be different, or even better. We typically associate “freedom” with western cultures, although that isn’t always the case; but the freedom to think independently, although somewhat tempered by the church, was instrumental in spawning the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century.
3. Developing a hypothesis: the next step is to develop a hypothesis, an answer to the question, which must be tested. This can be an obvious answer, or it may be an out-of-the-box answer, which may require some imagination, some creativity that would stem from previous research or observations.
4. Making predictions: this is where the scientist may refer to one of the foundations of the Scientific Revolution (in the 17th century): the universe, and everything in it, works according to the laws of nature, established by a higher being. (The Scientific Revolution, 2011) Scientists of that century believed in a higher power.
5. Testing predictions: experimentation (as started by Roger Bacon) will then test the hypothesis and predictions previously made. When possible, scientists will often use a controlled experiment, where only one variable differs between two units being tested, the reasoning being that any difference in outcome is attributed to the single variable that is different.
6. Analyzing and interpreting results: documenting the results, recording the data—especially numerical data—strengthens the testing, and provides explanations that can then be reviewed and substantiated by peers.
Much of the groundwork for testing scientific theories, laid many years ago, is still applicable today. And scientists are still curious, thinking outside the box, searching for answers that will make their lives—and ours—richer, fuller and happier.
References
Fowler, M. (no date). Life of Galileo. Retrieved from http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/gal_life.htm, May 31, 2011.
Hooker, R. (1996). World Civilizations: The European enlightenment—the scientific revolution. Retrieved from http://public.wsu.edu/~dee/ENLIGHT/SCIREV.HTM, May 31, 2011.
The scientific revolution of the 17th century, and, the political revolutions of the 18th century. Retrived from http://classweb.gmu.edu/rcherubi/ancient/srfr.htm, May 31, 2011.
Withgott, J., & Bennan, S. (2008). Environment: The science behind the stories (4th ed.). New York. Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Pat Holzbach
Environmental Studies, PHS 100A
Dr. David Terrell
Warner Pacific College
May 31, 2011
Curiosity and Reasoning
Western culture is based on reasoning, with a sprinkling of freedom and the pursuit of happiness, a dash of curiosity and imagination, and is rooted in faith in a higher power. The same is true of the scientific method.
A Brief History of the Scientific Method
In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the works of Aristotle, who lived 350 B.C., re-emerged in Europe. According to Aristotle, knowledge was based on investigating “a question by a) examining what everyone else had said about the matter, b) making several observations, and finally, c) deriving either general or probable principles on the matter from both a and b.” This “empirical” manner of thinking was revolutionary at that time. (Hooker, 1996)
In the late thirteenth century, Roger Bacon developed a very early version of today’s scientific method. His trial and error experiments (or “controlled experiences”), were defined as: “if the experience of a natural phenomenon is controlled in a certain way, that experience will be identical to any repeated experience that is controlled in precisely the same way.” (Hooker, 1996)
When Galileo started peeking through a telescope in the seventeenth century, he discovered the heavens were much larger, much more amazing, that any of his peers ever dreamed. It challenged everything they knew, and enlarged their way of thinking. (Hooker, 1996) This independent thinking may be, at least somewhat, attributed to his father, who said:
“It appears to me that those who rely simply on the weight of authority to prove any assertion, without searching out the arguments to support it, act absurdly. I wish to question freely and to answer freely without any sort of adulation. That well becomes any who are sincere in the search for truth.”
(Fowler, no date) Obviously, Galileo was in search of truth.
In the seventeenth century, two ideas basic to the Scientific Revolution were: a) the idea that the universe, and everything in it, works according to laws of nature, established by a higher being; and b) the idea that the laws of nature are discoverable by means of reason. (The Scientific Revolution, 2011)
Isaac Newton was among those scientists who believed that it was God who set everything in motion, and that the universe could be explained through mathematics. (Hooker, 1996)
Today’s Scientific Method
Today’s scientific method is logic in action. Much the same way as a reasonable person may trouble-shoot an everyday problem, the scientific method walks through an observing-and-testing model, only with much more documentation. The typical steps are (Withgott, 2008):
1. Making observations: this initial step of observing recurs throughout the process;
2. Asking questions: this is where the freedom part is displayed—the freedom to question how things work, or how they might be different, or even better. We typically associate “freedom” with western cultures, although that isn’t always the case; but the freedom to think independently, although somewhat tempered by the church, was instrumental in spawning the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century.
3. Developing a hypothesis: the next step is to develop a hypothesis, an answer to the question, which must be tested. This can be an obvious answer, or it may be an out-of-the-box answer, which may require some imagination, some creativity that would stem from previous research or observations.
4. Making predictions: this is where the scientist may refer to one of the foundations of the Scientific Revolution (in the 17th century): the universe, and everything in it, works according to the laws of nature, established by a higher being. (The Scientific Revolution, 2011) Scientists of that century believed in a higher power.
5. Testing predictions: experimentation (as started by Roger Bacon) will then test the hypothesis and predictions previously made. When possible, scientists will often use a controlled experiment, where only one variable differs between two units being tested, the reasoning being that any difference in outcome is attributed to the single variable that is different.
6. Analyzing and interpreting results: documenting the results, recording the data—especially numerical data—strengthens the testing, and provides explanations that can then be reviewed and substantiated by peers.
Much of the groundwork for testing scientific theories, laid many years ago, is still applicable today. And scientists are still curious, thinking outside the box, searching for answers that will make their lives—and ours—richer, fuller and happier.
References
Fowler, M. (no date). Life of Galileo. Retrieved from http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/gal_life.htm, May 31, 2011.
Hooker, R. (1996). World Civilizations: The European enlightenment—the scientific revolution. Retrieved from http://public.wsu.edu/~dee/ENLIGHT/SCIREV.HTM, May 31, 2011.
The scientific revolution of the 17th century, and, the political revolutions of the 18th century. Retrived from http://classweb.gmu.edu/rcherubi/ancient/srfr.htm, May 31, 2011.
Withgott, J., & Bennan, S. (2008). Environment: The science behind the stories (4th ed.). New York. Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)