Blog 4 - Biological Diversity and Carcinogens

Readings and Summaries

 

Ecosystems and Human Well-being

The whole world depends on Earth’s ecosystems and resources for survival.  These include food, water, disease management, climate regulation, spiritual fulfillment and aesthetic enjoyment.  These ecosystems have become rapidly depleted within the last 50 years to meet the growing human and economic needs.  Many people have not benefited from this process but have been harmed.  The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005 has come up with 4 findings on the major three problems of the world’s ecosystem management.

Those three problems are:

1) Approximately 60% of ecosystems have been degraded or used unsustainably.  Those being freshwater, fisheries, air, regulation of regional and local climate, natural hazards and pests. The full costs of all these problems are difficult to measure.

2) Incomplete evidence that changes to the ecosystem are increasing the likelihood of non-       linear changes in the ecosystems such as disease, alterations in water quality, “dead zones” in     coastal fisheries and shifts in regional climates.

3) Harmful effects of degradation are being disproportionally bared by the poor, which causes poverty and social conflicts.

 (http://environmentaldegardation.blogspot.ca/2010/05/effect-of-water-pollution_12.html)

 The four finding of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment follows:

Finding 1: Over the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable period of time in human history, largely to meet rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fibre and fuel.  This has resulted in a substantial and largely irreversible loss of the diversity on Earth.

Finding 2: The changes that have been made to ecosystems have contributed to substantial net gains in human well-being and economic development, but these gains have been achieved at growing costs in the form of the degradation of many ecosystems services, increased risks of nonlinear changes, and the exacerbation of poverty for some groups of people.  These problems, unless addressed, will substantially diminish the benefits that future generations obtain form ecosystems.

Finding 3: The degradation of ecosystem services could grow significantly worse during the first half of this century and is a barrier to achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

Finding 4: The challenge of reversing the degradation of ecosystems while meeting increasing demands for their services can be partially met under some scenarios that the MA considered, but these involve significant changes in policies, institutions, and practices that are not currently under way.  Many options exist to conserve or enhance specific ecosystem services in ways that reduce negative trade-offs or that provide positive synergies with other ecosystem services

 

The Millennium Agency has develop 4 scenarios to explore the future for ecosystems, those being Global Orchestration, Order form Strength, Adapting Mosaic and Technogarden.  Three of these scenarios suggest that significant changes in policies, institutions and practices can mitigate many of the negative consequences of the pressures on ecosystems.  Protection of ecosystems, technological advances and substitutes can also help mitigate some of the ongoing degradation. 

 

Critical Thinking – In what ways does damage to ecosystems affect human well-being?

Damages to the ecosystem can have a negative impact on human well-being because the ecosystem is where we get our food, fresh water, building materials and fuel.   If the ecosystem is degraded to the point where we not long can support or sustain any life, we risk the result of death as a consequence

 

Living Downstream: An Ecologist Looks at Cancer and the Environment

Sandra Steingraber was an adoptee who was diagnosed with bladder cancer and her adopted family had a history of cancer as well.  This demonstrated that cancer is not necessarily genetic but may be a result of the living environment.  Studies were completed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology finding that bladder cancer was an alteration in the genetic DNA from guanine to thymine, ultimately altering the amino acid produced.  Suppressor genes have also been found to play a role in the formation of cancerous cells.  Mutations of the suppressor genes have been found in more than half of all bladder cancers.

 The first record of excessive bladder cancers in workers in the aniline dye industry in 1895 because the carcinogens would form adducts in the cells of the tissue lining the bladder and the urine would show contaminants.  It was found that people who are slow acetylators have low levels of enzymes and are more susceptible to bladder cancer from aromatic amines.  It is estimated that more than half of Americans and Europeans have these slow acetylators.

(http://thesurvivalistsenclave.com/files/2012/09/400341-Water-Contamination.jpg)

Bladder carcinogens were one of the first forms of cancer every detected and has provided researchers with a portrayal of the sequential genetic changes that unfold over the progression of the cancer.  Even though there has been much discovered about genetic mutations, risk factors and mechanisms has not translated into steps of preventing the disease.  Bladder cancers have increased about 10% between 1973 and 1991, and have risen 28% in 1973 in African Americans.  Half of all bladder cancers in men and 1/3 of bladder cancers in females are attributed to smoking.  Even though levels of contaminants are within legal limits, employees are still containing carcinogens in their bodies.  Even though there are known risks about carcinogens in the workplace they are till manufactured, imported used and released in to the workplace environment.

 Preventing cancer’s largest obstacle is the idea that it is hereditary even though fewer than 10% of cancers involve inherited mutations.  Genetic inherited mutations play a role in the development of a particular cancer but environment plays a large part as well. If we lower the amount of environmental carcinogens we are exposed to it, the inheritance of a defective carcinogen-detoxification gene would matter less.

There are relationships between environmental contamination and human rights as human health is threatened by reckless pollution of the living world.  Our bodies still possess carcinogens that are no longer produced but linger in the environment.  A human rights approach recognizes everyone does not bare equal risks are those people living in environments where carcinogens are manufactured or disposed of are more vulnerable that those whose living environments are safer.

 The principal of the least toxic alternative should be implemented.  Finding alternatives for chemicals would not only lower our risk of getting cancer but would move us away setting maximum limit releases of these toxic chemicals.

 

Critical Thinking – What is wrong with the present system of regulating the use, release and disposal of known and suspected carcinogens?

This system does not have enough research on the effects of these carcinogens.  Even though there has been the eradication of some toxic substances, they are still found in the human body.  These regulations also set maximum levels of emissions so companies will still manufacture at the emission level they are instead of lowering them.  We still do not fully understand what happens when these chemicals are in the environment and what happens to our bodies, especially since people have different tolerance levels.

 

 

 

Our Stolen Future

Rachel Carson stated “our fate is connected with the animals” in her publication Silent Spring.  Researches have seen the damages wildlife has endured and it can be used to foreshadow symptoms that humans are seeing.  Humans think that they are unique from other animals but that is not completely true, we share many characteristics with other animals such as estrogen.  Critics believe that the uses of animals to predict the effects of hormone-disrupting chemicals are of little relevance.  We understand that synthetic chemicals disrupt hormone communication as well as DES has similar disruptions across many species including humans.  DES response curve is an inverted U meaning as science tests small and large amounts of DES concluding that high doses of DES may miss some effects of lower doses.  This evidence suggests that human are in jeopardy of endocrine disruption as these disruptions also threaten the survival of animal populations.  Humans are facing the same consequences for those laboratory and free-range animals in regards to the danger of disruptions in the human development.
 

(http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cbe/research/animal/laboratory.htm)

 

Hormone disrupting chemicals have a broad impact across the human population and are difficult to assess and harder to prove as there is a lag time before damages become evident.  There is concern about in increasing frequency of genital abnormalities in children like undescended testicles, small penises and hypospadias but the frequencies of these are difficult to document.  Problems caused by these endocrine disruptors will have to hit a crisis proportion before we know that something is going on. 

 Animals studies provide a touchstone of identifying and investigating the health effects in humans, may alert us to possible disruptions, and provide warning about current contamination levels as they are more readily exposed to the current levels of contamination.  Transgender effects, changes in behaviour, and diminished fertility are more likely to show up in animals first as they mature and reproduce more quickly than humans.  Through studies it has shown that laboratory animals have forecasted damaged that later showed up in humans but we continue to ignore the warning.

 

Critical Thinking – Is cancer the only heath effect of environmental contaminations that should concern us?

No, there are plenty other health effects caused by environmental contamination such as endocrine disruptors are mentioned but also respiratory illnesses such as asthma, neurological illnesses and sensitivity related illnesses.  Levels of contaminants can enter soils, water and air putting ourselves at risk for a multitude of illnesses.

 

 

Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice is an ongoing concept as minority communities are threatened with the risk of illnesses due to corporations polluting the environment around these communities.  These communities receive less protection in the environmental sector than white or affluent communities.  The National People of Colour Environmental Leadership Summit expanded the definition of environment to include where we work, live, play, worship, educational institutes and our physical/natural world.  This movement challenged the way environmentalism is practiced in the US and the world. The second summit produced about 24 policy papers to describe the environmental and health differences between colour and white communities.  Other gatherings targeted childhood lead poisoning, asthma and cancer in the Black community.

 

(http://www.nrdc.org/ej/)

The benchmark class action lawsuit between Bean v. Southwestern Waste Management Inc. in Huston in 1979 showed that over 80% of landfills and incinerators were located in mostly Black neighbourhoods which ultimately impacted facility siting regulations.  Highly toxic PBC laced oil was dumped in Warren County, North Carolina, a mostly Black community again.  This sparked protests and the first time an American had been incarcerated for protesting the placement of a waste facility.  This was where “environmental racism” created.  Environmental racism refers to any environmental policy, practice or negative effects of human health based on race or colour.   The Warren County events created a investigation on hazardous waste facilities and found out that ¾ off-site hazardous waste landfills were located in predominantly Black communities.  The Commission for Racial Justice documented that 3/5 Blacks live in communities with abandoned toxic waste sites.

 Since 1996 companies have been paying for the health of the people in communities plagues with their pollution.   Examples of these have been the relocation of citizens and preventing companies from starting up in their communities.  1992 the EPA established the Office of Environmental Justice and Clinton in 1994 issued an Executive Order in order to attempt to address environmental justice within existing federal legislation.  Unfortunately the Bush administration has deterred the hard work that previous presidents had put forth towards environmental justice.

 

Critical Thinking – How do people with money keep polluting industries out of their neighbourhoods?

Affluent people can either take these companies to court to ensure their neighbourhood does not become polluted or they use their money to back government officials to ensure that they get what they want.

 

 

Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services

Ecosystems are experiencing a loss of population and species in human dominated marine ecosystems which have unknown consequences.  The rate of resource collapse is increasing and the potential recovery, stability and water quality has been decreasing.  This loss of biodiversity in damaging the ocean’s capacity to provide food and maintain water quality, although data has suggested that these trends are reversible for the time being.  Studies have suggested that local diversity may enhance ecosystem productivity and stability although there are many issues with managing the oceans due to the scale of the ocean.   Changes in marine biodiversity are caused by pollution, habitat destruction, exploitation and the biogeochemistry of the ocean.  Regional ecosystems are rapidly losing populations and species.
 



 (http://worldwildlife.org/threats/overfishing)

 

Experiments have been conducted to examine the effects of variation in marine diversity, productivity, resource use, nutrient cycling and ecosystem stability.  Experiments have shown that diversity enhanced ecosystem stability, mixed diets optimize different life-history processes and show positive linkages between biodiversity, productivity and stability across tropic levels in marine ecosystems. 

 The closure of fisheries can help increase the population of the target fish species as well as biological diversity overall, studies show and increasing richness of species by 23%.  Also the switching between targeted fish species can help recover populations.  Experimental and correlative approaches show positive relationships between diversity and ecosystem functions.  Elimination of locally adapted populations and species not only impairs the ability of marine ecosystem to provide food sources for humans but also slows the stability and recovery potential.

 

Critical Thinking - Why are commercial fisheries in decline?

Commercial fisheries are in decline because of over-exploitation of species.  We understand that we are depleting our fish but we continue to take the resources without thinking about the future consequences.  Fisheries in international water is hard to manage unless all nations are on board with it and who would enforce regulations and policies.

 

 

 

Activity

 

I watched Jeremy Jackson's TED talk on How we wrecked the ocean.  The main points Jeremy talks about is the overfishing and pollution of the ocean.  Overfishing constitutes of the degradation of fisheries in the world not only with fish but crustations as well.  The main pollution points were about biological pollution such as toxic blooms like red tides that deplete oxygen to a point where fish die.  Deoxygenation happens when the algae dies and the bacteria use up all the oxgen to decompose the algae.  Invasive species also remove the native species in the area.

 

I know that deoxygenation not only happens in the ocean creating dead zones but can also happen in shallow lakes and attributes to summer kill of fish species as well as invasive species also destroy natural habitat of native species.  This shows that it is not only a local problem but we are facing this on a global scale.  This puts it into a large scale context that not only are our oceans suseptible of the depletion but our local fisheries are at risk as well.  This has local and global consequences are both sources of food are at risk of disappearing.

 

 

Blog Reflections

Reflect on your interactions with the economy.

1.How do you currently, or plan to in the future, contribute to a more environmentally sustainable economy?  Are there local, sustainable businesses that you support?  Have you considered your financial investments and their ethics?

 

When I reside in Swan River, our family purchases our meat from our local meat shop from local farmers, we purchase our bread from the local bakery and we shop at the local CO-OP rather than Superstore.  I eventually plan on residing in smaller communities after I graduate as well so would be basically forced to shop locally as well.  I have not considered financial investments as I do not have the money and will be paying off $15, 000+ in student loans.  As for what I see from my parents I believe that they have invested in Blue Chip companies which are those with good ethical standing and trust.  From what I have learned in Environmental Responsibility and the Law, Blue Chip companies are the best to invest in as they are reputable and are less likely to crash in the stock market.

 

 

 

Blog 3 - Food Sources, Women's Knowledge and Environmental Degredation

Readings and Summaries

Could Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?

The future is projected by studying the past trends.  The effects of these agricultural, populations, environmental and economic trends along with political tensions can breakdown governments and societies.  Food shortages, falling water tables, eroding soils and rising temperatures can result in a collapse of global civilization.

 Studies over decades have shown that environmental degradation trends are happening without effort to reverse these trends.  The demand for food, problems stemming from population growth, is higher than the supply resulting in price inflations, putting stress on government.  Failing states start to lose control when food and personal security as well as basic social services are not provided.  When control is lost, law and order begin to disintegrate.  These failing states are sources of terrorists (Iraq is a terrorist training center), drugs (Afghanistan is the #1 exporter of heroin), weapons (Somalian pirates) and refugees (Rwanda refugees joined soldiers to destabilize the Democratic Republic of Congo).  These are all of international concern and there is a need for politically stable nation-states to control the spread of disease, manage international monetary systems, control terrorism and for reaching common goals.  If enough states collapse, it will threaten the entire global civilization.

 Surges in grain prices pose threats to food security as poor harvests result in grain, rice and corn prices increasing dramatically.  The food market is a trend-driven market meaning as sources become scarce the market value of the food is driven upwards.  With the shrinking grain yield and the use of ethanol as an energy source, it generates food instability on a global scale.

(http://www.cameronhanover.com/wp-content/uploads/wheat-field-golden-grain.jpg)

 Water shortages are serious and an immediate threat.  Currently irrigation uses about 70% of freshwater worldwide.  The water in the irrigation wells are not being recharged as fast as the water is being used.  This is happening in China, India and the US.  There are 3 “fossil” aquifers in the US Saudi Arabia and China that are not rechargeable aquifers which could end agriculture in those arid areas.  The North China Plains aquifer is a fossil aquifer that is being drained due to is use since those shallower aquifers were being depleted.  Unmanageable food shortages and social conflicts due to shrinking water supplies could happen.

 Topsoil is eroding faster than it is being replenished which is due to deforestation, tilling and wind.  It has been proven that erosion from wind and water had doomed earlier civilizations.  If soil fertility and erosion is not reversed, it too could cause crop production to cease.  Also rising surface temperatures can impact harvest yields.  Studies have shown that as surface temperatures rise 1 degree above normal, crops decrease their yield by about 10%.

 Politics play a large and dangerous role in food sacridty.  Limitations and bans on export of food have put pressure and create panic in those states that rely on the import.  Russia, Argentina and Vietnam have all put limitation and bans on the export of grains in hopes to drive down domestic food prices.  Also bi-lateral agreements between states have risen out of this sacridty.  Such agreements have been enacted between the Philippines and Vietnam.    Food prices and hunger breakdown social order which leads to theft and hijacking of grain trucks and supplies.  No country is immune as the US must continue to export their grains to China as they have a large debt with Chinese Investors.

 The Earth Policy Institute had come up with Plan B which has 4 components for mitigating the global food shortage.  One is to cut carbon emissions by raising energy efficiencies, transitioning to renewable energy and creating carbon taxes.  Second is to stabilize the global population at 8 billion by having family planning services and reproductive healthcare available to women.  Thirdly is to eradicate poverty by ensuring all genders receive at least a primary education and everyone has access to village healthcare.  Last is to restore the forests, water and soils by creating more efficient irrigation systems, planting water efficient crops such as wheat and planting less rice, recycling water and planting trees, especially shelterbelts to reduce wind erosion.  The implementation of Plan B must be done quickly as it is nature’s clock we are racing against. 

Critical Thinking – According to Lester Brown, what is the greatest threat to global political stability?

Food shortages are the greatest threat to global political stability according to Lester Brown.  I do agree with Mr. Brown to an extent but I believe the real issue behind it is populations and population growth.  Increasing populations mean that more resources are needed to sustain these populations.  If we could reduce or maintain our population we would be in better shape globally.  I think that the main issue is global population and food shortages are what come with a growing population.  Food shortages then create chaos leading to the collapse of states and eventually global civilization. 

 

 

Women’s Indigenous Knowledge and Biodiversity Conservation.

In a patriarchal world, women are treated as unequal and inferior to men but it has been viewed that women are preservers of biodiversity, as gender and biodiversity are linked.  Biodiversity can only be protected when it becomes the basis, foundation and logic of the technology and economic of production.

 Diversity is the principal of women’s work and knowledge.  In Third World countries, the people rely on biological resources for sustenance and well-being, essentially survival and sustainability which is connected to the conservation and sustainability of these resources. Progressive technologies destroy both diversity and people’s livelihood.  There is a misconception that diversity based production systems are low-productivity but that is not the case.  A monoculture crop of coconut palms in Kerala, India requires an annual labour rate of 157 man-days per ha whereas a mixed cropping system requires 960 man-days per ha, ultimately increasing people’s livelihood by increasing job demand.  Labour displacement causes poverty, dispossession and the destruction of livelihood which is unproductive.  Sustainability at the Third World level is achieved by the sustainability of natural resources and sustainability of livelihoods.

 Women have remained invisible because economics discount their work as “production” due to them falling outside the production boundaries.  Women’s work is hard to define as they work both inside and outside the home.  The work women do to sustain their families is not measured in wages as well as they do a great volume and variety of work.  This work is considered invisible because it is outside mark-related work. 

 

(http://worldpulse.com/node/77085)

 Gender studies in India have confirmed that women are major producers of food in terms of volume, value and hours worked.  There is an extensive knowledge needed in the production and preparation of plant foods.  Preparing seeds, sowing the seeds, nurturing the plant and harvesting require enormous amounts of knowledge, time and judgement.  This knowledge has been the mainstay of indigenous grain and dairy industries.  Women have been the experts in agriculture, breeding and feeding of farm animals and forestry.  This knowledge and skills should be the basis of all crop-improvement strategies.

 Corporate scientist produce through uniformity but women produce though biodiversity.  Corporations view biodiversity only as “raw material” and the value of the seed lies in the discontinuation of its live.  Women farmers view biodiversity has intrinsic value and the seed is the continuation of life.  Corporations have deliberately breed seeds that will not give rise to future generations in a tactic to ensure those farmers who buy the seeds keep coming back.  Legal patients and intellectual property rights are also a tactic to guarantee that farmers must buy the seeds from them again next year.  Essentially Third World farmers are being robbed and depleted by multinational corporations.  These genetically altered seeds are neither natural nor safe as many risks have been associated with them.

 

Critical Thinking – What is ecofeminist?

According to dictionary.com, and ecofeminist is someone who attempts to unite environmentalism and feminism who argue that there is a direct relationship between the oppression of women and environmental degradation.  Vandana Shiva describes ecofeminists as feminists who are ecologically focused and see important connections between the domination of nature and the domination of women.  Although ecofiminists do not have a set of principles and beliefs they do believe that our experiences as women in a male-dominated society provides us with a different way of thinking when it comes to environmental issues.

 

 

Human Domination of Earth’s Ecosystems

 All organisms modify their environment and we as humans are no exception.  Humans directly dominate ecosystems and no ecosystem is safe from human influence.  We alter the Earth’s systems by participating in activities such as agriculture, industry, fishing, and international commerce which then transform the land surface, alter the major biogeochemical cycles and add or remove species and genetically distinct populations of many ecosystems.  These activities also drive climate chance and causes irreversible loss of biological diversity.

 Land transformations that use the land to yield goods and services alter the structure and function of ecosystems and how these ecosystems interact with the atmosphere, aquatic systems and surrounding lands.  Measuring land transformations on a global scale is very challenging because they encompass a wide variety of activities that vary in substantially in intensity and consequences. About 39-50% of land has been transformed or degraded.  Where the land has not been transformed it has been fragmented which can alter species composition and functioning.  Transformation of land also results in a loss of biological diversity and can affect climate.  It is difficult to understand land transformations.

 The alteration of marine ecosystems by humans is harder to quantify than of those terrestrial ecosystems.  Presently 60% of human populations live within 100 km of the coasts and the costal margin productivity have been strongly affected by these populations of people.  An example would be about 50% of mangrove ecosystems have been destroyed or transformed by human activity.  Many fisheries focus on removing the top predators which alter marine ecosystems out of proportion and have proven fisheries to be unsustainable.  As of 1195, 22% of marine fisheries were overexploited or already depleted with 44% more at its exploitation limits.  Also the non-target animals are being removed at a rate of 1/3 total landings per year, approximately 27 million tons per year.  Also the use of dredges and trawls damage sea floor habitat.  Algal blooms increase marine phytoplankton that can produce harmful structures or chemicals and are usually correlated with changes in temperature, nutrients or salinity.

(http://www.travelblog.org/Photos/1880834)

 Alterations of biogeochemical cycles such as carbon, water and nitrogen are also directly altered and affected by human activities.  Carbon dioxide has increased exponentially since the 1800’s, driven by human activities and the combustion of fossil fuels.  As CO² levels increase, it affects species differently and may drive changes in species composition and the dynamics of all terrestrial ecosystems.  We as humans use about ½ of all runoff water and use about 70% of that in agriculture.  River systems have been altered because of increasing water demands, transportation, flood controls and the dilution of chemical wastes.  These directly affect freshwater ecosystems.  Regional climate is also affected by alterations to the hydrological cycle.  Nitrogen is required of all life and must be fixed before it can be used.  We have alter this nitrogen cycle by the use of fertilizer and fossil fuel combustion which has multiple consequences.  It increases nitrous oxide concentrations, increases reactive nitrogen gases and contributes to acid rain and photochemical smog.  Also the increases in nitrogen drive eutrophication which leads to blooms of nuisance and toxic algae.  Other cycles such as oxidized sulfur gases affect regional air quality, biogeochemistry and climate.  Other synthetic organic chemicals may seem beneficial buy many are toxic to human health and other species.  These chemicals may also persist in the environment for long periods of time such as DDT which is known to biomagnify in food chains.

 Biotic changes due to humans modifying biological resources are substantial and growing.  Extinction, transportation of exotic species and a loss of genetic biodiversity can disrupt both natural and human systems.  Rates of extinction have increased dramatically since the human domination of earth and many species are threatened.  Land transformation is the most important cause of the extinction of species which results in a loss of genetic variation and genetic materials within populations.  The invasion of non-native species also reduces the variation of species by degrading habitat and introducing infectious diseases, altering the structure and functioning of a whole ecosystem.

 If we can work to reduce the rate that we alter Earth’s systems, accelerate our efforts to understand Earth’s ecosystem and how they interact with the numerous components of human-caused global change we can ultimately slow down the global consequences for human dominance.

 

Critical Thinking – Almost 50% of land surface has been transformed by human endeavors and more than half of all available fresh water is presently being used by humans.  We thus have a long way to go before we run out of land or water.  What is wrong with this statement?

Everything is wrong with this statement.  Our populations are growing at an exponential rate; therefore the use of resources will also expand exponentially as we need to consume more resources faster to sustain life.  The more the population grows the less time we have and the more resources will be used leaving less and less for the next generations.

 

Activity

Jane Goodall TED Talk – Jane Goodall helps humans and animals live together.

The main concept of Jane’s talk was to show what given the education and opportunities not only can the people in Gombe Stream National Park, but anywhere can remediate the lands and take care of said lands.  Goodall’s program TACARE was established to improve the lives of the people and refugees living in the 24 villages in the Gombe Stream National Park by teaching these people ways of reclaiming the land, drilling wells and building school rooms for education.  With these teachings the people have proven that they can sustain and replenish those resources in the Gombe Sream National Park.  Jane talks about how previous indigenous cultures make decisions based on how it would affect the next 7 generations comapre to coporations who make decisions based on the next corporate meeting instread of looking further into the future.  She also touches on other programs that are established to help people, animals and the envrionement to help live in peace and harmony. 

Jane talks about future generations alot which makes so much sense because we are degrading our environment so much that the next generations will not be able to sustain themselves properly.  It is our job to enure that our children and grandchildren have the ability to live comfortably in their world.

 
 

Blog Reflections

1) Consider your food system.  What do you like and dislike about it?  Consider taste, nutrition, cost, equity and environmental issues.

I feel like I have two food systems.  The one I use in Swan River and the one I use in Winnipeg, each are significantly different.  Back in Swan River life is easy as I leech off of my parents.  Our meat comes from the local butcher where local beef and pork is sold.  Produce and bread are bought from the local Co-op which I feel is a trustworthy source.  Unfortunately living in Canada, we import a lot of our produce, although there are quite a few Manitoba and Canadian options in Co-op.  Our bread is bought at a local bakery or the Co-op where it is made daily.  I like my food system back home because I know where everything is made and the people who make it.  It is averagely price and tastes pretty good to me.  However in Winnipeg, everything is bought from stores such as Superstore and Costco.  Living as a student I tend to lean towards making a purchase based on price instead of environmentally good choices.  Meat and veggies come from Costco, the chicken is cheap but I’ve also noticed it tastes cheap unlike the chicken I get back home.  The veggies seem to last longer in the fridge than what they normally should so I’m thinking there is something they are putting on them.  I dislike everything about my food system in Winnipeg but unfortunately my roommate also likes cheap and we are students.  I feel that once I establish myself in life with a job I can make better choices as to what I am buying.

 

2) What role if any, should zoos play in conservation/education?  Is it ethical to keep animals in zoos?  If so what size/type of animals or zoos? Do you enjoy visiting zoos?

I’m so torn on the zoo idea.  I feel in some cases zoos could be great for the conservation of animals such as the black footed ferret that was near extinction but do to breeding programs they were re-introduced into the wild but I don’t think it is ethical to keep animals in zoos.  I feel zoos are not a good way of conveying conservation or education.  Animals behave differently in zoos than in the wild and educating people on animals in the zoo doesn’t feel right.  I would prefer to have children go to an interpreter event in a provincial park and learn about species in their natural environment.  I am also a strong believer in letting nature take its course.  I don’t believe that young or injured animals should be rehabilitated to spend their lives in cages.   The last zoo I visited was in Sydney, Australia and honestly I don’t remember much of it.  I do however remember a petting zoo that we went to just outside Sydney.  From what I remember (I was 9) was the kangaroos and emus living in basically a fenced in park and had quite the distance to roam around.  I have inner turmoil because I loved petting and feeding the animals but I know we should not be interaction with animals in that kind of setting.  I think now I would find the zoos depressing due to the fact of the animals in those cages not being allowed to live as they should.

 

3) What am I doing to promote sustainability and happiness in my life?  What would I like to do?  I pledge…

Right now I don’t feel I am doing anything to promote sustainability.  I don’t have a lot of money so I continually buy the cheapest of everything, get mad when it breaks and continue to buy a new one of whatever.  I do however attempt to recycle or fix whatever I do break but after the class discussion one day I noticed that since graduating in 2007 I’ve had 5 cellphones and 3 laptops.  The laptops have broken completely and I’ve giving them to my brother for spare parts.  My cellphones I did keep and have given away to people who have lost their cellphone so I suppose they are getting a second life.  I try my hardest to use everything I own to its full potential as my parents are constantly boasting about all the things that are still working 30 years after buying them so I feel my things should do the same.  Once I get a job and a place of my own I would like to buy more expensive things that will last longer, plus I’ll probably save some life in these things as I’m not hauling them around 2 times a year.  I pledge to stop buying crappy, cheap objects and spend the extra dollars to acquire more sustainable things. 

Blog 2 – Exploitation of Nature, Ethics, Climate Change and Energy Sources

Readings and Summaries

The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis

Lynn White Jr. talks about how religion is to blame for our current environmental degradation.  The increase of human population numbers has affected environmental integrity by irrigation, overgrazing and the cutting of the forests.  These practices have profoundly changed the ecology of some systems.  It has been noted that human activities such as the advancement and evolution of technologies have had a direct impact on ecological systems.  Such examples could be as automobiles became more common, the droppings from horses have ceased and the sparrows that fed on these dropping have disappeared.  When the first cannons were shot, it left the people searching for the materials used for these cannons.  Mining for potash, iron ore, sulfur and charcoal have contributed to deforestation and the erosion of soils/rocks.  Also with the burning of coal it was noted in 1285 that London had a smog problem. 

 Back in the day when oxen were used as the power to pull the plows, man had more of a connection with nature, now that machinery is used, that connection has changed profoundly.  Man at that time was considered “a part of nature” but now we consider ourselves the “master” of nature and see no reason as to not exploit the land.  This is the similar view of the Christians, that the land, animals and plants were given to us by God and that we have the right to rule over such objects and use them as we see fit.  It is God’s will for man to exploit nature.

(http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-genesis-1-26-image6913192)

 But in and around the late 18^th century, many scientists deemed the hypothesis of God unnecessary and reasons for exploiting the land became what is culturally acceptable.  All acceptable science and technology these days seem are considered to be “Western” in style and method.  Although many ideas came from the East, the West had the rapidly expanding skills and technologies.

 The approach to remedy our troubles with environmental degradation must be religions due to the fact that our troubles are mainly religious.  Technology and science in this day and age have outgrowth the Christian way of thinking about man and nature.  To fix the problem we need to look upon ourselves and find a new relationship with the land.

 

Critical Thinking – What is the “purpose” of nature?
The purpose of nature largely depends on a person’s point of view and background.  In the Christian sense, nature is to be dominated over and use to further human growth. Where as in aboriginal cultures you are a part of nature and understand that everything has spirit.  The trees, animals and landscapes all hold value, but not in an economical way. 

 I feel the purpose of nature should not be aesthetic or economical.  Sure we do need things like trees, animals and plants to survive, but we need to respect the land and these living organisms like we would for a human.  Nature is a web of interconnecting living organisms and no one should hold dominance over it.

 

 A Sand County Almanac

Wolves have gotten a bad reputation among people.  From a human perspective they decrease deer populations for hunters and remove cows from farmers herds decreasing their profits but people rarely look at the wolves from a landscape perspective, specifically the mountain.  The absence of wolves has a direct link to the mountain.  Increased deer population means the foraging of plants and trees intensifies, leaving the mountains and landscapes barren of these important species.  Wolf predation also ensures healthy populations of species, as in Darwin’s theory of natural selection.

 Ecologic ethics varies quite substantially from social ethics.  Ethics at first evolved from individual relations to individual/society relations, to intergrading individuals into society and finally to integrate social organizations into society. We have yet to deal with the relationships between man and land, plants, or animals.  To have valuable ecological ethics you need to have love, respect and admiration for the land, plants and animals.  Without this the concept of ecological ethics is unrealistic.

 

 

(http://good-wallpapers.com/animals/22834)

 The most serious obstacle in dealing with ecological ethics is the lack of education and to stop thinking of the land as an economical source and problem.  In this view “a thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community.  These land ethics are a product of social evolution that needs to continue.

 The idea of conservation has good intentions but yet that do not have the critical understanding of the land or of economic land use.  To ensure environmental integrity and biological diversity, we must have a relationship with the land.

 

Critical Thinking – What is the lesson of Aldo Leopold’s “Thinking Like a Mountain”?

The lesson of Leopold’s Thinking like a Mountain is that our actions as humans have consequences for all other parts of the natural system.  Removing important predators can have an adverse effect on other parts of the system as removing the wolf lead to higher deer populations and the destruction of the mountain by the deer.  Also that if the wolves were to disappear there would be no “natural selection” left so the populations of the prey would become weaker in time as there is nothing to take away the weakest link except for disease.

 Having an ecocentric point of view I completely agree with this way of thinking.  Ecosystems need a balance and once that balance has been compromised there are adverse effects.  Nature ultimately regulates the ecosystem itself but once human influence begins we can alter the ecosystem substantially. 

 

 

 Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis

Global atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases have increase due to human activities.  These greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO²), methane (CH⁴),  and nitrous oxide (NO).

Greenhouse Gases	Pre-Industrial Level	2005 Level
CO2	280 ppm	379 ppm
CH4	715 ppb	1774 ppb
NO	270 ppb	319 ppb

As you can see, all three greenhouse gases have increased.  CO² have averaged an increase of 1.9 ppm in the last 10 years where between 1960 and 2005 it averaged 1.4.  There is year to year variability to keep in mind as well as estimate uncertainty.  The uses of fossil fuels have accelerated the increasing levels also.  CH⁴ levels have begun to decrease since the early 1990’s but the increase in levels is likely due to agriculture and fossil fuel use as well.  One third of all NO emissions are said to be primarily from agriculture.

 

There are many examples of direct observations of climate change: 

• 11 of 12 warmest years (1995-2006) ever recorded
• lower and mid-tropospheric temperatures increasing
• average atmospheric water vapour content has increased
• global ocean temperatures have increased
• loss of mass from ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctic
• sea levels rising
• Arctic temperatures increasing
• Arctic sea ice decreasing
• permafrost layers decreasing

(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254862/All-sea--polar-bear-cub-drift-shrinking-ice-12-miles-land-expert-says-survived.html)

 There are also many projections of the future changes to climate.  These include:

• increasing acidification of the ocean
• snow cover to contract
• sea ice to shrink
• hot extremes will continue
• tropical cyclones will become more intense
• amounts of precipitation will increase in high latitudes and decrease in subtropical land regions
• contraction of Greenland ice sheet will continue
• sea levels will continue to rise

Critical Thinking – Given that projections of global climate change are not certain, should we act now?  If not, how long should we wait?

I feel that the precautionary principal plays well into the idea of climate change.  It has been shown that these greenhouse gases are increasing and it is very likely due to human influence.  Why not start to act now?  The precautionary principal implies that we need have strategies in place for situations with scientific uncertainty.  We do not know how severe the climate change will be but why not use cost-effective measure to prevent these greenhouse gases to keep increasing.  We could wait but then we are just thrusting the same situation on our children and grandchildren but the outcomes could be more severe for them.  I feel the whole concept of “not in my backyard” is being used as a reason to delay the actions for global warming whereas we could start taking preventative measures.

 

 

A Path to Sustainable Energy by 2030

A sustainable, clean energy world is in our reach and can be obtained by 2030 if the world is willing to work together.  There any alternatives to using fossil fuels that are renewable and sustainable.  Those being solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydroelectric and battery powered. 

 At any point in time the globe is using approximately 12.5 trillion watts (TW) of energy, this is projected to increase to 16.9TW.  If the globe was to use only wind, water and solar energy technologies the energy demand would decrease to 11.5.  The use of wind energy technology could provide 40-85 TW and solar energy technology could provide 580 TW.  Currently the globe is only using 0.002 TW and 0.008 TW for wind and solar energies respectively.

(http://www.greentechforum.net/?s=&currentPage=2)

To ensure this sustainable energy plan for 2030 would work, the globe would only use 9% of all energy from water technologies which would mean there would be 900 hydroelectric stations, 70% of which already exist.  51% of energies would come from wind technologies and would need 3.8 million large turbines which would only occupy less than 1% of the earth’s surface.  Finally solar technologies would generate the last 40% of the energy needed.  This energy would come from 89,000 photovoltaic solar plants, occupying about 0.33% of the earth’s surface.  It may seem like a lot of new development but if we were to depend on coal, with the increasing demand we would need at least 13,000 more coal plants not to mention all the land needed for mining.

There are a few hurdles with upgrading the world energy supply.  Those being the materials needed to construct such technologies as wind turbines, solar panels and batteries.  Rare earth elements for the turbines and batteries are the most problematic.  Also the occurrence of intermittency problems but the could be solved with various strategies such as grid storage and combining and interconnecting geographically disperse areas to back up one another.

The issue with renewable energy isn’t the technologies, because we do have them.  It is more of a political issue.  Fossil fuel companies give large amounts of their profits back to the governments as well as the time and money put forth already by the governments in the coal industry.

 

Critical Thinking – Over the years, society has spent enormous amounts of money to building the current energy system.  Why does this make it difficult to change to a new energy system?
The current energy system that we here have established in Canada would make it extremely difficult to upgrade to a new system.  As we speak the Canadian and Alberta governments are trying to strike deals to install new pipelines that would carry oil to be refined in the States.  Economically speaking it would significantly damage our economy here in Canada.  Oil companies pay the government millions of dollars and with renewable energy Canada would proceed into an economic slump.  There are variables as how these production sites would be remediated and how much would that cost?  It would be parallel to building a new home from group up only to live it in for a year or two and then abandon it.

 

Activity

Consider your reliance on fossil fuels. Are you comfortable with your level of dependence? Do you feel that this is sustainable for the next 10 years? Are there steps you would like to take to reduce this reliance?

The majority of the time I do rely heavily on fossil fuels.  With the exception of walking to school, I use my car to drive myself where I need to be.  I would like to say that I am not comfortable with my level of dependence but being brought up in the country, it is unrealistic to become independent of fossil fuels.  In the city I can see how it may be a lot more feasible with the options of carpooling and public transportation. 

I feel that it is sustainable for the next 10 years but it’s the time after that.  How dependent are my children and grandchildren going to be?  Will there be better more sustainable energy resources available?  Are we going to have to force ourselves to become unattached to fossil fuel because I know we cannot keep up the rate of consumption forever.  When will we run out of fossil fuels?  It’s only a matter of when it’s going to happen.

When living in the city I find it much easier not to rely on my car so much.  I walk to school, car pool with my roommate when going shopping, and carpool with my sister when driving back home.  Eventually when I get settled where ever in life it would be nice to live close enough to work to walk daily, but at the moment my future plans are like next week’s lottery, who knows where or what I will be.

 

 

Blog Reflections

1. Can parks meet its dual mandate of access and protection?

I think this is a very difficult question to answer.   Yes parks need to be protected but also the tourism industry brings in a lot of money into the governments.  I don’t think it is possible to meet this dual mandate because of human nature.  I worked as a park patrol officer for three seasons and I know that people don’t like to follow rules.  They are going to do as they want until they get caught.  Take for example hiking trails; if you see a sign that says “Do not go off trail”, you are going to have those rebellious people who are going to do exactly the opposite.  The only way to ensure compliance is to have enforcement and yet that costs money that the government does not want to fund.  If society can change their nature as a whole society it may be possible but until then, you are going to have someone that wants to break the rules.

 

2. How can this be achieved in Wapusk?

The dual mandate of access and protection could be achieved in Wapusk with enforcement and compliance.  Interpreters could give guided walks only or impose very strict regulations to those visiting the park.  Again, the way society has evolved it is hard say exactly what will work.  You can impose regulations on the time period of the day you can visit, the amount of people allowed in the park, or control what activities take place within the park.

 

3. What future would you like to see for the Alberta Tar Sands project?

I would like to see the Alberta Tar Sand project modified to become more environmentally friendly.  There has to be technologies that can be used to clean it up.  It would be great if we did not need the oil anymore and then we would not need to tap into the tar sands but realistically our society has become too dependent on oil for this to ever happen.  If we could modify the practices so it becomes more environmentally sustainable, I think that would be good enough.  I do not believe than my generation will stop using oil.