http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-04-30/global-warming/31506507_1_national-action-plan-climate-change-green-india-mission
Just posting this to show that India is doing its part to help with the global warming problem~~~~
Friday, May 18, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Climate Change Is Real-An Easy Guide To Explain Climate Change To Your Disbeliving Friends
Hello darlings~~
My post for this week is about CLIMATE CHANGE. Being a very controversial topic, I am more than happy to get nitty and gritty with this post.
When I was in highschool, the majority of my classmates were very secular and were just mouthpieces for whatever their parents believed. As I personally believed in climate change being more of a result of human action, than a natural cycle that the earth goes through, I found much opposition. My peers opposed simply because their parents didn't believe in it, not because they had actually done any research to make up their own mind. This is why out of the multiple links that professor Huff let us choose from, I choose the "no necessay downloading" PDF from the EPA's website, which is titled "Frequently Asked Questions About Global Warming And Climate Change: Back To The Basics". It is a short and sweet 8-page guide to all the basic questions that will help explain climate change and global warming to your non-believing friends;)
There are three main questions that I am required to answer based on the reading that I did.
1) Climate is most certainly changing! Climate change means the major changes that people are able to see that occur over decades and not the daily change in weather. For example in the last hundred years the average global temperature has risen 1.5F and the ocean has risen about 4-8 iches. This may seem like small changes, but they certainly are changes! Even the smallest change can affect many creatures and people. These climate changes are not just ice caps melting thousands of miles away from our homes, but even back at home, people that hunt animals sometimes to help feed their families are experiencing the negatives affects of this change. The time and season in which hunters could expect certain animals to be out, has changed because of their mating, migrating etc patterns.
2) Sad as it may be, humans have probably contributed the most to climate change. There are some smaller natural forces at work, but primarily it has been the large contribution of humans. Since the industrial revolution in the western world, the carbon emission output has more than doubled. We are responsible for deforestation in many countries like Brazil and Indonesia. Our greenhouse gases are destroying the atmosphere.
3) Climate change is already affecting our society and world. We can't reverse what we have done. Because of the constant heating of the earth, many animals will die out and while it might seem a far cry for the existence of polar bears to have any affect on the life of a California girl, they most certainly do. Every living creature plays some important part in the ecosystem, taking one of these parts out will change everything. Bringing the example closer to home, with the atmosphere change it affects the agriculture that my state is famous for. Longer summers, shorter winters has a direct impact on our agriculture. If humans do not try and stop the rapid climate change, there won't be a living Earth for anyone or thing to inhabit.
In my humble opinion, the skepticism exists because there are those who believe the change is normal and Earth does this every thousand years etc. I personally know some people that honestly think this is just a "cycle".
Many politicians and corporations benefit by brainwashing people into believing that climate change isn't a threat. Our oil consumption has a lot to do with climate change, and if you work in business you will know that many items are produced using tons of oil and oil is used in many other aspects of the stages of production to shipping. These companies need to be able to continue to use up the resources that they do, and rape the environment. If people suddenly wanted to protect it, this would damage if not ruin their companies. All their resources are pretty much not renewable sources from the earth, and their methods of production are not environmentally friendly.
If humans continue their destruction lifestyles, in 50 years I don't think think humans will be able to live on the Earth anymore. We can't sustain this lifestyle for very long. I am just honestly sad that the so many people don't realize that climate change is a huge concern.
My post for this week is about CLIMATE CHANGE. Being a very controversial topic, I am more than happy to get nitty and gritty with this post.
When I was in highschool, the majority of my classmates were very secular and were just mouthpieces for whatever their parents believed. As I personally believed in climate change being more of a result of human action, than a natural cycle that the earth goes through, I found much opposition. My peers opposed simply because their parents didn't believe in it, not because they had actually done any research to make up their own mind. This is why out of the multiple links that professor Huff let us choose from, I choose the "no necessay downloading" PDF from the EPA's website, which is titled "Frequently Asked Questions About Global Warming And Climate Change: Back To The Basics". It is a short and sweet 8-page guide to all the basic questions that will help explain climate change and global warming to your non-believing friends;)
There are three main questions that I am required to answer based on the reading that I did.
1) Climate is most certainly changing! Climate change means the major changes that people are able to see that occur over decades and not the daily change in weather. For example in the last hundred years the average global temperature has risen 1.5F and the ocean has risen about 4-8 iches. This may seem like small changes, but they certainly are changes! Even the smallest change can affect many creatures and people. These climate changes are not just ice caps melting thousands of miles away from our homes, but even back at home, people that hunt animals sometimes to help feed their families are experiencing the negatives affects of this change. The time and season in which hunters could expect certain animals to be out, has changed because of their mating, migrating etc patterns.
2) Sad as it may be, humans have probably contributed the most to climate change. There are some smaller natural forces at work, but primarily it has been the large contribution of humans. Since the industrial revolution in the western world, the carbon emission output has more than doubled. We are responsible for deforestation in many countries like Brazil and Indonesia. Our greenhouse gases are destroying the atmosphere.
3) Climate change is already affecting our society and world. We can't reverse what we have done. Because of the constant heating of the earth, many animals will die out and while it might seem a far cry for the existence of polar bears to have any affect on the life of a California girl, they most certainly do. Every living creature plays some important part in the ecosystem, taking one of these parts out will change everything. Bringing the example closer to home, with the atmosphere change it affects the agriculture that my state is famous for. Longer summers, shorter winters has a direct impact on our agriculture. If humans do not try and stop the rapid climate change, there won't be a living Earth for anyone or thing to inhabit.
In my humble opinion, the skepticism exists because there are those who believe the change is normal and Earth does this every thousand years etc. I personally know some people that honestly think this is just a "cycle".
Many politicians and corporations benefit by brainwashing people into believing that climate change isn't a threat. Our oil consumption has a lot to do with climate change, and if you work in business you will know that many items are produced using tons of oil and oil is used in many other aspects of the stages of production to shipping. These companies need to be able to continue to use up the resources that they do, and rape the environment. If people suddenly wanted to protect it, this would damage if not ruin their companies. All their resources are pretty much not renewable sources from the earth, and their methods of production are not environmentally friendly.
If humans continue their destruction lifestyles, in 50 years I don't think think humans will be able to live on the Earth anymore. We can't sustain this lifestyle for very long. I am just honestly sad that the so many people don't realize that climate change is a huge concern.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
It's about time, space, and some BPA!
Hello! Okay, to be honest, it isn't really about space but definitely time and BPA! For this week's scrumptious post, I'm going to be sharing some information about BPA and regulating toxic chemicals.
I choose to focus on this aspect of the article "Regulating Toxic Chemicals" because I had heard of BPA, but really didn't know a thing about it. I hope to enlighten you too.
The 24 page article was a lot to digest and remember, but what stuck out the most was BPA.
BPA is Bisphenol A and is one ingredient used to make plastic. Plastic as we know, takes lots of oil to make and the creation of it puts more carbon dioxide in the air. Without even looking anything else BPA is harmful. BPA is small doses was used to create baby bottles which infants use and therefore are exposed to. Exposure to BPA is very sensitive for infants especially and could lead to neurological difficulties later. The FDA released a report in August of 2008 saying that "BPA in food packaging didn't pose a health risk"(Regulating Toxic Chemicals, 64). After being read over by a panel of advisers, the report was deemed as flaws due to not enough samples being taken which were assessed. The issue is the money that is involved in this. If companies are not allowed to use some quantities of BPA to produce their formulas or bottles, they will lose money. In turn they will pressure or bribe the FDA to approve that level of BPA as "safe" so that they can continue producing whatever they produce.
When it comes to BPA, the precautionary principle is being used, otherwise there wouldn't be such a fuss over it. But as wonderful as it is that there is such a concern for our infants, there are many other toxic chemicals which should probably be examined more closely. As this issue of BPA levels is quite recent, we are not able to see the affects which they have on children until they are probably older. It is impossible to completely get rid of chemicals we use to produce things, at least at this moment. But I am glad that the FDA doesn't have free reign to allow even small doses of BPA in products.
What really ruffled my feathers was that the FDA had to be in this whole mess. The FDA is like some random child's lemonade stand. You don't know if that is real lemonade or pee. The FDA isn't trustworthy in the least. They are a company and shouldn't be regulating anything. On top of that, other government agencies aren't that much better when it comes to regulation of these chemicals.
It makes me want to go out, grow my own veggies and make my own instruments on which to eat them. I don't trust anyone know!
I choose to focus on this aspect of the article "Regulating Toxic Chemicals" because I had heard of BPA, but really didn't know a thing about it. I hope to enlighten you too.
The 24 page article was a lot to digest and remember, but what stuck out the most was BPA.
BPA is Bisphenol A and is one ingredient used to make plastic. Plastic as we know, takes lots of oil to make and the creation of it puts more carbon dioxide in the air. Without even looking anything else BPA is harmful. BPA is small doses was used to create baby bottles which infants use and therefore are exposed to. Exposure to BPA is very sensitive for infants especially and could lead to neurological difficulties later. The FDA released a report in August of 2008 saying that "BPA in food packaging didn't pose a health risk"(Regulating Toxic Chemicals, 64). After being read over by a panel of advisers, the report was deemed as flaws due to not enough samples being taken which were assessed. The issue is the money that is involved in this. If companies are not allowed to use some quantities of BPA to produce their formulas or bottles, they will lose money. In turn they will pressure or bribe the FDA to approve that level of BPA as "safe" so that they can continue producing whatever they produce.
When it comes to BPA, the precautionary principle is being used, otherwise there wouldn't be such a fuss over it. But as wonderful as it is that there is such a concern for our infants, there are many other toxic chemicals which should probably be examined more closely. As this issue of BPA levels is quite recent, we are not able to see the affects which they have on children until they are probably older. It is impossible to completely get rid of chemicals we use to produce things, at least at this moment. But I am glad that the FDA doesn't have free reign to allow even small doses of BPA in products.
What really ruffled my feathers was that the FDA had to be in this whole mess. The FDA is like some random child's lemonade stand. You don't know if that is real lemonade or pee. The FDA isn't trustworthy in the least. They are a company and shouldn't be regulating anything. On top of that, other government agencies aren't that much better when it comes to regulation of these chemicals.
It makes me want to go out, grow my own veggies and make my own instruments on which to eat them. I don't trust anyone know!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)