Current Events Blog: Energy

Article Link: http://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-voice/2016/08/09/finalizing-conservation-and-clean-energy-plan-crucial-regions-future/88435282/

Topic: Energy (Consumption, Efficiency, Conservation, and Alternatives)

This article focuses on the plan to build wind and solar farms in the California Desert. The article discusses how with the sunny, open desert, the country’s leaning toward renewable energy and the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan make this idea possible. After six years of negotiations and changes, the plan proposes that more than 600 miles of public land in the desert of California be used to build wind and solar farms, enough to meet and surpass California Energy Commission goals. The article acknowledges that many people believe the plan does not allow enough public land for development, but argues that the plan is necessary in order to solve the climate crisis and says that the plan should be approved. I agree with the author of this article and believe that the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan should be approved. The main problems with wind and solar farms are that they take up a lot of land and they are seen as unsightly and ugly by some people. In the desert, there are hundreds of miles of land that are unused and unseen by most Californians. Coupled with perfect sunny and windy conditions, I think that the California desert is the perfect place to build wind turbines and install solar panels. Although some people may argue that the renewable energy sources take up too much public land, that public land was not being used before. It was merely desert but with wind and solar farms in place, the land will be used productively in order to generate clean sources of electricity for Californians. In my opinion, having wind turbines and solar panels on that public land is a better use of the public land because it benefits many people. Although the amount of land proposed in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan would make enough wind and solar farms to surpass the goal of the California Energy Commission, I do not think that this means that there should be less land use. Instead of meeting the goal, the goal should be surpassed if possible. Because that public land was not being used for anything before, nothing is lost in using that land to use renewable resources and generate energy and electricity.

Current Events Blog: Land Use, Urbanization, and Urban Sprawl

Article Link: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-chaotic-urbanization-puts-cities-in-harms-way-un-2016-5

Topic: Land Use, Urbanization, and Urban Sprawl

Big cities have a higher risk of being hit by man-made or natural disasters. This article argues that national governments need to take more steps and precautions in order to protect their citizens. With exponentially increasing urbanization, governments must plan in order to manage their populations and protect people who move to urban centers unplanned. The national government must takes steps to aid the local authorities and reduce the chances of a huge disaster killing many people through urban planning. Many countries have already taken actions and are making plans to protect urban centers. I think more countries should follow suit and make efforts to make cities safer to benefit the residents of these cities. However, this article lacks enough evidence and facts to back up its claim that big cities are dangerous because they have a higher risk of being devastated by disasters and that the way to solve this problem is through urban planning. Perhaps an example of a populated city that was struck by disaster due to a lack of urban planning would be helpful in adding to the author’s claim that urban planning needs to be done to protect citizens of large cities. While common sense tells me that big cities are more inclined to disasters, as I read the article I wondered if urban planning was the best way to approach the problem and attempt to solve it. Would urban planning prevent natural and man-made disasters? And with the massive quantity of people moving to urban centers unplanned, is it possible to plan for all of them to take residence in cities? What exactly is it about big cities that makes them more inclined to disasters? I think that having the answers to some of these questions would be beneficial in finding a solution to make cities safer for people who live in them. I think the article would have benefited from more evidence in the form of real life examples. I believe that had the author used more examples and added more facts to back up their claim that their argument would have been more effective and that their message would have been clearer. 

Current Events Blog: Land/Air/Water/Noise Pollution

Article Link: https://asiancorrespondent.com/2016/05/beyond-china-asia-grapples-air-pollution/

Topic: Land / Air / Water / Noise Pollution

According to the World Health Organization, air pollution is most severe in urban, low and middle-income countries in Southeast Asian and the Eastern Mediterranean with the most polluted cities being in India. This article discusses where the most polluted cities are, what leads to air pollution, and why it has become such a big issue in these cities. In many cities, the high level of air pollution is due to the small amount of regulations on air pollution. Because there is no control, the air pollution gets out of hand and to levels that are dangerous. In Vietnam, road traffic accounts for most of the air pollution and the use of motorbikes has made it worse. In order to minimize their effect, Vietnam has places a tax on motorbikes and plans to make new metro lines. Many other countries have started to place regulations to control air pollution in attempt to have cleaner air, avoid deaths caused by air pollution, and help the environment and other important populations. I think that more countries need to follow the initiatives placed by countries such as China and Vietnam. China used to have the most heavily air polluted cities but has been able to decrease the amount of air pollution and take some of their cities off of the list of most heavily air polluted by passing and enforcing laws that controlled emissions and air pollution. Vietnam is another example discussed in the article. I think that more countries, primarily India, should take the same action in order to improve air quality in cities with heavy air pollution. It is important to find the source of the air pollution and then do whatever is possible to cut down the source in order to decrease air pollution. In Vietnam, a huge cause was motorbikes so the federal government started placing taxes on them and making efforts to create public transportation in order to diminish the use of motorbikes and therefore decrease air pollution. Based on the examples provided in the article, I completely agree that the governments of countries should enforce laws and restrictions in order to decrease air pollution.

Current Events Blog: Food, Forestry, Agriculture and Aquaculture

Article Link: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35198675

Topic: Food, Forestry, Agriculture and Aquaculture

According to this article, aquaculture is a huge threat to mangroves in South East Asia, accounting for almost 40% of its deforestation in only two years. Many mangroves have been converted into rice or palm oil plantations, which is widely known but the magnitude of its effects on mangrove populations was shocking to researchers. Mangrove forests are important in coastal communities because they allow for biodiversity and provide food and resources to the people in these communities. The article goes on to discuss how bringing awareness of the importance of mangroves is vital and discusses some of the initiatives already in place in some South East Asian countries to protect mangroves. However, the article assures that more must be done to stop the deforestation of mangroves and to save existing mangroves. Based on the information given in the article, I agree that more needs to be done to save and preserve mangroves. The article provides sufficient evidence that shows how important mangroves are to the environment and people in coastal communities in South East Asia. I had no knowledge of mangroves, their importance, or their endangerment before I read this article but now that I know, I feel more inclined to do something to help this problem. The article cites awareness as one of the most important things that can help save mangroves and I agree based on my own experience of learning about mangroves and their importance by reading this article. However, as I was reading the article I asked why the people in South East Asia took to deforestation and made rice and palm oil plantations to replace mangroves when mangroves provide so much to the people in South East Asia. Are rice and palm oil plantations more profitable than the resources that mangroves provide? I also want to know if the loss of aquaculture and rice and palm oil farms would negatively affect the people who converted mangroves to aquaculture and if there is a way to have a balance of both.

Current Events Blog: Mining, Soil Dynamics, and Geology

Article Link: https://www.yahoo.com/news/amid-coal-market-struggles-less-060621933.html?ref=gs

Topic: Mining, Soil Dynamics, and Geology (Earth, Rock, and Plate Tectonics)

This article talks about how the once seemingly endless amounts of coal is predicted to be exhausted in the next few decades. The United States Geological Survey found that the Powder River Basin’s lifespan is around 40 years when it was initially believed to be 150 years. The article goes on to talk about how people claimed America has enough coal to last centuries and the future for coal mining. Currently, mining costs are rising because it takes more mining to find coal and coal prices are falling, causing many coal mining companies to go bankrupt. I think that this is the perfect example of why ideas and predictions always need to be revisited and re-tested. Although in the 1990’s the prediction was that coal would not be exhausted for centuries, the reality is that it won’t even last for half of one century and this miscalculation is due to people taking into accountable coal that cannot be mined or used. I know that some people might argue that testing the same idea or gathering the same information more than once is redundant and would be a waste of time, it is often beneficial to double check previous research, which is why many researchers and scientists throughout history test previous findings. For example, the Miller-Urrey experiment that was done to simulate primitive earth and find some of the possible organic compounds that could have formed life on Earth was conducted multiple times after that by multiple people and continues to be redone and improved to this day. In addition, had the United States Geological Survey believed the predictions from the 1990’s and not conducted research on the Powder River Basin area, people and industries would have continued as if our coal supply would last much longer than it actually would. I think the study conducted by the United States Geological Survey was valid because they only counted coal that could be mined and used and current technologies are much better at predicting how much coal there is than the technologies that were available in the 1990’s. With the decline of the coal industry, this article made me wonder about the future of energy sources. What will come to replace coal as the most popular energy source in the United States?

Current Events Blog: Biodiversity

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/14/biodiversity-below-safe-levels-across-over-half-of-worlds-land-study

Topic: Biodiversity – Loss, Preservation, and Conservation

According to the Guardian, habitat destruction has decreased biodiversity so much that it could negatively impact agriculture, human health, and the economies of many countries. Scientists place the blame on humans destroying habitats to use as farmland. According to an international study published in Science, biodiversity has fallen below the safety limit of a loss of 10% in over 50% of the world’s land. The article goes on to discuss the worries of many scientists and researchers who warn about what the decrease in biodiversity could mean for the world and how while there is no way to know for sure how much biodiversity loss is too much, we should make efforts to conserve biodiversity. I think the author and the researchers and scientists mentioned in the article make valid points and agree that more efforts need to be made to protect biodiversity. Although no one is sure of how much biodiversity is needed in order to maintain balance and a healthy environment, it is important to keep biodiversity as great as possible so that we never find out since we know that the consequences of too little biodiversity would be extreme. However, I couldn’t help but wonder exactly how much biodiversity is needed in the world and why the safety limit was set at 10%. Although I asked how much biodiversity is needed, I think that biodiversity should be maximized and out goal should not just be to stay barely above the minimum. Instead of the 10% safety limit, I think the goal should be set higher to ensure that biodiversity is conserved and that more should be done to enforce this limit. If it went below the assigned safety limit once, more should be done to make sure that biodiversity is preserved in the future and make sure this event does not repeat itself or become a trend. For example, laws should be passed that restrict habitat destruction for use of farmland and even more importantly, these new and currently existing laws should be enforced by the government in order to ensure the preservation and conservation of biodiversity.

Current Events Blog: Water

Article Link: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-fresno-water-penalties-20150622-story.html

Topic: Water – Use, Loss, Allocation, and Conservation

This article is about how Fresno, California has started using more aggressive tactics in order to conserve water during the severe drought. The city has started to use a team of water monitors who follow up on reports of people wasting water and hand out penalties and fines to citizens who do not follow water conservation laws. The article follows a man named Wells, who takes on the job of water monitor and travels to reported water wasters to warn, stop, or fine them. The article goes on to discuss the success of this tactic with Fresno meeting and surpassing its conservation goal. The article compares Fresno to other cities in California and calls for other cities to do their part in conserving water by taking on some of the extreme measures that Fresno has. I have to agree with the claim made by the author of the article. I believe that it is important for every part of California and every city in California to conserve as much water as it possibly can. The fewer number of citations and fines given in cities such as Los Angeles demonstrates how lax other cities in California are about water conservation laws. In time of a serious drought, it is unfair that citizens of one part of California give up more when everyone in the state should be making a greater effort to lessen their water usage. I think the author’s argument that everyone in California has to make a greater effort to conserve water during the drought is valid since everyone in California is affected by the drought. If the entire state came together and all made attempts to conserve water, each individual would have to give up less as opposed to everyone in one city, for example in Fresno, making huge sacrifices while others continue to live as they have been. This made me start thinking on a global level about how some countries take more initiative on conservation and helping the environment and how all countries should make efforts for the same reasons that every city in California should.