Blog Ten: Climate Efforts Falling Short, U.N. Panel Says

Summary: This blog was about the third recent report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is a group of officials in the United Nations that discuss climate change and possible solutions. The Panel agreed that, without extreme restrictions and changes in greenhouse emissions, there will be significant changes and potential catastrophic disasters seen worldwide within the next 15 years. Without limiting global warming, the average temperature (globally) could rise nearly 4 degree Fahrenheit – enough to lead to rising sea levels, inability to grow adequate food, and mass extinctions of animal and plant species. The positive end of solutions, such as implementing solar or wind power, is finding that these energy sources are becoming cheaper. However, in order to cut harmful emissions to an acceptable degree, new technologies will need to be added. These new technologies have not yet been created, and when they are, they will more than likely be quite expensive. The Panel found that, the costs in order to clean up our environment would be quite significant and, while many societies will be much richer than they currently are, over 5 percent will be poorer than they were initially, before having to dole out the money to fix previous generations mistakes.

Analysis: This article raised some really important points. Climate change is a well-known issue that affects every living and non-living thing on our planet. It will take a group effort in cleaning up the mess, just as it was, for the most part, a group effort in creating the problem (though some countries, our own being one of them, “donated” more to the issue than others). Also, while it is easy to say you will cut down on emissions by using public transportation or walking or some other small thing (that is in fact still important), it really isn’t an easy matter. Much of the carbon gas released into the atmosphere comes from industrial processes or factory farming. So what can we do? Are we, as a developed country, really ready to give up our industry or the (amount of) meat that is consumed here? Because, from the way the article talks, there may either be new technologies created to clean up the environment, or there may simply be huge taxes added on to products or the production of products that are not environmentally safe. How many of us will be able to afford these luxuries? 

This article was published in The New York Times on Monday 14 April 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/science/earth/un-climate-panel-warns-speedier-action-is-needed-to-avert-disaster.html?emc=edit_th_20140414&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=67003518&_r=0

Blog Nine: U.S. Gas Tantalizes Europe, but It's Not a Quick Fix

Summary: This article went into detail about how the United States would potentially supply much of Eurasia (particularly Eastern European countries, like Hungary, Ukraine, Bulgaria and Greece) with natural gas. The idea is nice and almost valiant of the United States, but it comes with a steep price. There are currently workers in Louisiana that are building a terminal in order to send natural gas anywhere on the globe, and it will be completed by the end of 2015. However, this obviously doesn't solve the immediate issue. Gazprom raised the price for gas in the Ukraine up 80% this past week, which is only adding to the tension between these two countries. While there are bills already in the process of being approved, it could cost nearly $7billion (or more...) to build the terminal, and $100million just to find suitable sites for these terminals, besides the one currently being built. As stated earlier, the building of the terminal(s) can take several years, but this is after construction has begun. It may take months or even years just to get the approval to build these terminals.

Analysis: I wrote a blog about an article regarding Russia's withholding gas from the Ukraine a few weeks ago. Basically, Russia was using the natural gas supplies that they serve much of Eurasia with (through their company, Gazprom) as a threat, such as "if you do/don't do this, we will raise the prices or put you on a stiff budget of natural gas." So I'm glad to see somewhat of a "follow up" article about this. Personally, I think the gas terminal construction idea is a terrible one. I'm against natural gas, because it's really a dirty form of energy. I think we should start making more moves towards renewable energy. Not only are they better for the environment, but you have to ask yourself - when was the last time you heard of two (or more) countries fighting over solar power? Or wind power? You can't. Maybe I'm missing something, but those are resources available to any and every one. If we began implementing these resources, and did so on a global scale, people wouldn't have to pay for gas anymore (or at least what they had been paying, since they wouldn't use as much) and people wouldn't necessarily become as sick due to smog, poor air quality, unsafe water, etc.

"U.S. Gas Tantalizes Europe, but It's Not a Quick Fix"

This article was published in The New York Times on 8 April 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/08/business/energy-environment/us-gas-tantalizes-europe-but-its-not-a-quick-fix.html?ref=science

Blog Eight: Panel's Warning on Climate Risk: Worst is Yet to Come

Summary: This article talks about a report that was released on Monday, March 31 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. This panel was created by the United Nations in order to discuss climate science and current issues that are feeding into climate change. The report states that ice caps and sea ice in the Arctic are melting, water supplies are dwindling in many areas of the world, and many species of organisms are either migrating to other, more hospitable areas of the world or they are simply dying out. To add to this, oceans are rising and becoming more and more acidic due to the levels of carbon dioxide that is being absorbed, due to industry or car exhaust. The article makes a connection between these happenings and the global social problems that will result. For example, with lack of water as well as poor or toxic soil comes the inability to grow food. As we have discussed in class, when resources are in short supply, violence can certainly start making its mark on the people of the area. 

Analysis: This was a great article. We just finished talking in class about violence, and I think it’s interesting to consider how violence begins, in relation to global social problems such as the issue of climate change. I think that a lot of people tend to brush it off as being an issue, but not a “serious” issue. Climate change is definitely having an impact on every person and organism on this planet, as the article stated. In one way or another, it affects us all and as easy as it often is for us (as Americans) to say, “violence won’t happen here; it won’t affect us that badly,” it’s absurd to think that. When you no longer have clean water because it’s full of chemicals and you no longer have food because you can’t grow anything, what do you think will happen? Overall, I thought this was a good article and I highly recommend it to anyone, interested in Environmental Issues/Climate Change or not – READ THIS. (I also recommend listening to “Collapse (Post-Amerika)” by Rise Against if you’re into that sort of thing…it’s also relevant.)

Article published in the New York Times on 31 March 2014

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/01/science/earth/climate.html?action=click&module=Search&region=searchResults%230&version=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%3Faction%3Dclick%26region%3DMasthead%26pgtype%3DHomepage%26module%3DSearchSubmit%26contentCollection%3DHomepage%26t%3Dqry860%23%2FPanel%2527s%2520warning%2520on%2520climate%2520risk%3A%2520worst%2520is%2520yet%2520to%2520come&_r=0 

Blog Seven: Fish Embryos Exposed to Oil From BP Spill Develop Deformities, a Study Finds

Summary: This article, as the title suggests, was about the contamination and poor development of fish embryos that had been exposed to oil during the BP oil spill. The oil spill, also known as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, occurred almost four years ago and included the spillage of nearly 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers have discovered numerous deformities in several different species of fish embryos, including herring, salmon, and tuna. One of the researchers, Barbara Block, also stated that it is a recently discovered fact that petroleum “has a cardio-toxic impact on vertebrate hearts.” The researchers stated that, at this present time, there is no obvious decrease in fish populations in this area which the oil spill occurred.

Analysis: As an Environmental Studies major, reading articles like this one just make me shake my head. The information is there. We know that these chemicals and resources can bring harm to not only ourselves but to other living, breathing creatures as well. Honestly, it’s quite stupid that we allow things like this to even happen. When animals are exposed to toxins and we then eat them, the level of toxicity found in our bodies is actually amplified compared to what was in the animal’s body. Besides the immediate concern of which fish were affected by the oil spill, you must also consider the possibility of fish sales and also the sheer size and volume of this spill. There is honestly no telling how far the oil could have spread or how many countries it affected, directly or indirectly. It may take another ten or fifteen years to have a full view of this spill, from the event itself to the last effects of its aftermath. I’ve heard that hindsight is 20/20. I’m curious to see whether we keep our eyes open and observe in the future or if we will close them and pretend like we saw nothing. 

Published in the New York Times on Tuesday, March 25, 2014

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/us/fish-embryos-exposed-to-oil-from-bp-spill-develop-deformities-a-study-finds.html?_r=0

Blog Five: U.S. Hopes Boom in Natural Gas Can Curb Putin

Article Publication Date: 5 March 2014, New York Times

Summary: This article was basically about the natural gas company in Russia, known as Gazprom, threatening to stop supplying the Ukraine with natural gas. As an ally of the Ukraine, the United States has decided to step up to the plate and begin supplying the Ukraine with natural gas in order to make them more independent from Russia.

 

Analysis: This article seemed really interesting. I thought it really did a good job of showing how easy it is for resources to get pulled into arguments between governments. It has been a common move, as history shows, for Russian presidents to threaten to stop supplying goods if another nation-state does not comply with Russian rule or is at odds with them. The article also brought to light the issue of money and how easily people will slit their own throats for money. For example, the article mentions fracking and, aside from one small comment about fracking leading to the poisoning of some rural watersheds (no big deal, right?), the article talks almost approvingly of fracking, as if it will be a great money making strategy for the United States. For those of you that don't know what fracking is, it is a procedure in which fluid (a mix of water and various chemicals) is pumped into the ground at high pressure in order to break (or fracture) shale rocks in order to release the natural gas within. When natural gas is found, it spews back up, carrying much of the fluid pumped in with it. It usually takes between one and eight million gallons of water to do just one fracking job (what water crisis?). On top of this, as the article states, many people end up with contaminated water due to fracking in their area (If you've ever seen Gasland, you know what I mean). Natural resources and our usage of them are a pretty difficult topic to handle and discuss without bringing global politics into the matter, and unfortunately, the environmental impact of these fracturing procedures have been left out while Western countries try to defend the Ukraine against Russia. To me, it's quite a sticky situation. As an ally of the Ukraine, we cannot stand back while they are being bullied by Russia. At the same time though, I truly fear that this will just open the doors for us to implement fracking all over the United States or potentially in other countries.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/06/world/europe/us-seeks-to-reduce-ukraines-reliance-on-russia-for-natural-gas.html?src=me

 

http://www.dangersoffracking.com/