Monday, June 4, 2007
Sunday, May 20, 2007
can the earth be saved?
Why is the environment important and how does is affect planets and humans?
The environment is our home.if we never take care of her who will? Onl one species on earth has the power to save the other species. The environment has given us life and death, with all of our resources coming from her. Medicine, coal, water all from the environment. That is why it is important for us to look back and see what we are doing to the environment.
Starting from the past, the indutrial revolution has brought good and bad to this world. It has given us tools and materials for recreation, building and etc. The industrial revolution brought in money an easy working life. It is the age whereby industries and the manufacture of machinery was introduced, begining with textile industries, iron making techniques and the increases use of coal. Sad to say but these are the beginning towards a suffering environment.
Factories and industries contribute to the country's economy, but at what price? Some governments care more about how much money they make rather then caring for the environment. For example, the rivers of china are at risk of pollution from 21,000 indusries along the their rivers. These industries contain toxic chemicals that if were to have a spillage would result in catastrophic consequences, such as the loss of potable water. Every single human being needs water to survive, without water people will dehydrate to death of worst still they would drink the polluted water and die due to infections or disease caused by the pollution. Locals living along the rivers would lose their main source of food and would have to search for other alternatives of food as the pollution would infect the fishes in the rivers and would not be edible. Locals would lose transportation too as would put a stop in all activities concerning the river including recreational activities. Living alongside a polluted river could be dangerous, chemicals from the industries could react with the river water and create and even more hazardous chemical. The government would have to use billions of dollars to replenish the river and to repair the damaged.The country would lose more money from the industries rather than gain more from them. But some effects of spillages could not be repaired, such as the loss of lives, the introduction of diseases and the damage to the human body. This is what would happen when the government valued economic growth above environmental health.
We not only have to look at the industries but we also have to look at the minor things like our food. Humans are omnivorous, meaning they eat both plants and animals. Humans farm livestock such as cows, pigs and chickens to be used as our daily food. But is this good or bad? As the demand for food increases people go to more extreme measures for meet this demand. Farming of livestock has changed for the worst. No more do you see the animals roaming freely in a farm, what you would see are factories cramped with thousands of animals. The thousands of animals stored in these bad conditioned factories harm the environment as well. Massive number of animals equals to massive numbers of droppings. These dropping contain toxic gasses which in high concentrations would causes illnesses to our body and polluted the soil. These large factories require massive amounts of space and would need the loss of habitat of other wildlife to be erected. Loss of habitat means the loss of trees which the primary living place for wildlife. The loss of hundreds of trees would mean less trees to replenish the carbon dioxide levels in the air and would cause the green house effect to take effect and make the earth a warmer place to live in. With a warmer climate, ice from the north pole will start to melt and cause a rise in ocean water levels causing more natural disasters to occur such as floods.
With all these problem i dun think that the earth is in fit condition at all. The economical aspects of the factories and industries, the ecological aspects of the food chain all pont to signs of NO. These problems lead to one question only, CAN THE EARTH BE SAVED?
To answer this questions first we have to look at what is damaging our environment. The first problem is the massive use of the earth resources. The massive loss of trees is a huge problem. Wood is the product of trees and we can see wood EVERYWEHRE , furniture, paper and so for. The loss of trees mean the loss of wild life habitat. I know yo think that what is the prolem? can grow back the trees. There is a problem. Trees take a very long time to grow, some trees are over a few hundred years old.So the rate of which we are growing the trees are slower than the time taken to cut down trees. And it takes an even more longer time to devlop the newly planted trees into and ecosystem full of wildlife.
Another resource is fossil fuels. Petrol, plastic, oil, tar and cadels all come from a common source, FOSSIL FUELS. Just look at ur nearby petrol station and see the number or cars buying petrol. Everyday millions of cars are getting their fuel tanks full. This depletes our limited amount of fossil fuels we have at a fast and large pace. Due to this rapid usage of fossil fuels scientists now estimate that the fossil fuels will be one in about 50 years .Minerals are also at risk. Minerals such as gold and diamonds are very rare and need to be extracted by mining. Mining requires huge amounts of land which is also a part of resources and would result in the loss of wildlife and habitat again. A few hectares of land is to be mined only for a small amount of this minerals. Mining only cost destruction leaving huge holes in the ground and man-made desserts.
The second problem we are looking at is the people's general concern for the environment. Some people are so focused towards achieving their goal that they totally cross out environment health from their minds. For e.g the rivers of china are at risk of being polluted as the government valued economic growth above environmental degradation. Another example would be the pig farming in Poland. The pig farmers are s focused on their earnings that they forget about how their methods are affecting the local people. Some governments have made cities that has no green in them at all. Take New York City for example, do you see any trees in the middle of the streets? The only park i know of there is central park. Cities like that contain very low quality air from the thousands of exhaust from the vehicles and with no trees in the picture, the quality of air is even lower. No trees mean no replenishing the level of oxygen in the air, people will keep breathing out carbon dioxide but who or what converts the carbon dioxide into oxygen for us to breathe? The only answer is trees. Another concern is the publics awareness of environmental health. How many people do you see littering about? Probably a lot. Tissue papers, plastic bottles, plastic bags and tin cans are just a few of the rubbish we the public throw along the streets every day.
The third problem is technolgy. The progress of man has lead us to new inventions every single day with new equipment and computers. But when you buy that fresh band new computer at home, do you know where the old computer goes to? yes it goes to the trash can but wads after that? Computers and hardware are made of materials that release toxic gasses and chemicals when are to be recycled and disposed off. So what do we do with the old computers then? no solution has been found yet, they would probably end up in some junkyard and collect dust.
An another problem with technology is that some equipment or processes emit toxic chemicals into the air or even if the chemicals are contained in some way they is always a risk of having a containment breach. Industries are the main cause to these type of problems. The machines or processes required to make their product require chemicals and toxic waste is the leftover product. This toxic waste if not disposed off properly could result in chemical warfare with humans fighting for their survival. Another problem would be the location of these industries. The location of the industries cannot be located near any form of ecosystem. The ecosystem would be in mortal danger if were to be near an industry as there is always a risk of a spillage and the whole ecosystem could be wiped out in a matter of days.
These are all the main problems that cause harm to our environment. And now the big answer to the question CAN WE SAVE THE EARTH?. The answer is NO. We cannot predict or tell if the planet is to survive or not and man in some way will find a way to make this death occur faster but what we as environmentalist can do is slow down this process of earth dying and prevent the environment from suffering through a number of solutions towards the main problems i have mentioned earlier and with this we are so called saving the earth.
The first solution towards the massive use of resources is to find substitutes to substitute the materials that are being used with environmental friendly materials. For example the cars that use petrol, there is a substitute for that and some of the public are using them right now. They are fuel cell or electric cars, fuel cell cars make use of the energy produced from the combustion of hydrogen with oxygen to propel the car's movement. Unlike the normal petrol cars whereby the exhaust fumes contain environmental unfriendly gasses, the end product of this process is WATER , the liquid that is impossible to not have. Another process would be to recycle and reuse the products such as plastic bottles, plastic bags and paper. Paper can be recycled to be made into new paper which is just as good quality as freshly made from the factory paper and in turn would reduce or stop the cutting down of forests to make new paper and conserve wildlife, improve quality of air and in turn improve the health of man. The public can also save the resources of the earth by not buying precious minerals like gold and diamonds. These precious stone can be replaced by other materials that are just as nice to wear.
The second solution towards the public's general concern to the environment would be thru media and education. Which home do not have a television? or better yet which child do not watch television? Through conservation via television messages we can promote this sense of care towards the environment throughout all ages. In schools we can also promote environmental health with geography as a subject in school students would be more aware of their environment and thus lead to wanting to save the earth. Parents too can play apart in this, they can show good examples to their kids by not littering and so for. Environmental messages and posters could be posted through out the city and thus create even more awareness of the earth's condition to the public. Farmers would have to do monthly checkups on the amount of waste their livestock is giving out , the soil and dispose of the waste in proper ways that would not harm the environment.
The 3rd solution to the technological impact on the environment is by substitution, careful planning and design and also through strict laws and maintenance checkups. Companies and brands can substitute the materials they used in making the computers and hardware with materials that are not harmful to the environment. Industries would have to be located away from any cities forests and ecosystems, such as rivers and lakes. Strict laws from the government would have to be imposed to ensure the safety of the environment and the people of the cities.
Everyone has a part to play in conserving the environment and saving the earth. And with these solutions for problems like massive usage of resources, peoples general concern to the environment's health and the technological effects on the environment i hope we can prolong the life of earth and in turn save he earth.
The environment is our home.if we never take care of her who will? Onl one species on earth has the power to save the other species. The environment has given us life and death, with all of our resources coming from her. Medicine, coal, water all from the environment. That is why it is important for us to look back and see what we are doing to the environment.
Starting from the past, the indutrial revolution has brought good and bad to this world. It has given us tools and materials for recreation, building and etc. The industrial revolution brought in money an easy working life. It is the age whereby industries and the manufacture of machinery was introduced, begining with textile industries, iron making techniques and the increases use of coal. Sad to say but these are the beginning towards a suffering environment.
Factories and industries contribute to the country's economy, but at what price? Some governments care more about how much money they make rather then caring for the environment. For example, the rivers of china are at risk of pollution from 21,000 indusries along the their rivers. These industries contain toxic chemicals that if were to have a spillage would result in catastrophic consequences, such as the loss of potable water. Every single human being needs water to survive, without water people will dehydrate to death of worst still they would drink the polluted water and die due to infections or disease caused by the pollution. Locals living along the rivers would lose their main source of food and would have to search for other alternatives of food as the pollution would infect the fishes in the rivers and would not be edible. Locals would lose transportation too as would put a stop in all activities concerning the river including recreational activities. Living alongside a polluted river could be dangerous, chemicals from the industries could react with the river water and create and even more hazardous chemical. The government would have to use billions of dollars to replenish the river and to repair the damaged.The country would lose more money from the industries rather than gain more from them. But some effects of spillages could not be repaired, such as the loss of lives, the introduction of diseases and the damage to the human body. This is what would happen when the government valued economic growth above environmental health.
We not only have to look at the industries but we also have to look at the minor things like our food. Humans are omnivorous, meaning they eat both plants and animals. Humans farm livestock such as cows, pigs and chickens to be used as our daily food. But is this good or bad? As the demand for food increases people go to more extreme measures for meet this demand. Farming of livestock has changed for the worst. No more do you see the animals roaming freely in a farm, what you would see are factories cramped with thousands of animals. The thousands of animals stored in these bad conditioned factories harm the environment as well. Massive number of animals equals to massive numbers of droppings. These dropping contain toxic gasses which in high concentrations would causes illnesses to our body and polluted the soil. These large factories require massive amounts of space and would need the loss of habitat of other wildlife to be erected. Loss of habitat means the loss of trees which the primary living place for wildlife. The loss of hundreds of trees would mean less trees to replenish the carbon dioxide levels in the air and would cause the green house effect to take effect and make the earth a warmer place to live in. With a warmer climate, ice from the north pole will start to melt and cause a rise in ocean water levels causing more natural disasters to occur such as floods.
With all these problem i dun think that the earth is in fit condition at all. The economical aspects of the factories and industries, the ecological aspects of the food chain all pont to signs of NO. These problems lead to one question only, CAN THE EARTH BE SAVED?
To answer this questions first we have to look at what is damaging our environment. The first problem is the massive use of the earth resources. The massive loss of trees is a huge problem. Wood is the product of trees and we can see wood EVERYWEHRE , furniture, paper and so for. The loss of trees mean the loss of wild life habitat. I know yo think that what is the prolem? can grow back the trees. There is a problem. Trees take a very long time to grow, some trees are over a few hundred years old.So the rate of which we are growing the trees are slower than the time taken to cut down trees. And it takes an even more longer time to devlop the newly planted trees into and ecosystem full of wildlife.
Another resource is fossil fuels. Petrol, plastic, oil, tar and cadels all come from a common source, FOSSIL FUELS. Just look at ur nearby petrol station and see the number or cars buying petrol. Everyday millions of cars are getting their fuel tanks full. This depletes our limited amount of fossil fuels we have at a fast and large pace. Due to this rapid usage of fossil fuels scientists now estimate that the fossil fuels will be one in about 50 years .Minerals are also at risk. Minerals such as gold and diamonds are very rare and need to be extracted by mining. Mining requires huge amounts of land which is also a part of resources and would result in the loss of wildlife and habitat again. A few hectares of land is to be mined only for a small amount of this minerals. Mining only cost destruction leaving huge holes in the ground and man-made desserts.
The second problem we are looking at is the people's general concern for the environment. Some people are so focused towards achieving their goal that they totally cross out environment health from their minds. For e.g the rivers of china are at risk of being polluted as the government valued economic growth above environmental degradation. Another example would be the pig farming in Poland. The pig farmers are s focused on their earnings that they forget about how their methods are affecting the local people. Some governments have made cities that has no green in them at all. Take New York City for example, do you see any trees in the middle of the streets? The only park i know of there is central park. Cities like that contain very low quality air from the thousands of exhaust from the vehicles and with no trees in the picture, the quality of air is even lower. No trees mean no replenishing the level of oxygen in the air, people will keep breathing out carbon dioxide but who or what converts the carbon dioxide into oxygen for us to breathe? The only answer is trees. Another concern is the publics awareness of environmental health. How many people do you see littering about? Probably a lot. Tissue papers, plastic bottles, plastic bags and tin cans are just a few of the rubbish we the public throw along the streets every day.
The third problem is technolgy. The progress of man has lead us to new inventions every single day with new equipment and computers. But when you buy that fresh band new computer at home, do you know where the old computer goes to? yes it goes to the trash can but wads after that? Computers and hardware are made of materials that release toxic gasses and chemicals when are to be recycled and disposed off. So what do we do with the old computers then? no solution has been found yet, they would probably end up in some junkyard and collect dust.
An another problem with technology is that some equipment or processes emit toxic chemicals into the air or even if the chemicals are contained in some way they is always a risk of having a containment breach. Industries are the main cause to these type of problems. The machines or processes required to make their product require chemicals and toxic waste is the leftover product. This toxic waste if not disposed off properly could result in chemical warfare with humans fighting for their survival. Another problem would be the location of these industries. The location of the industries cannot be located near any form of ecosystem. The ecosystem would be in mortal danger if were to be near an industry as there is always a risk of a spillage and the whole ecosystem could be wiped out in a matter of days.
These are all the main problems that cause harm to our environment. And now the big answer to the question CAN WE SAVE THE EARTH?. The answer is NO. We cannot predict or tell if the planet is to survive or not and man in some way will find a way to make this death occur faster but what we as environmentalist can do is slow down this process of earth dying and prevent the environment from suffering through a number of solutions towards the main problems i have mentioned earlier and with this we are so called saving the earth.
The first solution towards the massive use of resources is to find substitutes to substitute the materials that are being used with environmental friendly materials. For example the cars that use petrol, there is a substitute for that and some of the public are using them right now. They are fuel cell or electric cars, fuel cell cars make use of the energy produced from the combustion of hydrogen with oxygen to propel the car's movement. Unlike the normal petrol cars whereby the exhaust fumes contain environmental unfriendly gasses, the end product of this process is WATER , the liquid that is impossible to not have. Another process would be to recycle and reuse the products such as plastic bottles, plastic bags and paper. Paper can be recycled to be made into new paper which is just as good quality as freshly made from the factory paper and in turn would reduce or stop the cutting down of forests to make new paper and conserve wildlife, improve quality of air and in turn improve the health of man. The public can also save the resources of the earth by not buying precious minerals like gold and diamonds. These precious stone can be replaced by other materials that are just as nice to wear.
The second solution towards the public's general concern to the environment would be thru media and education. Which home do not have a television? or better yet which child do not watch television? Through conservation via television messages we can promote this sense of care towards the environment throughout all ages. In schools we can also promote environmental health with geography as a subject in school students would be more aware of their environment and thus lead to wanting to save the earth. Parents too can play apart in this, they can show good examples to their kids by not littering and so for. Environmental messages and posters could be posted through out the city and thus create even more awareness of the earth's condition to the public. Farmers would have to do monthly checkups on the amount of waste their livestock is giving out , the soil and dispose of the waste in proper ways that would not harm the environment.
The 3rd solution to the technological impact on the environment is by substitution, careful planning and design and also through strict laws and maintenance checkups. Companies and brands can substitute the materials they used in making the computers and hardware with materials that are not harmful to the environment. Industries would have to be located away from any cities forests and ecosystems, such as rivers and lakes. Strict laws from the government would have to be imposed to ensure the safety of the environment and the people of the cities.
Everyone has a part to play in conserving the environment and saving the earth. And with these solutions for problems like massive usage of resources, peoples general concern to the environment's health and the technological effects on the environment i hope we can prolong the life of earth and in turn save he earth.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Is the earth worth saving?
Yes! The earth is our home we cant juz snap our fingers and move to another planet. If people start to get aware of the Earth's suffering. she can be saved. POWER TO THE PEOPLE. The earth is threatened by the people living on her. By the technological advances of man by the peoples constant need to improve their standard of living. If we save the earth we wud be happy and the environment would be happy. Human health would be better as the environent's health is better and vice versa.
why is the environment important and how does it affect planets and humans?
The environment is part of Earth and isnt Earth the planet where we live in. We can't change or move to another planet for our daily resources. All of our daily resources come from the environment itself. Not caring for the environment would result is catathrophic consequences as we would be affected as well. Such as the intensive pig farming. Large amounts of pigs equals to large amounts of ammonia containing waste which if not disposed of properly would pollute the underground water and would be not be potable for human and animals any longer. Seems to me that people on earth take this world for granted, they only take what they want but do not give anything back. Irregard for the environment would also have long term effects on people and the environment such as the Bhopal gas tragedy. The victims of the accident after 5 years are still suffering bad effects of the chemical spill.
The environment is not healthy at all. With all these irregard for the environment its no wonder that she is not healthy and this onli those tragedies that we know off. The environment is always at risk as long as irresponsible people are around. With technology around the world is off even more greater threat. technology is there to make people's lives easier but does it make the environments life easier? The answer is NO.For e.g the amount if e-waste in india. as technology progresses the old equipment gets dumped away and has no way to be rid off. The old equipment releases dangerous chemicals into the environment when tried to be recycled of be disposed off.
But with technolgy itself we can solve this envrionmental mishaps. Companies and brands are looking for environmental friendly alternatives to substitute the materials they use in their products.People themselves are starting to get aware that our world is in danger are doing their best efforts to help the environment.
The environment is not healthy at all. With all these irregard for the environment its no wonder that she is not healthy and this onli those tragedies that we know off. The environment is always at risk as long as irresponsible people are around. With technology around the world is off even more greater threat. technology is there to make people's lives easier but does it make the environments life easier? The answer is NO.For e.g the amount if e-waste in india. as technology progresses the old equipment gets dumped away and has no way to be rid off. The old equipment releases dangerous chemicals into the environment when tried to be recycled of be disposed off.
But with technolgy itself we can solve this envrionmental mishaps. Companies and brands are looking for environmental friendly alternatives to substitute the materials they use in their products.People themselves are starting to get aware that our world is in danger are doing their best efforts to help the environment.
TOPIC 15: Greenhouse effect
The term 'Greenhouse Effect' is commonly used to describe the increase in the Earth's average temperature. Water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide absorb energy, the gas particles begin to vibrate and they radiate energy in all directions, including approximately 30% of it back towards Earth.As a result, the Earth's average surface temperature is kept at about 15C by the blanket of atmosphere that surrounds it.Without this, the temperature would be about -18C and would be too cold for life.An increase in fluorocarbons and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere enhances the atmosphere's ability to trap heat which leads to an increase in the average surface temperature of the Earth.
TOPIC 14: Bhopal Gas tragedy
In the city of Bhopal, Central India, a poisonous vapor burst from the tall stacks of the Union Carbide pesticide plant. This vapor was a highly toxic cloud of methyl isocyanate. Of the 800,000 people living in Bhopal at the time, 2,000 died immediately, and as many as 300,000 were injured.Five years later showed that many of the survivors were still suffering from partial or complete blindness, gastrointestinal disorders, impaired immune systems, post traumatic stress disorders, and menstrual problems in women. A rise in spontaneous abortions, stillbirths, and offspring with genetic defects was also noted.The accident started when a tank containing methyl isocyanate (MIC) leaked and reacted with water causing an exothermic reaction resulting in the safety valve bursting under pressure. It is presumed that 20 and 30 tonnes of MIC were released.
conclusion: Industry plants have good intentions of wanting to reduce unemployment in the cities and also provide the neccessary products for the people there. But with the presence of industry plants in the city, the locals are never guaranteed a safe place to live in. The industry plants if falls to irresponsible people's hand or maybe even to one minor design flaw, would result in catathrophic consequences.
conclusion: Industry plants have good intentions of wanting to reduce unemployment in the cities and also provide the neccessary products for the people there. But with the presence of industry plants in the city, the locals are never guaranteed a safe place to live in. The industry plants if falls to irresponsible people's hand or maybe even to one minor design flaw, would result in catathrophic consequences.
TOPIC 13: Cadmium in fertilizers/peanuts: Oz
Cadmium is a naturally occurring mineral which can cause kidney damage if large amounts are eaten.It is used in phosphate fertilizers used by farmers today and the high cadmium levels are absorbed by the crops(peanuts).In 2003 the European Commission launched a consultation on a 15-year programme to reduce the cadmium cAn initial limit of 60mg of cadmium per kilogram of phosphorus pentoxide would take effect after five years. This would be cut to 40mg/kg after a further five years, and finally to 20mg/kg after another five. ontent of phosphate fertilisers.In Australia before 1998 cadmium levels were unmonitored and now the maximum permitted level of cadmium has reduced from 0.5mg/kg to 0.05 mg/kg.
conclusion: cadmium is a very dangerous mineral that would cause our kidneys to be damaged if consumed in a large amount over a long period of time.The use of chemical fertilizers is the cause of this and if enough research had been done on the fertilizer to ensure that they do not contain dangerous chemicals that would harm our environment this would not have happened. Now with the imposed cadmium levels, consumers of peanuts are safe.
conclusion: cadmium is a very dangerous mineral that would cause our kidneys to be damaged if consumed in a large amount over a long period of time.The use of chemical fertilizers is the cause of this and if enough research had been done on the fertilizer to ensure that they do not contain dangerous chemicals that would harm our environment this would not have happened. Now with the imposed cadmium levels, consumers of peanuts are safe.
TOPIC 12: Mercury poisoning: Siberia
Mercury from a polluted industrial site in Siberia is posing a serious threat to public health and the environment. This is quiet similar to the Harbin leak in china where chemicals from a industry leaks into the soil and causes harm to the environment.More than 1,500 tonnes of metallic mercury from the former Ussolsky plant in the Baikal region have seeped into soil and local rivers but clean-up efforts are moving so slowly that they will take 1,000 years to complete at the current rate of progress.The pollution affects the nervous system, and is a problem for pregnant women and newborn babies. People complain of headaches, respiratory and intestinal diseases and hand tremors, and doctors are said to be growing increasingly concerned. Mercury exposure damages the central nervous system and kidneys, creating personality changes, hallucinations, sleep difficulties, irritability, headaches and memory loss.
conclusion: the authorities are to be blames for this. if the polutants have been stored and cared for carefully the sippage would not have occured.
conclusion: the authorities are to be blames for this. if the polutants have been stored and cared for carefully the sippage would not have occured.
Friday, May 18, 2007
TOPIC 11: Pollution in the Baltic
Sweden's Commission on Marine Environment has warned that the Baltic Sea is in a "critical" condition and in danger of dying unless pollution from the Russian city of St Petersburg is drastically cut.Half of the fish species in theMuch of the city's sewage flows untreated into the Neva, and from there directly into the Baltic. The Baltic is the world's biggest brackish sea - a peculiar mix of sea and lake, salt water and fresh. Its bed is a mix of ridges and troughs that trap pollutants, and starve fish and plant life of oxygen. And because it only has a narrow outlet to the ocean - between Sweden and Denmark - the water takes 25-30 years to refresh itself. 30% of the total water dumped into the Neva river by St Petersburg companies and apartment buildings goes there unfiltered.
conclusion: Too much polution is getting into the baltic while he baltic can onli replenish its waters very slowly.This has a very harmful on the marine live and the environment. If the authorities from the russian city do not take action and stop polluting the baltic with untreated industrial and city watse the pollution will spread on a bigger scale.
conclusion: Too much polution is getting into the baltic while he baltic can onli replenish its waters very slowly.This has a very harmful on the marine live and the environment. If the authorities from the russian city do not take action and stop polluting the baltic with untreated industrial and city watse the pollution will spread on a bigger scale.
Topic 10: Effect of mining activities on the environment and human health
Mining creates destruction which stretches across an area so great it has been described as perhaps the largest man-made desert in the world.Big forests are cut down to make way for the mining of nickel, cobalt and copper. As the extraction of the seemingly endless tundra's hidden wealth of mineral reserves has become increasingly lucrative, fresh plans for a massive expansion in mining and smelting operations by giant companies has emerged. There have been reports of the bad effects of mining.On the Kola peninsula, authorities say the levels of iron and chemicals in the drinking water is too high, and Monchegorsk is among the places where the quality is the worst.In addition, many of those working in the mines and processing plants suffer from ill health, ranging from throat irritation to cardio-respiratory disease and cancer
conclusion:mining brings alot of harm to the environment. with the cuting down of trees to make way for mines there is an increase chance of even more hamful chemicals released into the eonvironment.
conclusion:mining brings alot of harm to the environment. with the cuting down of trees to make way for mines there is an increase chance of even more hamful chemicals released into the eonvironment.
TOPIC 9: e-waste recycling-india
Mountains of e-waste (discarded parts of computers, mobile phones and other consumer electronics equipment) are quietly creating a new environmental problem in India. Thirty million computers are thrown out every year in the US alone, and many are dumped in India and China. Some 70% of the heavy metals in landfills come from electrical equipment waste. The old computers contain toxic chemicals in them.These heavy metals and chemicals are released into the environmentm when extraction or recondition is tried.The process of extraction uses all kinds of chemicals, like acids ,which in turn get dumped into the soil and go into the groundwater.Burning things like PVC-covered copper wire, will release very toxic chemicals like dioxins into the local environment.There are also fears that the recycling process, an unregulated industry in India, is also very harmful to the health of those employed to do it.
In particular, the job involves exposure to a number of toxic chemicals both as part of the recycling process and within the computers themselves.
conclusion:it is virtualy impossble to get rid of the computer equipment with out causing some harm to the environment. Therefore manufacturers will have to eliminate such harmful substances inside the machines and reduce the amount of toxic chemicals in the products.
In particular, the job involves exposure to a number of toxic chemicals both as part of the recycling process and within the computers themselves.
conclusion:it is virtualy impossble to get rid of the computer equipment with out causing some harm to the environment. Therefore manufacturers will have to eliminate such harmful substances inside the machines and reduce the amount of toxic chemicals in the products.
TOPIC 8: Mothballs: not just for humans
According to researchers, a species of termite fumigates its underground nests with naphthalene, the active ingredient in mothballs. The Formosan subterranean termite, Coptotermes formosanus, mixes the chemical into the soil and chewed-up wood which it uses to insulate the complex of tunnels in which it lives. The fumes are thought to keep away the termite's natural enemies such as ants, poisonous fungi and nematode worms. Traces of naphthalene have been found in magnolia flowers and in a gland on the forehead of certain deer, human users must use industrial chemistry to obtain it.
conclusion: It seems that not onli humans are smart in repelling pests. Perhaps other chemicals widely used by people could have already been used by animals or other organisms. Maybe with the discover of these naturally occuring chemicals we could wipe out the use of industries, greatly decreasing the level of pollution by harvesting the animals or organisms tt produce these chemicals.
conclusion: It seems that not onli humans are smart in repelling pests. Perhaps other chemicals widely used by people could have already been used by animals or other organisms. Maybe with the discover of these naturally occuring chemicals we could wipe out the use of industries, greatly decreasing the level of pollution by harvesting the animals or organisms tt produce these chemicals.
TOPIC 7: Pesticides: Good or bad?
For hundreds of thousands of people, living in the countryside holds the promise of healthy, pollution free living, but is it the opposite? There have been reports about the health of people living in the country side.Kay Wadey and her children live at Kirtling, near Newmarket.Their home is surrounded by fields. It may look like a rural paradise but they say their health and home is being damaged by the curse of crop spraying. she claims that her child's health were caused by the crop spraying too.the government intends to make spray record keeping by farmers legally enforceable and it is to look at making those records available to the public through a third party. Some 25,000 tonnes of pesticides are used on UK fields every year.
conclusion: pesticides maybe have little effect on us when we eat fruits and vegetables containing low levels of pesticides but there is evidence that the effects of sprayed pesticides cause harm to the environment n people living near the sprayed areas. Therefore i say pesticides are bad when environmental health is concern.
conclusion: pesticides maybe have little effect on us when we eat fruits and vegetables containing low levels of pesticides but there is evidence that the effects of sprayed pesticides cause harm to the environment n people living near the sprayed areas. Therefore i say pesticides are bad when environmental health is concern.
TOPIC 6: Pesticides in a third of all our foods
Fruits and vegetables contain pesticides. Fruit and vegetables, meat and poultry, cereal products, tea, olive oil, fruit juice and infant foods were tested for pesticides and was found that there were no residues found in chicken, eggs, infant formula, kidneys, milk or swede. At very low levels pesticides are not a concern to health. We are all exposed to chemicals in the environment every day, but whether they are toxic or not is down to the level of the dose.
conclusion: Eating fruits containing low levels of pesticides are not harmful to our body. There is more good in eating fruits containing little pesticides than to eating those that do not contain pesticides at all such as pest free, betta quality fruits and vegetables.
conclusion: Eating fruits containing low levels of pesticides are not harmful to our body. There is more good in eating fruits containing little pesticides than to eating those that do not contain pesticides at all such as pest free, betta quality fruits and vegetables.
TOPIC 5: How healthy are barbequed foods
Cooking meat and meat products, such as sausages, until they are overcooked or burnt can cause a number of chemicals to be formed, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) which can be harmful. Undercook meat otherwise any bacteria in the meat could survive and cause food poisoning.
conclusion:baberqueing is fun but make sure that u take the neccessary safte precautions to reduce the chances of geting uncooked or overcooked food which could be harmful to your body.
conclusion:baberqueing is fun but make sure that u take the neccessary safte precautions to reduce the chances of geting uncooked or overcooked food which could be harmful to your body.
TOPIC 4: Pearl river delta and Yellow river
More than 100 chemical plants beside China's rivers pose safety threats to the country's environment.In the past the government had valued economic growth above environmental degradation, but that its priorities were now changing with plants identified as unsafe were being investigated. A total of 21,000 chemical factories had been found to be located along China's rivers and coastline. More than half the plants were found to be located along two of China's most important rivers, the Yangtze and Yellow rivers, which are relied upon by millions of people. Chemical content in the songhua river which has recently been affected by a chemical spill are closely monitored and will not rise above the state standards for water quality, fish from the river are safe to eat.
conclusion: china had put the countries development as the top priority and pushed aside all concerns for the environment in the long term. Now china's river are at risk of chemical spillage with over 21000 chemical plants located along them. Spillage would result in high concentrations of benzene in the river causing harm to the environment.
conclusion: china had put the countries development as the top priority and pushed aside all concerns for the environment in the long term. Now china's river are at risk of chemical spillage with over 21000 chemical plants located along them. Spillage would result in high concentrations of benzene in the river causing harm to the environment.
TOPIC 3: Harbin leak: China
Toxic leak 80km (50 miles) long from china, expected to enter Russia from the Songhua river within two weeks. The spill was fraught with enormous damage to the natural environment both of China and Russia. As soon as the presence of benzene (a carcinogenic chemical) is detected at the confluence of the Songhua and the Amur, a state of emergency will be introduced in Khabarovsk (Russia).Cold and hot water supplies will be cut off for at least 40 hours and schools, childcare organisations and restaurants will close. Benzene levels at the songhua had dropped below the official limit at 0600 on Saturday (2200 GMT Friday), but nitrobenzene, was still at 3.7 times the permitted level. Local schools have been closed, about 6,000 people have been evacuated, and officials have gone from house to house warning residents not to use water from the nearby river.
conclusion: Benzene is a carcinogenic chemical and is very harmful to humans and to the environment. The high concentrations of this chemical could kill alot of the river's aquatic organisms. So all the more reason to quicly treat the chemicals sooner and brace themselves from the effects of this spill.
conclusion: Benzene is a carcinogenic chemical and is very harmful to humans and to the environment. The high concentrations of this chemical could kill alot of the river's aquatic organisms. So all the more reason to quicly treat the chemicals sooner and brace themselves from the effects of this spill.
TOPIC 2: Moses and the 10 plagues: caused by water pollution?
The pfisteria theory
In 1999 an environmental catastrophe happened in the town of New Burn, North Carolina. The residents woke up to find the waters of their river - the Neuse - had turned red. More than a billion fish died. People working near the river found that they were covered in sores.
The cause of this was found to be pollution. The pollution had come from a pig farm further up the river. Millions of gallons of pig-waste had found its way into the river, causing a genetic mutation in a marine micro-organism called pfisteria; turning it from harmless into lethal. The river had been poisoned.
John Marr, an epidemiologist specialising in environmental disasters, believes pollution in ancient Egypt could have caused the first six plagues. Pfisteria, or something like it, caused the fish to die, thus turning the river red; the pollution would have driven the frogs onto the land, on land the frogs would die, causing an explosion of flies and lice. The flies could then have transmitted viral diseases to livestock, killing them.
conclusion: the pfisteria theory has shown us a more logical way to see how the 10 plagues had started. With its evidence n so for i beleive that pfisteria theory is probable.
In 1999 an environmental catastrophe happened in the town of New Burn, North Carolina. The residents woke up to find the waters of their river - the Neuse - had turned red. More than a billion fish died. People working near the river found that they were covered in sores.
The cause of this was found to be pollution. The pollution had come from a pig farm further up the river. Millions of gallons of pig-waste had found its way into the river, causing a genetic mutation in a marine micro-organism called pfisteria; turning it from harmless into lethal. The river had been poisoned.
John Marr, an epidemiologist specialising in environmental disasters, believes pollution in ancient Egypt could have caused the first six plagues. Pfisteria, or something like it, caused the fish to die, thus turning the river red; the pollution would have driven the frogs onto the land, on land the frogs would die, causing an explosion of flies and lice. The flies could then have transmitted viral diseases to livestock, killing them.
conclusion: the pfisteria theory has shown us a more logical way to see how the 10 plagues had started. With its evidence n so for i beleive that pfisteria theory is probable.
TOPIC 1: Intensive Agriculture: Pig farming in Poland
conclusion:
Poland is 1 of the world's biggest pig farming countries.These uniform mettalic pig farms contain thousands of fattened pigs With over 1.2 million pigs slaughtered a month. This is promising to the unemployed as they intend to lower the umemployment rate in poland and this also contributes to Polands economy.But farming and slaughtering huge numbers of pigs causes harm to its surrounding environment and people. With huge numbers of animals comes huge amount of waste. Pig waste gives out toxic gases such as ammonia and hydrogen sulphide which, in high concentrations, can cause headaches, eye irritations, mood alterations and fatigue. This high concentration chemicals also sip into the soil and pollute the water beneath the soil endangering the lives of both humans and animals. So in conclusion the pig farming industry has brought good to Polands economy but also brought harm to the world's environment.
Poland is 1 of the world's biggest pig farming countries.These uniform mettalic pig farms contain thousands of fattened pigs With over 1.2 million pigs slaughtered a month. This is promising to the unemployed as they intend to lower the umemployment rate in poland and this also contributes to Polands economy.But farming and slaughtering huge numbers of pigs causes harm to its surrounding environment and people. With huge numbers of animals comes huge amount of waste. Pig waste gives out toxic gases such as ammonia and hydrogen sulphide which, in high concentrations, can cause headaches, eye irritations, mood alterations and fatigue. This high concentration chemicals also sip into the soil and pollute the water beneath the soil endangering the lives of both humans and animals. So in conclusion the pig farming industry has brought good to Polands economy but also brought harm to the world's environment.
Monday, May 14, 2007
wad i did today
today went to class for ecology. slack here n there find dissimilatory denitrification(sounds chim i noe). hopefully dun have to do again this afternoon. then went eat at canteen 1 eat chicken rice so much betta than the stupid canteen 3 food. onli lyk the prata there(big juicy eggy oniony prata). then go library do this stupid blog. tts wad i did today. voila!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)