PMU199 Course Blog

In deciding what to write this blog post about, I found myself looking at notes from a course i took last semester called “Introduction to Environmental Studies”.  The course, taught by proffessor Stephen Sharper,  provided me with a brief but widely spread representation of many of the theories and treatments for our current environmental problem. Some of these theories shape the way we approach this dilema so i think it is important to keep these in the approach to any of the environmental problems we face. Out of the several theories we learned about, there was one that stuck the most. It is the one that i felt the closest connection to and the one i will speak to you about for the next little bit.

Out of everything i’ve learned and theories i’ve studied so far, my favorite is the Gaia theory. Originally developed by John Lovelock in the 70s, this theory was developed in an attempt to find ways to identify life in other planets. Working under NASA, Lovelock was assigned to come up with a series of life defining characteristics thatscientist could use to look for life in outer space. In this procces, Lovelock discovered we know alot about everything in life, but barely anything about life itself, what it is and how it forms.

Not too many scientist had set out to define life, but the ones that did all came to the same vague conclusion

“A rough paraphrase might be that life is one of those processes which are found whenever there is an abundant flow of energy. It is characterised by a tendency to shape or form itself as it consumes, but to do so it must always excrete low-grade products to the surroundings.”

Along with Dian Hitchcock, another scientist trying do discover the potential for life in o other planets, Lovelock realized that the main characteristics of what we call life are very clearly present in our own atmosphere.

“Earth’s highly improbable atmosphere was that it was being manipulated on a day-to-day basis from the surface, and that the manipulator was life itself. The significant decrease in entropy-or, as a chemist would put it, the persistent state of disequilibrium among the atmospheric gases-was on its own clear proof of life’s activity”

That is, our planet is a living organism. The planet itself as well as the atmosphere around it is a self adjusting combination of gasses and other elements that is able to maintain the perfect conditions for all of the organism within it (all life on earth) to survive.

A good way to picture this is to imagine the word as a body. The body adjust to the environment it’s in to maintain conditions inside it at a stage where the organs can work to sustain the body itself. Without well functioning organs the body canot function properly and it begins to break down. Without a chemically balanced atmosphere or solid screen from the suns radiation, the earth begins to get sick.

This make make you wonder, what is our position in this body? If we continue to deteriorate the earth’s main organs – the oceans, ozone layer, etc – like we are, we will become like a parasite to the worldly body. We are sickening the earth in a way that it cannot maintain it’s conditions, something like a fever, if it’s not controlled, the body will eventually cease to function.

At it’s origin, the Gaia hypothesis was a huge mess of long scientific words that not alot of people understood or agreed with, however, like other useful theories, it has proven it’s theoretical value and it is now shaping the way leaders in environmental sustainability act. With the help of author William Golding, Lovelock was able to express his idea in a way we could all understand, and also changed the name from “the hypothesis that the biosphere is a self regulatory entity with capacity to keep our planet healthy by controlling the chemical and physical environment” to “Gaia” as we refer to it today, the ancient Greek word for Mother Earth.

Like any other theory going through criticism and development it has changed since it;s original form, in Lovelocks words;

“We have since defined Gaia as a complex entity involving the Earth’s biosphere, atmosphere, oceans, and soil; the totality constituting a feedback or cybernetic system which seeks an optimal physical and chemical environment for life on this planet. The maintenance of relatively constant conditions by active control may be conveniently described by the term ‘homoeostasis’.”

Since i first hear about Gaia last semester I’ve noticed how applicable the theory really is. Analyzing the world around me it seems very real to me that we are part of something bigger, however, our potential to destroy ti is bigger than ever. I think it is important to understand this in order to appreciate what we have a want to preserve it.

At last, i’d like to leave you with one last quote found at the end of the first chapter in “Gaia”. Mother nature is everything we rely on and we must change out view from the mean dominant special that must conquer all to one that understand we must accept and communicate with our surroundings in order to survive.

“If Gaia exists, the relationship between her and man, a dominant animal species in the complex living system, and the possibly shifting balance of power between them, are questions of obvious importance… The Gaia hypothesis is for those who like to walk or simply stand and stare, to wonder about the Earth and the life it bears, and to speculate about the consequences of our own presence here. It is an alternative to that pessimistic view which sees nature as a primitive force to be subdued and conquered. It is also an alternative to that equally depressing picture of our planet as a demented spaceship, forever travelling, driverless and purposeless, around an inner circle of the sun.”

For those interested in more information about the Gaia theory you can visit these sites:

This was the reading we had about Gaia in my Environmental class:

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/gaia.htm

Also use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

http://www.gaiatheory.org/

It’s no wonder that in the day and age that we live in, where we are bombarded with information every minute of our lives, clashing opinions and viewpoints can confuse and make us apathetic about a number of topics. The recent debate over the condition and future of our planet has experts from all sides presenting us with the ‘facts’ of the case, and how we should go about dealing with such an issue. Different media outlets are keen on using different strategies to cater to specific sides of the argument:

1) By presenting opinion as fact. (video)

It is quite obvious to see that Fox News holds a lot of sway in the realm of public opinion, their methods of doing so however, can be quite sinister. While the majority of programming on the network is quite rightly labelled as news, the opinions of TV personalities are oftentimes inserted in the broadcast, making it very difficult to distinguish them. In this clip from 2010, we can see how easily it is to be swayed by complete speculation.

2) Using straw man arguments, (misrepresentation of an opponent’s position).

This video explains the technique of how the straw man argument can be used in a debate about climate change. Once again, this clip from Fox News shows how they can employ this type of argument, going as far as bringing in an unrelated topic and catching their interviewee off guard

3) Abusing the recency effect to enflame public opinion.

-The recency effect holds that people will subconsciously consider more recent news to be more powerful than events that happened farther in the past. For example, the disastrous events of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the constant media coverage that followed dramatically reduced the support for offshore drilling, overshadowing the 40-year period without a spill. Another example of the short-sightedness of the media can be found in the first video link, where a recent large snow storm is used to disregard claims of climate change.

The Green School is an amazing project, pioneering sustainability within education, Now, I am sure  that some of you might be wondering is this just another ordinary school that aims at promoting ideas such as recycling and energy saving. If you think that’s the case, then, you are totally wrong. The Green School is a lot more than that; it is by far the “greenest” and innovative school I have ever seen!

The Green School sits in south-central, Bali, on 20 acres of gardens.  Instead of the usual image of what a school should be with bricks and concrete walls, the school is built primarily from bamboo which is a natural and renewable resource. The Green School is being recognized as the number one model of sustainability in education in the world. The co-founder John Hardy made it very clear that the aim of the Green School is to promote valuable and useful skills to create a new generation of global, green leaders. Instead of having class in classrooms with walls and blackboard, students here at Green School gain their knowledge by connecting with the nature. Nature is where all the possibilities are and where you give and take.

Every aspect of the site and buildings are living examples of sustainability. Micro-hydro power, solar power and bio-diesel are used. Green School standard is to use 99% natural materials in their construction projects, to recycle as many materials as possible, and to manage waste responsibly.

The “greenness” of the school can be easily seen around campus. The school cow is used to replace the lawnmower on the playing field. Instead of writing on blackboards or whiteboards, they write on bamboo blackboards. Instead of use lights and air-conditioning, they use natural lights and natural breeze.

The world is not indestructible; one day energy and resources will all be used up. In the sense of learning how to live a sustainable future, the Green School sets a really good example to the world and has done a fantastic job.  The idea of Green School is one of the first but certainly not the last, seeing the success I’m sure more yet to come. If each place in every country can have a school like this to instill the idea of sustainable living, our future generations can still have a chance to enjoy the life that we had. They can still have a chance to experience blue skies and cool breeze. Just remember, “Let the nature take the lead”, because nature is where all possibilities begin!

 Click to see co-founder John Hardy’s interview and the Green School offical website.

http://www.greenschool.org/

http://www.ted.com/talks/john_hardy_my_green_school_dream.html

Hi so my topic is going to be about pollution and how it is a major factor in climate change and global warming. I chose this topic because I think it is something that must be addressed and it’s a problem that we could easily overcome if we worked together. Plus I kind of talked about this topic in high school so I remember as few things:).

First of all what is pollution? Pollution is when water, air or land becomes very dirty. Pollution can come in 4 different types effecting different types of areas in the world. Air pollution affects the air, water pollution affects the water and marine life, land pollution affects the land destroying life and the environment and there is also noise pollution that can affect our hearing. Some of the major Causes of the Pollution Crisis are: deforestation, polluted rivers, sound pollution, air pollution, and soil pollution.

We all contribute to pollution in some way or another. Whether it is with a large amount or small amount we canstill cause major damage to our health and the environment. In people pollutants may cause respiratory and other health disorders such as asthma and allergy symptoms furthermore if the pollution is heavy enough, serious health problems, including cancer, can result from the toxins constantly breathed in through the air.

In order for us to solve this issue everybody needs to contribute to prevent pollution. Many small steps can make a big difference. People everywhere on Earth should obey laws, laws that protect their families, their neighbors, their friends. Responsible behavior of all individuals and a group effort can make all the changes we need for a cleaner, pollutant free community.

                Here are some solutions for your neighbourhood that I picked up:

• Use Environmentally Safe Products
• Recycle Your Used Motor Oil and Filters
• Compost Yard Trimmings
• Report Illegal Dumping
• Pick up After Your Pets
• Dispose of Trash Properly
• Use Water Based Paints.
• Recycle Everything You Can!
• Take Your Residential Special Materials to a City of Los Angeles S.A.F.E. Center
• Don’t Litter!
• Wash Your Car On the Lawn

Pollution is a major problem all around the world. It has adversely affected the lives of millions of people and caused many deaths and health disorders. Pollution is gradually destroying our planet and is gradually killing ourselves too and that is why I feel so strongly about changing pollution because I don’t want to die of such a foolish issue which can so easily be changed.

So I have two links below the first one shows you some facts about pollution. The second one is a youtube video which I think is an effective way to show people about the problem of pollution.

Facts: http://library.thinkquest.org/11353/facts.htm

Youtube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O_ZF0vQ0NE

Some sources I used and did not link them in te blog:

ž  Articlebase. (Apr 14, 2006). Health Problems Caused By Air Pollution. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/health-problems-caused-by-air-pollution-22606.html

ž  City of Toronto. (1998-2010). City of Toronto Environment Patrol. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from http://www.toronto.ca/environment/

P.S: I know this isn’t the best blog but I’m definately going to work on it.

Have you ever wondered why the species from the dinosaur era were much larger compared to the species that exist today? Why do some species tend to be larger than others? The size of a specie is one of the most essential characteristics that resemble how a specie should live. Various perspectives regarding the size of species depending on the climate have been introduced by numerous scientists. It is a very controversial topic to review but, I intend to summarize my findings and would be delighted to know about how others believe climate change and global warming will have impact on the size evolution in the near future.

I will begin by reviewing the discovery of a 60-million year old fossil believed to be a snake that weighed approximately 1140kg and measured 13 meters in length. This magnificent fossil referred to as the “Titanoboa cerrejonensis” was uncovered by the University of Florida’s Florida Museum of Natural History and a crew directed by  the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. Soon after the discovery, the fossil was examined by Jason Head from the University of Toronto-Mississauga who made the estimates of the approximate temperature of Earth 60-million years ago (the period in which the Titanoboa cerrejonensis lived). Scientists believed that only a very hot climate would be enough to support cold blooded creatures such as this snake. Paleontologists stated that cold-blooded reptiles tend to be larger when they live in a hot climate as correlation studies indicate that as temperature rises, the upper body of poikilotherms which are cold-blooded creatures also increases in size proven by the size of their bone structure. So exactly how much hotter would the Earth have to be to support a snake as big as this? It is believed that tropical ecosystems that supported creatures such as this snake lived in rain forests such as Cerrejon at an average temperature of 32 degrees Celsius which is approximately 5 degrees Celsius higher than the average temperature of a modern rain forest. As a matter of fact, Jason Head from the University of Toronto and Jonathan Bloch from Florida Museum of Natural History indicated that  the Titanoboa cerrejonensis required a minimum average temperature of 30-34 degrees Celsius to survive.

http://www.astrobio.net/pressrelease/3031/big-snake-warm-climate

The Titanoboa cerrejonensis fossil vertebra is placed alongside the vertebra of a modern day, 10-foot-long boa constrictor. The two vertebrae are both positioned near the snake’s bellies. -Jason Head et al.

Now some of you reading this may say this has not proven or has given any reason to why animals in the dinosaur era used to be a lot bigger than the modern days’ creatures. This is where the real scientific explanation begins. Scientist believe that the main reason for massive and enormous size of species were due to the flourishing atmosphere that contained an immense amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide. As a matter of fact, the level of oxygen was 50% higher while the carbon dioxide was at the limit of 500% compared to today. Oxygen and carbon dioxide are two of the most important components that help plants grow faster and larger. With such hot conditions, not only oxygen and carbon dioxide was abundant but, hard rain and sunlight would also be very constant. In an environment and atmosphere such as this, not only the ordinary plants we see today may have been much larger but, various unknown plant life may have been abundant. I myself, even come to believe that some form of plants may have given unreal yet rich nutrients to these species, helping the species in the dinosaur era to develop much quicker and grow bigger. We cannot be sure what these unreal plants may have been, it may have not even existed as it is a personal statement unapproved by scientific evidence. Yet, I would still like to include such statement because we do know for a fact that the ecosystem at the dinosaur era was a lot different compared to the one we live in today. In addition, I would like to believe this and perhaps support this on my next blog because even today, we know for a fact that certain plants grow only at certain environments and conditions such as the “Blue Gum” that only grow in rain forests. Carrying on, as plants grew very large and was abundant during the dinosaur era, herbivores (plant eaters) ate as much of the resources that they were given and grew bigger. In addition, as herbivores grew bigger, it benefited the carnivores as there was plenty to eat for the carnivores. It was a matter of rich supply within the food chain supporting the growth and development of these species.

http://www.petesplace-peter.blogspot.com/2008/01/how-dinosaurs-got-so-bigwarming-in.html

Scientific studies indicate that climate and the environment surrounding the species are leading factors that determine the size of species. As I said before, this is a very controversial topic that includes various perspectives on climate change and size evolution. As a matter of fact, some theories indicate that global warming will and is causing species to become smaller as time passes by while others state otherwise in the case of the Titanoboa cerrejonensis which is opposite as it states that as temperature is on the rise, cold-blooded creatures increase in size. For further information and inquiries on the general theory that supports why certain species get larger while some get smaller as temperature increases, you may want to read the link below which explains a case and validity of the Bergmann rule that states

Animals tend to become bigger as latitude increases or the climate gets colder, and animals found in warmer climates are generally smaller.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8560000/8560694.stm

The purpose of this blog is to inform my audience that size evolution in species is also a topic that deserves more attention as global warming is on the rise. The impact of climate change will ultimately affect our food chain as size of species evolve and become larger or smaller. With uncertainty, we cannot be sure if a cat will become the prey of a mouse that becomes larger while the cat becomes smaller due to the climate change (Will probably never happen but just hypothetically). The previous statement just indicates that certain species that may have been weak in our modern world may prevail to become very dominant and powerful species in the future, threatening certain species. At worst, some species may become extinct and affect the entire food chain. We cannot predict how all of the different species will adapt to the new climate but perhaps this topic may show numerous individuals an additional reason to why we must do everything we can to stop global warming. This topic raises several questions into the future such as:

“If certain species become larger while some become smaller how will it affect the food chain? How do we preserve the lives of certain species that may become close to extinction?” ….or is climate change and size evolution just a total nonsense to you??? I am looking forward to many of your opinions.

                Climate change is a very serious issue for not only the well being of our planet Earth but the well being and survivals of us, as a species. Chances are that, unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade or so, you are aware of this. Heck, even if you’ve been ice skating with some emperor penguins in the Antarctic or fishing with a few polar bears in the Arctic you’ve would’ve noticed the melting ice and glaciers slowly breaking down. Though not as heavily publicized and valued, maybe rightfully so, as cancer awareness, the AIDS epidemic, or even the rising population paired with dwindling resources, climate change has been gaining notoriety at fairly quick pace.

                In my opinion and I’m sure many people would agree with me, one of the biggest problems facing the battle against climate change is perhaps the transfer of essential information regarding the topic. Scientists, most of whom have exclusive background in the sciences do not always have the easiest time conveying the information concerning climate change to politicians and policy makers, most of whom usually have very little to no formal training, especially of higher level, in the environmental sciences. Perhaps, in their attempt to “dumb down” the stats and details of climate change, they accidentally downplay the importance or even severity of the problem. This is why it is important that every student, no matter field of interest should be exposed to sciences as well as other fields.

            Now, so far I have said that we have a bunch of smart scientists with their lab coats, their stats, and details facing a bunch of politicians in their thousand dollar suits and ties with matching cufflinks trying to figure things out. But, I want to bring it down a step to the everyday citizen who either knowingly or unknowingly faces the consequences of not only climate change itself but the results of the decisions made by those in authority concerning the issue. Let’s me start of by asking you, the reader, how much do you know about climate change. Never mind whether you are concerned, aware of, or even dismissive of the fact, just ask yourself how much you and even the people around you actually know about climate change. Then ask yourself, of what you do know, how much of that is fact and how much fiction. Now before you go into deep thought about this allow me to ask you this: How can people in society really push towards combating and bringing about change regarding climate change if we aren’t aware of the basics, the simple facts about the issue? How much can you trust politicians who have their own agendas on mind when they inform the public or even the media which are a part of huge media conglomerates which too have hidden agendas?  Maybe now you’re thinking that this all seems like too much work for you in your busy lives so I will tell you what. I’ve gone and done the research and I want to present to you some misconceptions and facts about climate change. I hope that in doing this I bring not only awareness but also some good information so that you can come to your own conclusions. As I said before, “The more you know the better opinions you can form!” So with that being said let me present you with what I promised.

Climate Change is causing global temperatures to rise at a rapid rate.

 Well I’m pretty sure you’ve heard someone exclaim, probably during a harsh winter storm, “If there is global warming, how come the weather isn’t warming up?” To be honest, I admit to naively wondering the same thing. The truth of the matter is though that on average the Earth has only warmed up by around 0.6 degrees Celsius over the last century and only 1.0 degrees Celsius in the past two decades. Even the record highs that are glorified on the news are only based on records kept since the 1860’s. But wait, before we start jumping for joy and running back to your local Hummer dealer, let us remember that although there has not been a huge change in temperature, global warming and climate change are still very real and even a slight change in temperature such as this can disturb the balance of the Earth.

For information on temperature tracking organization click this link!!

Global warming is the main cause behind extreme weather.

                Yes it seems to make sense that global warming be the sole cause of the extreme weather since it is an extreme phenomenon but there have not been enough documented studies or proof to provide a definitive answer.  The El Nino Oscillation is a major cause of bizarre weather and not really connected to the climate change. Although it is quite possible that the warming of the planet could possibly affect the El Nino effects, this phenomenon has been cause of bizarre weather in the past.

Pollution, nuclear power, and toxic chemicals are the cause of climate change.

                Although most people agree that pollution and toxic chemicals are generally not ideal for life, it is only Carbon Dioxide that is the principal pollutant in causing global warming. In fact, aerosols actually block the sun’s rays from hitting the ground and actually cause cooling. Now, I know you’re thinking that I’ve found the solution to global warming, but the truth is that aerosols not only cause ozone layer depletion but the long term side-effects of these chemical s are still not known.

 Final Thought!!

                If you’ve come this far down my blog, it means you are interested in the topic, or maybe not interested but are wooed by my writing style (which I doubt), or maybe you just scrolled down to the end (I hope not L). Anyways, what I’ve presented, in an attempt to neither overwhelm nor downright bore you, is to present only a fraction of the misconceptions that are out there. I encourage you to post a comment stating whether you liked it and want to hear more, or that you think I’m doing a poor job and I should not quit my day job (although I don’t have one). I have tons of other misconceptions ready to roll and I hope to post more about climate change in some upcoming blogs. Remember, you can make a difference, but the first step is informing yourself so you can make the best decisions!!

Link Climate Change

EDIT: CHECK OUT THE NEWER VERSION OF THIS BLOG HERE

In recent years, more and more people have started to take notice on how much the weather and climate has been changing. Climate change is a long-term change in the statistical distribution of weather patterns over periods of time that range from decades to millions of years. This has been caused mostly due to natural variability or to human activity. Many scientists have noticed that pollution has affected much of the environment, one of the main forms of pollution in the environment is air pollution.

Picture Link to more on Pollution

Air pollution is the introduction of chemicals, particulate matter, or biological materials into the atmosphere. These pollutants can cause harm or discomfort to living organisms, and certain pollutants can remain in the environment and accumulate over time.

The Asian Brown Cloud/Haze is an especially important problem in concerns of the creation and the effects of it. First we have to answer the question: What is the Asian Brown Cloud? The Asian Brown Cloud is a layer of air pollution that covers parts of the northern Indian Ocean, India, Pakistan, and parts of South Asia, Southwest Asia, and China.

A picture taken by NASA of the Asian Brown Cloud Picture Link

The causes for this cloud is caused mainly by domestic wood and dung fires plus smoke from the burning of forests and fields for agriculture. In addition vehicle exhausts, power plants, factory chimneys, characteristic of biomass burning and industrial emissions due to incomplete burning are all added to the mix. Burning biomass such as dried twigs, leaves and dung, and agricultural slash-and-burn practices, are common across poor, rural Asian areas.

The Asian Brown Cloud interferes with the normal distribution of solar energy from the sun to the atmosphere and the surface of the earth by absorbing and deflecting light energy. Black soot particles in the Asian Brown Cloud absorbs the sunlight and warms the atmosphere around the area, it is calculated that the cloud boosted the effect of solar heating on the air around it by almost 50 percent. The overall effect is that the layer of land and air extending from the surface to the troposphere will be overall generally warmed by the Asian Brown Cloud and similar clouds.

The environmental effects are tremendous in regards to the Asian Brown cloud. The Himalayan glaciers provide the source of many of Asia’s great rivers, with millions of people depending on them for food and water. Asian Brown Clouds increase atmospheric heating these glaciers are in retreat for the past number of decades. They carry large amounts of soot and black carbon which are deposited on the glaciers, allowing them to absorb more of the sun’s heat and melt quicker. Asian Brown Clouds are also interfering with centuries old monsoon patterns with disastrous consequences for food production.

The health impact of these particles is an increase in cardiovascular effects, pulmonary illnesses and chronic respiratory problems. The report estimates that in India and China alone, Asian Brown Clouds result in over 330,000 excess deaths per year.

At ScienceNetlinks: Science Updates Asian Brown Clouds, it posted a Podcast on the Asian Brown cloud. The cloud is associated with winter monsoon (December to April) during which there is no rain to wash pollution from the air.

The cloud peaks in size during the winter, when the temperature of the air tends to be hotter than the ground. That situation is called an “inversion,” and the upshot is that pollutants get trapped in the atmosphere and can’t move. It’s like putting a lid on a pot. Seasonal variations like this affect pollution in American cities as well; for example, Los Angeles experiences a similar inversion during the summer months, which tends to be the smoggiest time there.

This pollution layer was observed during the Indian Ocean Experiment (INODEX) intensive field observation in 1999. Subsequently the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has been supporting a project called ABC (still ongoing in 2007).

1999 INODEX Intensive Field Phase Platforms - Picture Link

For More information on the facts and Myths of Asian Brown clouds please check out the PDF file: Asian Brown Cloud Fact and Fantasy

For more on Air pollution in regards to clouds check this PDF file out: Pollution and Clouds

Youtube video on [CNN] Asia\’s Pollution Super-Cloud 2008.11.13

Remember:

Control Climate Change

A new edited version is available here

As times goes on, more and more countries are urbanizing and this becomes a worldwide phenomenon. Cities are growing bigger in developed countries, and especially for developing countries with a huge number of population.

“(Cities) and the nature tried to coexist….but it wasn’t that easy.”

Trees and Animals are disappearing from our lives because of our violation to the environment. In order to replace the losing green environment, somebody come up an idea to plant vegetations on top of the buildings . This environmental technology is called the Green Roof.

The Green Roof is an environmental technology first founded in Germany in 1960s, and spread to other countries later. It covers the roof of a building with vegetation planted over a water-proof membrane with a design includes, as a minimum, a root repellent system, a drainage system, a filtering layer, a growing medium and plants.  The picture shows below layers of a typical green roof.

There are 2 types of Green roofs – intensive and extensive. Intensive green roofs can support a variety of plants and growth but are more labour-intensive. They are more park-like areas which may also be used as recreation space.

The extensive green roofs, in contrast, require less maintenance (about once a year) and are designed to be self-sustainable.

There are lots of benefits to have a green roof. It serves several purposes for a building, such as absorbing rainwater during peak rates in storm, lengthen the roof life 2 to 3 times potentially and negate acid rain effect. It also acts as an insulator of heat so that the demand of winter heat decreased. A new habitat is made for wildlife while reducing the amount of CO₂ and toxin in the atmosphere. As a result, there is a reduction in city “heat island” effect and low the urban temperature, therefore reduces summer air conditioning costs.

The main disadvantage of green roof is its high initial cost. ($8 per square foot is a minimum amount which includes materials, work costs and installation whereas values around $12 to $24 per square foot are the most common, and may even cost more for the traditional built-up roofs)  Some green roofs have ongoing maintenance cost and thus enterprises may not want to put it in practice. Nowadays, there’s about 10% have been “greened” in Germany. (wikipedia) Besides Europe, green roofs are very popular in countries like United States, Canada, and Australia etc.

In Toronto, there’s a Eco-Roof incentive Program promoted by the City of Toronto to fund the green roof projects for industrial, commercial and institutional buildings. For more information, click the link below: http://www.toronto.ca/livegreen/greenbusiness_greenroofs_eco-roof.htm

How does Canada measure up on climate change? We are of course an economically developed country, and what with all our snow, our beavers and our wilderness one would think we’re doing pretty good, right? Wrong. Maybe there are a few other criteria in the fight against climate change, besides the beavers.

EPI Ranking Map. Highest scores are yellow, and scores lower as the colour gets darker.

On Yale’s EPI (Environmental Performance Index) Canada ranks 46th out of 163 countries, including currently developing countries such as China and places recently hit by climate-change spurred natural disasters like The Maldives and Haiti. Coming out on top are countries like Switzerland, which ranked second, and Sweden which ranked fourth.  So how does Canada compare to such high ranked countries?

Based on Yale’s EPI website we can draw some basic conclusions about quality of life in Sweden, Switzerland and Canada. The average GDP per capita of the three countries is just upwards of $34,000. 100% of citizens in all three of the countries also have access to basic needs, such as sanitation and clean water. The countries are also very similar in terms of local climate, which also plays a key role in quality of life, and emissions in terms of heating and cooling. In other words, Sweden, Switzerland and Canada are all developed nations with a great quality of life.

So, if Canada has such a great quality of life, we shouldn’t have any problems setting up environmental reforms and becoming leaders in the fight against climate change! How, then, are we ranked 46th?

The problem seems to lie in policy and practice. In an article by David Richard Boyd, a well-known environmental lawyer and Canadian, he compares Sweden and Canada on ten different environmental criteria. The reason why Canada falls behind is directly linked to their policies. While Sweden has used “innovative economic policies to reduce pressure on the environment” and produced “a bold national strategy to achieve sustainability within a generation”, Canada has taken a different approach. Canada is described in the article as a country which puts emphasis on voluntary contributions to fighting climate change, instead of enforcing policies. They also favour environmental education, which I agree is necessary, but education without action and the support of local government officials will have little effect.

Boyd also seems to cite a lot of the same key issues with Canada’s policy as The Conference Board of Canada.  The Conference Board of Canada is an independent and non-profit organization what provides research studies on a wide range of Canada’s economic and political policies.  In the board’s article on environment Canada is ranked 15th out of 17 of it’s peer countries, and given a C grade.  Below is a list of some of the important issues mentioned by both Boyd and The Conference Board of Canada:

Key Issues

• Canada needs to clean up it’s act on reducing it’s GHGs, which have increased 32% in the past 15 years.
• Water is also an issue.  Most of Canada’s water is used in production, and little effort to conserve is made.  As well, over 90 of our cities and towns haven’t got the facilities to properly treat their sewage.
• Total municipal waste increased by more than 17% since 1980, and continues to rise.  Per person we create more than 791 kg of waste per year!

Population density also plays a big role in climate change, according to a study by Christopher Kennedy, Professor at the University of Toronto. This is largely due to the fact that ground transportation (such as cars, trucks, and buses) contributes a lot to the GHGs we send into the atmosphere. The chart below compares the ten different cities in Kennedy’s study in terms of their population density and GHG output.

Unlike Switzerland and Sweden, Canada is huge! We have a mix of rural and urban areas, but even within our urban centers, such as Toronto, we’re nowhere near as densely populated as most European cities. This means we have to travel a lot more from the suburbs to the down town core. Toronto’s Public Transit has a system length of 70km and 69 stations, Montreal’s Metro is nearly the same, with a length of 69km and 68 stations. Not only is it the distance, but it’s the service area of the transit that effects us. In both cases of Toronto and Montreal there are only four different subway lines, which means the service area is very restricted. We can compare this to Sweden’s Public Transit, the Stockholm Metro, which has 7 different lines, and although it covers about the same distance (105km) it serves 100 different stations. Public transit it then more accessible for those living within the city. In essence, because of our lack of population density and inadequate public transportation, Canada has become a car-oriented city.

The good news is, there’s still room for improvement! Canada can make changes to it’s policies to make climate change an issue of it’s government and it’s citizens as a whole, not just the select few. We can take examples from those countries ranked 1st through 45th and build upon and improve our society in order to ease pressure off of the earth.  The goal should be to bring every country to the number one spot, and there’s no reason why a country which has the means and the will cannot change.

06/02/2011 (1): Edited for clarity.  Added some background information about the various sources used.
06/02/2011 (2): Added information about Public Transit in Toronto, Montreal and Sweden.