PMU199 Course Blog

Take a look at this article on The Guardian that I found.

(I don’t know why I update the old version but the content just disappeared… twice… so I’m trying to publish a new post)

In the contemporary society, transportation has becoming an important part that people cannot live without. Everyday people take streetcars, buses or subway going for class, movies, shopping, etc. The development of transportation had obviously improved the living conditions. However, as the climate is changing rapidly, abnormal phenomena such as the warm winter in Toronto this year make people start to concern about the health of our earth. Is 2012 a true story? This is a hot topic discussed by people these years.

It is undeniable that climate change and transportation are closely linked. After the great invention of airplane by Wright brothers and the first affordable car manufactured by Ford, the popularity of automobile is increasing rapidly. Nevertheless, almost all means of transportation uses fuel such as gasoline. When burning gasoline, a large number of  carbon dioxide, one of the main greenhouse gases, is released to the atmosphere, results in the rise of temperature (see article The other climate threat: transportation).

The amount of carbon dioxide emissions is increasing annually everywhere in the world.The data (from Wikipedia) shows that: on 2008, the annual carbon dioxide emissions of the whole world is 29,888,121 thousand tons. According to this data, the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Centre (CDIAC) estimates that in 2010, the number will increase to 33,508,901 thousand tons.

This data table also shows the rank of the countries in the amount of carbon dioxide emissions, with their percentage of global total. With the largest population in the world, China’s released 23.33% carbon dioxide of the whole world, higher than the United States, which ranked 2nd with 18.11%. One of the main reasons that lead to their high rank is, there are huge amount of automobile in both the two countries. Only a small amount of people in the United States are without driver’s license, and because the large population base and the increasing GDP, the amount of cars in China increases the fastest all over the world.

However, the relationship between transportation and climate change is not just from one side. On the contrary, climate change also negatively impacts transportation. Actually, though the Beijing Municipal Government is trying to deal with the pollution by controlling the traffic flow, they are still facing so many difficulties. As BBC reported, Beijing’s air quality is getting worse and worse these year. Since November 2011, Beijing and its surrounding areas are usually shrouded in fog. Sometimes the visibility is only several meters. Cars cannot move at the regular speed, traffic jams are everywhere in Beijing, and the amount of car accidents rises sharply. Airplanes cannot take off in such weather, thousands of passengers are stranded at the airport. And because of the abnormal climate, Beijing suffered the largest percipitation in the last decades of years, all the roads, even the subway stations are flooded, influenced the transportation in Beijing severely.

Transportation is affecting climate change, and the climate change also have negative feedback on transportation. Recent years, almost all the motor companies are creating their own environmental friendly cars, aiming at reducing the carbon dioxide emissions. On the one hand,these ‘green cars’ are using new discovered fuels, reduced the amount of oil use and emissions; on the other hand, the motor companies must keep their competitiveness because fuel-efficient cars are the development trends of the automobile market. The website Clean Green Cars introduces lots of newly published ‘green cars’ from big motor companies such as Toyota and Ford. How to develop transportation in a ‘green’ way is an essential issue that is being discussed now, and will still be discussed at least ten or twenty years in the future.

I think this is a better idea than geo-engineering.

More pictures here!

More about Tianjin Eco-city

It’s on Wikipedia too!

Lets see how much discussion this picture can create…. Do you believe the statement on the picket sign is true?

Gathers come together to see Punxsutawney Phil as predicts 6 more weeks of winter at the 126th annual Groundhog Day Festivity.

Every morning I wake up and by habit the first thing I do is check my twitter. I came across a few trending topics…#groundhogday, #PunxsutawneyPhil. Today’s Groundhog Day! Unfortunately I am unable to attend todays class, but instead I thought it would be interesting if I wrote a little about Groundhog Day since it is somewhat relevant to our course.

Ground Hog Day takes its roots in a German superstition from 1887 that says if a hibernating animal casts a shadow on February 2nd, the Christian holiday of Candlemas, winter will last another six weeks. If no shadow is seen, legend says, spring will come early.

At 7:25 this morning, ground hog Phil of  Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, came out of his borough to find his shadow. Based on tradition, this calls for another 6 more weeks of winter. Taking into consideration the warm and bipolar weather we’ve been having, this is a little ironic, huh?

What started as a small gathering in 1887 has now evolved into tens of thousands of visitors from around the nation and even the world coming to Punxsutawney to participate in this Groundhog Day tradition.

Cool fact, Ground Hog Phil has seen his shadow 100 times and has not seen it 16 times since 1886.

The Fifth Mass Extinction

Once specie becomes extinct there is no way in bring it back, despite what Jurassic Park may have led you to believe. However you may be shocked to find out that species extinction is a very common and natural phenomenon. Natural extinctions occur at 1 per million species annually which accounts for the fact that 96% – 98% of all species that have ever lived on earth are now extinct. In addition the earth periodically suffers a mass extinction in which large numbers of species are wiped out in a short period of time, the last example being the dinosaurs. However, scientists have discovered that extinction rates are on the rising and have reached 100 – 1000 species per million per year, not to mention there are unrecorded species that go extinct even before we discover them. To put that number in perspective it can be compared to the last five mass extinctions. This is due to the fact that humans destroy habitant, introduce pesticides, and over consume resources such as lumber and fossil fuels which create greenhouse gases further endangering the planet. It is said that “…one-in-five mammals assessed, one-in-eight birds, one-in-three amphibians, and one-in-four corals…” are on the edge of extinction and will disappear if nothing is done to stop it.

Fender’s blue butterfly

This rare butterfly is now on the verge of extinction

Habitat destruction is one of, if not the most dangerous threats to endemic (native) species. Deforestation for farming and ranching and suburban sprawl (increase of suburb areas around a large city) are just two ways that we redirect land use for our own gain. This leads negatively to the outcomes of fauna (animals) and flora (plants) around us. One such example is the Fender’s blue butterfly. Thought to have become extinct in 1937 the Fender’s blue butterfly (Icaricia icarioides fenderi) was only rediscovered in 1989. The reason why this graceful insect almost faded out of existence was due to destruction of its highly specific habitat. Much of the wild grasslands of where the Fender’s blue thrived were systematically converted into farmland. A plantfound only in wild grasslands of the Central American prairies, the Kincaid’s lupine,

The Fender's Blue butterfly larva are born and feed on this vital plant

acts as the primary food source for Fender’s blue larva, and without the lupine the butterfly cannot survive. Approximately 0.1% of the butterfly’s original grassland habitat exists today. Conservation sites have been established but butterfly populations have been in decline since 2001 due to drought. With increasingly unstable climate change the last of the Fender’s blue butterfly may finally disappear.

Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and the effects of DDT

Spraying DDT was a common sight in the 1950-1960 regardless of what health side effects it would have caused

Even at a young age Rachel Carson was passionate for nature. Having grown up on a farm, she was instilled with an admiration of wildlife that would reflect her writing and work as a marine biologist. After graduating from John Hopkins University and publishing numerous books about marine life, Rachel received a chilling letter from a friend. Her friend had discovered an alarming amount of bodies of neighbour birds around her property. The area had just been sprayed with DDT to kill misquotes, but it seems it was just as deadly to non-targeted species.  Carson immediately started writing what would be her greatest work, Silent Spring. The title comes from a poem by John Keats that describes a spring without the sounds of birds. Her book which became a bestseller was much debated by chemical production companies and scientist who debating its scientific integrity. At that time DDT was a common and viable source of pesticide which made agriculture more successful. It could also have been said that DDT reduced the chances of malaria (a deadly disease that claims thousands of lives) which uses misquotes as vectors (An organism that carries disease-causing microorganisms from one host to another) . The absence of DDT in some scientist

The concentration of DDT increases as the tropic (food) levels rise

eyes would be a technological step back. Soon the president at the time, J.F. Kennedy, appointed a team of scientist to determine the validity of Carson’s case and after their investigation DDT was banned in the United States. This example proves that there is a trade-off to human invention; what we think may be the only solution may have more catalytic effects elsewhere. The banning of DDT was only a precursor and changed the way the public viewed the environment (this was before the mainstream concern of greenhouse gases, climate change, global warming, and recycling).  Here is a more detailed video of Rachel Carson’s life.

With all the facts about climate change, mass extinction, and humans tampering with the natural balance, one may find the future bleak and apocalyptic. However this does not have to be the case. People like Rachel Carson have made a tremendous change for a better future. If more individuals were willing to speak up and spark controversy, the rate of extinction would diminish and species such as the Fender’s Blue butterfly might be able to be preserved for future generations.

Given the information above, please comment on what you think the US government should have done with respect to DDT and why. On one hand banning DDT reduces the deaths of many vital species and prevents unknown human risks. On the other hand, DDT enhances food production for an already starving world and decreases cases of malaria which in parts of the world have killed thousands.

(update)

In my opinion the American government did the right thing by banning the use of DDT. The conservation of species far out weighs the improved production of crops. With modern industrialized agriculture we increased grain productions five-folds in the past century without the use of DDT in Canada. Secondly the spread of DDT is not localized within insect species. This problem is magnified when doses of DDT become more potently concentrated as it is consumed with each increasing tropic level. This may end up affecting larger predatory animals ranging from small pets, aquatic life, predatory birds, and larger carnivorous mammals with lethal doses. By introducing this toxin into the environment, mankind is endangering the survival of all species on earth and with the effects of climate change can ultimately wipe out the planet’s biodiversity.

Food Chain

Although the use of DDT can aid in eliminating the spread of malaria, the disease can be treated with less threat to the mosquito population. Although there is no current cure for malaria there are treatments and preventative measures against it. In addition the extermination of misquotes as a species may deleteriously affect the delicate food chain leading extinction of other connected species (see food chain).

Current chemicals being released that provide a similar affect on climate and the environment include industrial gaseous waste and carbon emissions. The gaseous waste include nitrogenous and highly acidic compounds. These compounds when condensed fall back to earth and acidify bodies of water, eat away plant tissue and endanger species. They also act as aerosols that reflect sunlight away from the earths surface.  Carbon emissions are produced by the combustion of fuels such as coal, oil and bio-fuels. substances such as carbon dioxide and monoxide act as green house gases and cause global warming. This emissions sadly are by-products of important chemical industrial reactions required to produce manufactured goods. The production of toxic fumes can only be banned once society as a whole can either find alternative ways of production or can function without this process.

During the first class weather manipulation and/or warfare came up more than once. There is a lot of confusion on the subject, caused mostly by misinformation. Conspiracy theorists clutter internet blogs and forums with enough inarticulate babble to fill a library. Fearmongers can be found blaming weather research projects like HAARP for everything from  Hurricane Katrina to el Nino , to the seismic devastation in Japan. After sifting through enough nonsense to terrify many of those subjected to it, I decided to look into the ways the topic has been approached scientifically and politically.

A quick search will yield the wikipedia page on weather control. Though not usually a very good source, wiki managed to cover this well enough for a brief overview. They even included an interesting list of US patents granted for the purpose of weather modification. Upon further investigation online, I came across an interesting paper on the history of climate modification by James R Fleming. I strongly recommend having a look if you’re interested or curious about the subject. The following is quoted from the outline of the paper, since it is a bit of a long read .

ABSTRACT – The chequered history of weather and climate modification exhibits a modicum of promise and an excess of hype. This paper examines two completed historical cycles: the first, dating from 1839, involved western proprietary rainmaking or “pluviculture”; the second, from 1946 to 1978 involved “cloud seeding,” commercial rainmaking, and the attempted weaponization of the clouds. Recently, discussion of weather and climate modification has returned to the science-policy agenda, framed as seemingly inevit able responses to killer storms and global warming. The long history of deceptive and delusional attempts to “control” nature, however, raised serious questions about the rationality of these options.-

Concerns about weather modification have been voiced by many scientists and politicians for decades. These concerns have been addressed by most of the developed world in various international legally binding treaties . Among the most important of the treaties that involve the subject are the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (aka Environtmental Modification Convention or ENMOD) and the more recent Convention on Biological Diversity .

Controlling the weather is a complicated proces that we are at least decades from mastering. Though the internet is flooded with horror stories, there is no need for alarm. Claims that typical natural disasters have been caused by tinkering mad scientists at the behest of opaque and omnipotent governments are becoming increasingly ridiculous, as well as being a shameful form of treason. The direction of weather research has shifted vastly since the first half of the twentieth century. Any country with a budget large enough to research anything on the level of weather warfare is already bound by multiple international treaties that directly prohibit such activity. Even the radiophobes are more justified in their panic over nuclear technology, as while both processes are heavily regulated, only the radiophobes have anything tangible in existence to be afraid of today.

Climate change can be very expensive for Canada as we are still in the hole of the economic crisis. Although Canadian economy is highly dependent on her own natural resource industries, transportation and health systems, but to clean up the mess after taking natural resources and providing free health care is very important to Canada’s economic well-being.

As the temperature rises through out the pass few years. It could hurt Canadian economy in serval ways. For example increase in temperatures will make it difficult to sustain a healthy balance of diverse crops while thinner snow cover could make winter wheat crops vulnerable. Rising ocean on Canada’s West Coast have weaken the fisheries industry. Higher temperature and rising seas can decrease both quality and quantity of valuable species. Forestry and

infrastructure are also was effected by Climate change in Canada. (As it was indicate in“Economy Impact,”David Suzuki   Foundation, http://www.davidsuzuki.org/issues/climate-change/science/impacts/economic-impacts/)

What will happen to canada’s economy when Climate change has such great impact on Canada’s natural resource industries？ With factories that sells natural resources or uses naturel resources direct from Canada are providing millions employment, decreasing in revenue can lead canada into bankruptcy and massive job losses.

As the unemployment rate increases, government will have to spare more money due to increase of number of low income families. With the economy already in a bad shape, providing more money to low income families and protect environment will be very expensive. Eventually, this canlead Canada to another rise of income tax.(“Paying the Price: The Economic impact of climate change for canada.”Date Modified: October 26, 2011, http://nrtee-trnee.ca/climate/climate-prosperity/the-economic-impacts-of-climate-change-for-canada/paying-the-price)

Rise of temperatures can do a lot more damage to Canada’s economy then just the natural resource industries. Poorer air quality resulting from higher temperatures can causes illness and desase. More employers would take working days off for visiting hospital, resulting not only decrease companies revenue but costs millions of dollars to local heath care system, especially in four of Canada’s major cities（Toronto, Vancouver， Montreal and Calgary).

Canada does not need to choose between averting climate change and promoting growth in economy. Looking for solutions to make climate change benefits Canadian economy can make major difference to Canada’s economy. We already see some “green” product in the market today. I believe if more researches and investigates are done between climate change and economy, solutions to benefits Canadian economy are no longer far.