Environmental Perception is a blog intended to open dialog about current environmental issues to stimulate awareness and promote realistic sustainability for our future generations.
The calendar year has changed, and one of the things that many people do, is make a resolution towards bettering themselves in one way or another. Yet, how often do we think about ways that we can help better another person, area, region, or family? More recently, I have begun to heed the thought that there is not greater gift than the gift of time; the ultimate gift is towards the service to another. So, if I may be so bold: Consider where you could give your time towards another, in 2016.
The gift of time could be in the form of volunteering for human rights; animals; arts and culture; board development; environmental stewardship... what is it that you feel passionate about?
To start you out, below are a few websites that I found online, that you may wish to look at:
After all the hype of COP21 and the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris, I was anxious to hear about the final results -- what happened? -- after seeing image after image of some form of success, what does it mean? Honestly, after much digging and sifting through web searches, this is the best recap I can find from the UN FCCC Website:
On one hand, it seems wonderful that we have finally reached a point in which our leaders acknowledge the need for change. Yet, one question still remains: What is our course of action? According to the COP21 Website:
Why is this agreement historic and why will 12 December 2015 be remembered as a great day for the planet?
It has been widely recognised, with unanimous agreement from scientists,
that the earth’s atmosphere is growing warmer due to greenhouse gas
emissions generated by human activity. The aim of the Paris Conference
that was held from 30 November to 12 December at the Le Bourget
exhibition centre was to come up with a response to this problem, which
is threatening to wipe out the human presence in certain parts of the
world. Keeping the rise in temperature below 2°C
This agreement marks a change in direction, towards a new world. It
confirms the target of keeping the rise in temperature below 2°C.
Scientists believe that a greater increase in temperature would be very
dangerous. The agreement even establishes, for the first time, that we
should be aiming for 1.5°C, to protect island states, which are the most
threatened by the rise in sea levels. How can we manage to avoid global warming?
By 12 December 2015, 186 countries had published their action plan (further information);
each of these plans sets out the way in which they intend to reduce
their greenhouse gas emissions. The UN body that deals with climate
change (the UNFCCC*) published an evaluation of these contributions on 1
November 2015 (further information).
This study showed that despite the unprecedented mobilization shown by
States, at this rate global warming would still be between 2.7°C and
3°C, i.e. above the threshold set by scientists.
The Paris agreement therefore asks all countries to review these
contributions every five years from 2020; they will not be able to lower
their targets and are encouraged, on the contrary, to raise them.
In addition, emissions should peak as soon as possible and the countries
will aim to achieve carbon neutrality in the second half of the
century. This is a real turning point. We are going to gradually stop
using the most polluting fossil fuels in order to reach this goal.
And just how are the governments going to do this? Oh, well, they're supposed to implement carbon mitigation to reduce the current carbon emissions that are contributing to the environment with the goal of keeping global temperature rising below 2ºC. Let's face it though - no government or business is going to do this without incentive and to their benefit - the economy and money will have the final toll on whether or not this is going to happen. So, the UN has devised the following incentive for financial purposes; according to the UNFCCC Paris Agreement:
"[COP 21] Recognizes the importance of adequate and predictable financial resources, including for results based payments, as appropriate for the implementation of policy approaches and positive incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks; as well as alternative policy approaches, such as join mitigation and adaptation approaches for the integral and sustainable management of forests; while reaffirming the importance of non-carbon benefits associate with such approaches; encouraging the coordination of support from inter alia, public and private, bilateral and multilateral sources, such as the Green Climate Fund, and alternative sources in accordance with relevant decisions by the Conference of Parties." - Paragraph 55
Really?? Are we really putting the economy before the health and well-being of the planet we live on? This is where I think back to the many lectures of Dr. David Suzuki:
So, what are we, as people on the ground, the front line, going to do about it? Well, a number of things can be done, though what is really going to make a difference? How about taking a real close look at our lives, and our lifestyle. Do you know the actual impacts of what you buy? Before you purchase something, do you think about what message you are sending to the overarching 'powers-that-be' that control industry, our economy, and the world we live in? Perhaps what we really need is a social revolution - one that reconsiders the way we live our lives - yet, this is going to require change at a real, true, fundamental level... because, continuing to do what we're doing is a form of madness. Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results, is madness.
It's time to stop rewarding negative behaviour with positive incentives (i.e. money, tax reductions, "green" labeling, etc.). Can we really leave the future of our planet in the hands of people that are influenced by money? What price would you put on the world your future grandchildren will have??
2016 is nearing and a time that many people start to consider what direction they want their lives to go in the next year, five years, or ten years. Perhaps it's time to start thinking about the present day, for the benefit of that future.
US President Barack Obama has delivered a speech at the COP21 meeting, saying that he hoped the Paris summit can be a "turning point” in the fight against climate change.
Experts say cooperation between China and the US is crucial if there's
to be progress at the climate change conference in Paris. The two
countries have the largest economies in the world, but are also the two
largest emitters of greenhouse gases. Each exerts a different influence
on nations around the world trying to reduce emissions and reach the
ambitious targets Paris has set.
Coccolithophorid - A Haptophyte Algae
Source: http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/naturelibrary/images/ic/credit/640x395/c/co/coccolithophore/coccolithophore_1.jpg
More of my beautiful green beasties... Algae!!!
A John Hopkins University Scientist has found a deifying correlation between carbon dioxide (CO2) and the abundance of the Coccolithophore population in the North Atlantic. Coccolithophorids are characterized by special calcium carbonate plates (sometimes called scales) of uncertain function called coccoliths. However, not all organisms within the Family Prymnesiophyceae are coccolithores, as there are some species that lack coccoliths (e.g. Prymnesium).
Coccolithophores--tiny calcifying plants that are part of the foundation
of the marine food web--have been increasing in relative abundance in
the North Atlantic over the last 45 years, as carbon input into ocean
waters has increased. Their relative abundance has increased 10 times,
or by an order of magnitude, during this sampling period. This finding
was diametrically opposed to what scientists had expected since
coccolithophores make their plates out of calcium carbonate, which is
becoming more difficult as the ocean becomes more acidic and pH is
reduced.
[...]
When the percentage of coccolithophores in the community goes up, the
relative abundance of other groups will go down. The authors found that
at local scales, the relative abundance of another important algal
class, diatoms, had decreased over the 45 years of sampling.
"Coccolithophores have been typically more abundant during Earth's warm interglacial and high CO2
periods," said Balch, an authority on the algae. "The results presented
here are consistent with this and may portend, like the 'canary in the
coal mine,' where we are headed climatologically."
[...]
"What is worrisome," he said, "is that our result points out how little we know about how complex ecosystems function."
Yes, the garden of ocean life is changing in response to climate change... the question really being: what does it mean? At this point, to my knowledge, all we really know is that the changes are occurring faster than scientific prediction modeling and at a rate that is unlike what our historic records indicate, leading many scientists to continued concern of the impact of global emissions and the future of Earth's resources.
Considering that the UN Conferences on Climate Change has begun in Paris today, it will be interesting to see what becomes of our legislated requirements as governments argue the value of economics over the stability of our planet. Will this newly published information be part of the discussion? We shall see in the next two weeks.
Most people that know me, know that I am a little bit obsessed with algae... they are the most amazing organisms on the planet (in my opinion). They're responsible for our environment as we know it - early microorganisms, especially cyanobacteria, were the first living organisms on this rock, flying around the Sun - and without them, life today wouldn't exist. Now, this is not to say that there are other really fantastic organisms out there, or that life wouldn't have evolved in any other way, because that would be an incorrect statement. It just so happens that Stromatolites are the earliest records we have found for life on Earth, dating 3.5 Billion Years Ago.
Now, what in the world does this have to do with today's blog? Well, my friends, the United Nations Conference on Climate Change is having it's next meeting in Paris from November 30th through December 11th, 2015. And, a team from Concordia University in Montreal might have found an answer to the ever-going question of how we can reverse our dependence on fossil fuels: Cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae!! Once again, my beloved algae come to the forefront of the survival of Earth!! These wonderful organisms are found everywhere, are found in some of the most hardy environments as well adapted extremophiles, and produce energy through photosynthesis, nitrogen fixation, and respiration; cyanobacteria are arguably the most successful group of microorganisms on earth!! While the details of technology are continuing to work on a sustainable source of harvesting these little power houses.
As published in Science Daily, A New Green Power Source:
"By taking advantage of a process that is constantly occurring all
over the world, we've created a new and scalable technology that could
lead to cheaper ways of generating carbon-free energy," says
Packirisamy [lead engineering professor at Concordia University].
He notes that the invention is still in its early stages. "We have a
lot of work to do in terms of scaling the power cell to make the project
commercial."
Currently, the photosynthetic power cell exists on a small scale, and
consists of an anode, cathode and proton exchange membrane. The
cyanobacteria or blue green algae are placed in the anode chamber.
As they undergo photosynthesis, the cyanobacteria release electrons
to the electrode surface. An external load is connected to the device to
extract the electrons and harness power.
As Packirisamy and his team develop and expand the project, he hopes
that the micro photosynthetic power cells will soon be used in various
applications, such as powering cell phones and computers. And maybe one
day they'll power the world.
And what comes to mind is the Wicked Witch of the West, stirring her crystal ball (which looks like it has algae in it, by the way!), in the Wizard of Oz, substituting her words for "Continue to flourish, my little green beasties, flourish!!!"
Climate Change is becoming a big topic for many people, politicians, and government authorities. In truth, it is a big concern for the future of our planet, and the empirical data is undeniable from researchers around the world. And yet, it is becoming such a buzz word, that it's meaning and impending urge for human change is losing it's significance... Climate change is a complex issue, and like it or not, humans are contributing to to it.
The United Nations (UN) formed an international treaty in 1992, "to consider what they could do to limit global temperature increases and
the resulting climate change, and to cope with its impacts". In 1995, many of the participating countries realized that emission reductions enforced from the 1992 treaty were inadequate. Two years later, in 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted with the intent to legally bind participating countries to emission reduction targets. The first commitment period started eleven years later in 2008, and the second is to start in 2013.
The UN Climate Summit was created to oversee the world's climate negotiations, to prevent climate breakdown by limiting the amount of greenhouse gases that are released. The first offender of climate breakdown is the use of fossil fuels, and the idea was to constrain the use or consumption of these resources. While their efforts are appreciated, what change has really happened since 1992 to decrease emissions that degrade our greenhouse gases?
In the 2014 UN Climate Summit in Lima, there was much talk about utilizing the remaining resources for economic profit. And, last month the UK instated the Infrastructure Act that maximizes the economic recovery of petroleum products, legally binding our future business to squeeze every drop out of the land. Unfortunately, this will become a battle of resources in the future, pushing the largest price on consumers for the gain or benefit of the those in control and in power of the petroleum industry... Is this really leading us towards the mission statement of the UN Climate Summit?
Obama explained that “I don’t always lead with the climate change
issue because if you right now are worried about whether you’ve got a
job or if you can pay the bills, the first thing you want to hear is how
do I meet the immediate problem?”(17)
Money is certainly a problem, but not necessarily for the reasons
Obama suggested. The bigger issue is the bankrolling of politics by big
oil and big coal(18), and the tremendous lobbying power they purchase. These companies have, in the past, financed wars to protect their position(19);
they will not surrender the bulk of their reserves without a monumental
fight. This fight would test the very limits of state power; I wonder
whether our nominal democracies would survive it. Fossil fuel companies
have become glutted on silence: their power has grown as a result of
numberless failures to challenge and expose them. It’s no wonder that
the manicured negotiators at the UN conferences, so careful never to
break a nail, have spent so long avoiding the issue.
And yet, back on 19 March 2015, USA President Obama signed executive orders to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of US agencies. While the US Federal Agencies have decreased their contribution by 17%, most of these changes cost money.
“For federal agencies who are looking at how to cover their energy
needs, this is a very pragmatic dollars-and-cents issue,” said Brian
Deese, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama. “If they can consume less energy
or they can consume renewable energy that is cheaper, more reliable or
more sustainable, then they can achieve their environmental goals while
they are saving money.” Further information can be read from the New York Times Article: Obama Orders Cuts in Federal Greenhouse Gas Emissions
From a perspective of food resources, published by Reuters:
ROME (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Global warming could cause an 18 percent drop in world food production
by 2050, but investments in irrigation and infrastructure, and moving
food output to different regions, could reduce the loss, a study
published on Thursday said.
Globally, irrigation
systems should be expanded by more than 25 percent to cope with
changing rainfall patterns, the study published in the journal
Environmental Research Letters said.
Where they
should be expanded is difficult to model because of competing scenarios
on how rainfall will change, so the majority of irrigation investments
should be made after 2030, the study said.
"If
you don't carefully plan (where to spend resources), you will get
adaptation wrong," David Leclere, one of the study's authors, told the
Thomson Reuters Foundation.
Infrastructure and
processing chains will need to be built in areas where there was little
agriculture before in order to expand production, he said.
International
food markets will require closer integration to respond to global
warming, as production will become more difficult in some southern
regions, but new land further north will become available for growing
crops.
Based on the study's models, Leclere
expects production to increase in Europe, while much of Africa will
remain dependent on imports.
If climate change
is managed correctly, food production could even rise 3 percent by
2050, the study said, as a higher concentration of carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere has a fertilizing effect on plants.
Managing water resources is expected to be the biggest challenge for farmers steming from climate change.
Water
"may become dramatically scarcer much earlier than previously
thought," Michael Obersteiner, another study co-author, said in a
statement. (Reporting By Chris Arsenault; Editing by Tim Pearce)
Yes, climate change go beyond a nebulous thought of 'someday' - the effects are here, measurable, and impacting our daily lives - and, we have yet to see the change that is truly necessary to make a difference. Let us open our eyes, review our daily habits, and see where we are contributing to the economic mechanism driving this madness.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results." ~ Albert Einstein
