 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Art / Photo of the Month
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Departments... |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quote of the MonthWe save what we love, we love what we understand, we understand what we are taught."– Baba Diome, Senegalese Naturalist |
Letters to Dr. Green
Dear Dr. Green, As a resident of El Gordo California, a filthy rich neighborhood, I constantly witness some pretty nauseating habits. For instance, my sister will order three giant dishes from a restaurant with emblematic American oversized proportions, three of which will contain animal products. Upon receiving her dishes, she will take approximately three bites of food from each plate, and sometimes never even touch her food. I can’t help but think about prostrate citizens of third world countries who would live another day with all of the food just wasted. Because I am able to feel that there is something seriously wrong with the tremendous waste of nonrenewable resources, not just in Bellaire but throughout the rest of America, I was wondering how I could determine specifically how much biomass it would take in order to support a world full of human beings like my sister. Thanks, Space-taker Dear Space-taker, You are addressing what we would like to call an ecological footprint, the amount of resources a human population needs to survive in a sustainable environment. The ecological footprint may be affected by factors like technological advancements and how much waste the population produces, like your sister’s inability to clean her plate. Furthermore, it sounds like your sister may have quite a colossal ecological footprint. This is not surprising; however, if everyone lived like the average American, 5.3 planets worth of space would be necessary. Perhaps an idea for your family would be to undergo ecological footprint analysis, a way of determining relative consumption for the purpose of educating people about their resource use. This can sometimes trigger the way that one consumes. Although this needs to be addressed in an entirely different Dr. Green letter, overpopulation is a huge concern regarding the over-consumption and thus high ecological footprints of humans. Human population demands have already far exceeded the local and even regional supplies of one nonrenewable resource—water. The next time your sister takes two bites of a huge steak, drag her to the computer to www.myfootprint.org and make her take a 2-minute online test. When she realizes that if her lifestyle was echoed by the rest of the human population it would 17 planets to sustain, her whining may have been worth your trouble. Let us pray that next time she will not order so much food. To find out more about how to shrink hers or even your own ecological footprint, visit www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030902038.html. With hopes for technology as our last hope, Dr. Green http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2006/03/09/AR2006030902038.html Dear Dr. Green, I am somewhat familiar with the idea of carbon trading but would like a clarification on the main idea behind it. Can rich countries and firms buy the right to pollute? Does it work as one of the solutions to dealing with climate change? -Carbon CRAZY Dear Carbon CRAZY, This question ties in the most threatening environmental phenomenon (global warming, of course) with global politics, a connection that many people in our society have yet to make. In regards to your question, carbon trading is a derivative of the Kyoto Treaty to tackle global warming. Industrialized nations that have signed the treaty must reduce their total greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2%. Carbon trading can be compared to the trading of securities in a marketplace. Carbon is given a market value allowing companies/nations to buy and sell it. If a company buys carbon, they are buying the right to burn it, and if a company sells carbon, they are giving up the rights to burn it, thus, cutting down its pollution. A country’s ability to store/prevent carbon from being released into the atmosphere affects the carbon’s value. Obviously, the better a country is at storing carbon, the more they have to sell. The ultimate goal of carbon trading is to keep total carbon emissions at a comfortable level. In answer to your question, absolutely, rich firms can buy the right to pollute. As you can imagine, solely creating a market does not by itself restrain emissions. Trading only works if emissions are reduced enough to contain global warming. And finally, here’s a wake up. Ironically, the US, the world's largest CO2 polluter, isolated itself by choosing not to authorize Kyoto. Aren’t you proud to be an American? Thought so, Dr. Green http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/04/060404.asp http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4919848.stm
|
|
WCI Oakland Habitat Restoration
Oakland Habitat Restoration By Walnut Creek Intermediate School On Sunday, February 26th, a few Environmental Club members along with Mrs. Muniz and me took a trip to the Oakland Habitat Restoration Center. There were many people that joined us, (Red Cross members, Piedmont High students, etc.), and we were able to accomplish a lot. First, we learned about the invasion of the non-native plant Scotch Broom. Scotch Broom is not very healthy for Californian animals to consume. The plant originated in Scotland where there are harsher climates such as colder winters and burning hot summers. The main reason we went there was to help pick out the plants to keep them from ruining our native habitat. We had to be careful of how we picked the Scotch Broom weeds out, using our hands as well as a tool called a weed wrench. We had to make sure that the roots came out completely because even if you break the root of the plant, it can still grown for another ten years. Scotch Broom does not even die without water; therefore the plant is almost indestructible. To describe Scotch Broom, its leaves are grouped in three, it has a woody stem, yellow flowers, and it looks like a broom. But be aware, because this devilish plant can always be mistaken for the native plant Coyote Brush. Remember, “Leaves of three, let it be. Berries white, danger in site. " Ava Mostowfi, Walnut Creek Intermediate, 8th grade
|
Save the Bay Animation
|
Poetry
|
|
|
