Week 5

Chapter 5 – Sustaining Biodiversity: The Species Approach

“The greatest threats to any species are loss or degradation of habitat, harmful invasive species, human population growth, pollution, climate change and overexploitation”

Discuss three ways in which you could apply this concept to make your lifestyle more environmentally sustainable.

It is often said “What can I do, I am only one person?” However, Mahatma Gandhi believed, “We must be the change we wish to see” (The Global Tribe, 2003).

This blog entry will discuss three lifestyle changes that may reduce the effects that degradation of habitat, harmful invasive species and climate change has on many organisms.

1. The refusal to purchase take-away coffee in disposable cups has beneficial outcomes for the environment. It has been said that Australians throws away around one billion coffee cups per year; which equates to six million trees, and creates over 5,500 tonnes of landfill annually (Micup, 2010). Choosing a re-usable cup can help to alleviated the impact that this affluence has on the habitat of numerous species. Better yet, make one at home, or go without.

2. Join the battle to stop the cane toad from crossing the WA border and into the Kimberley’s by enlisting with the Kimberley Toad Busters. Cane toads were deliberately introduced to control pests of sugar cane; however, as they have few predators, and are poisonous throughout their life cycle, the toads have had devastating effects on many native animals and plants (Australian Museum, 2010; KCT, 2010).

3. Carbon footprint reduction with hopes to slow down climate change. Methods include using fuel-efficient modes of travel, such as walking and bicycle riding; installation of energy efficient lighting; employing solar power; and ‘refuse-reduce-reuse-recycle’ (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 278).

Although insignificant in number; as one member of the most dominant species on the planet, it becomes self-evident that there are individual lifestyle choices that can be made, to lessen the impact that one being has on the environment.

As sung by Michael Jackson (1988), we have to start somewhere: 

“I'm starting with the man in the mirror

I'm asking him to change his ways

And no message could have been any clearer

If you want to make the world a better place

Take a look at yourself and then make a change.”

References:

Cameron, E. (2010). Australian Museum: Cane toad. Retrieved from http://australianmuseum.net.au/Cane-Toad

Jackson, M. (Singer and Producer). (1988). Man in the mirror [Sound recording]. USA: Epic Recods. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbzMsIcp6fI&ob=av2e

Kimberley Toad Busters. (2010). Fact sheets. Retrieved from http://www.canetoads.com.au/
 Micup. (2010). Retrieved from http://micup.com.au/did-you-know

Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. E. (2009). Sustaining the earth. (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brookes/Cole

The Global Tribe. (2003). Global citizens. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/kcet/globaltribe/change/index.html

Week 4

Chapter 4 – Community Ecology, Population Ecology, and the Human Population.

“Some people believe that our most important goal should be to sharply reduce the rate of population growth in developing countries where 97% of the world’s population growth is expected to take place. Others argue that the most serious environmental problems stem from high levels of resource consumption per person in developed countries, which use 88% of the world’s resources and have much larger ecological footprints per person than do developing countries.”

What is your view on this issue? Explain your response...

Research has shown that developing nations impact negatively on the environment out of a need to survive, rather than one of want, as is the case for many developed countries (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 14). Reducing population growth in developing countries is an important environmental goal to aim for; however, why this occurs must first be evaluated.

(Shah, 2009)

To do this, the world must look deeper into the global issue of poverty, unequal wealth distribution and affluence. Many developed nations view that freedom of trade, an ever growing economy and the subsequent generation of more jobs provide a larger tax income, a freer circulation of capital and the ability for countries to invest; so therefore the ensuing profits will “trickle-down” to help the poor, reducing poverty. Unfortunately, this is instead causing the benefits to flow up to the rich, widening the wealth gap (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 318-319). It is disturbing to note that the Gross Domestic Product of the 41 deeply indebted developing countries, with a population approximating 567 million, is less than the wealth of the world’s seven richest people combined (Shah, 2010).

Affluent lifestyles of numerous urbanised countries lead to high levels of consumption, reflected in the alarming statistic published by the World Bank showing that in 2005, the richest 20% of the globe accounted for 76.6% of entire private consumption and the poorest fifth just 1.5% (Shah, 2010). Additionally, the United Nations Framework on Climate Change recognised that the “largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries” (United Nations Framework on Climate Change, 1992, p. 2). Consequently, wealthier countries must be recognised as the greater contributors to the destruction of the ecosystem, leaving a much larger ecological footprint than those in poverty stricken developing countries (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 15), and also have greater control over resource consumption, and subsequent environmental degradation.

It is suggested that industrialised nations should owe developing nations for the associated costs of climate change, amounting to over 600 billion dollars; which is triple the conventional debt that developing countries currently owe (Jubilee USA, 2009; Shah, 2010).

Developed countries have to assist in reducing poverty; by extending foreign debt cancellation, providing education, family planning guidance, sustainable energy supplies, and Microloans to the poor people of developing nations (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 319). Additionally, developed nations are in a strong position to take control of their own outputs, use of natural resources, and should shift towards environmentally sustainable economies, for the benefit of the entire earth.

References:

Jubilee USA Network. (2009). Who owes whom? The climate debt we owe the world’s poor. Retrieved from http://www.jubileeusa.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Resources/Grassroots/Jubilee_USA_Climate_Change_Resource_09.pdf

Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. E. (2009). Sustaining the earth. (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brookes/Cole

Shah, Anup. (2009). Global Issues: Climate Justice and Equity. Retrieved from http://www.globalissues.org/article/231/climate-justice-and-equity

Shah, Anup. (2010). Global Issues: Poverty around the world. Retrieved from http://www.globalissues.org/article/4/poverty-around-the-world

Shah, Anup. (2010). Global Issues: Poverty Facts and Stats. Retrieved from http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats>

United Nations Framework on Climate Change. (1992). United Nations framework convention on climate change 1992. Retrieved from http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf

Week 3

Chapter 3 – Biodiversity and Evolution

Discuss: “You are a defence attorney arguing in court for sparing an undeveloped old-growth tropical rainforest from being cleared and developed. Give your three best arguments for the defence of this ecosystem.”

“Your Honour, old-growth tropical rainforests provide human beings with a large range of plant species, many of which are important for agricultural purposes. Farmers of banana, sugarcane and cocoa are reliant on the cross-breeding of these domesticated plants with their wild tropical rainforest relatives, in order to maintain crop resistance to diseases and pests. In addition, old-growth tropical rainforests provide natural pesticides; in the form of pest-eating insects and plant derived insecticides. The destruction of this old-growth tropical rainforest will leave essential crops venerable to major damage, with consequential adverse affects left to be felt by humans (Ninan, 2006, p. 4).”

“It has been proven beyond reasonable doubt, that tropical rainforests support the greatest diversity of living organisms on Earth, and have the potential to help understand and eliminate currently untreatable diseases (Chivian, 1994). While these old-growth jungles cover only a small part of the planet’s surface; they remain the habitat for up to 90 percent of the world’s entire species (Ninan, 2006, p. 4). Researchers estimate that tropical old-growth rainforests house between five to 50 million different species (Butler, 2006). This exceptional wealth in biodiversity combined with the devastating tropical deforestation rate suggests that many animal and plant species will become extinct, before humans have the chance to study them. If humans develop this untouched tropical rainforest, they run the risk of denying the human species of not only instrumental rainforest values, but possible remedies for currently incurable diseases (Chivian, 1994; Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 99.)”

“In closing, the consequences of clearing tropical old-growth rainforests can have a detrimental effect on the earth’s climate. The warm humid air provided by these forests provide an even ecological foundation by creating warm, moist air that in turn generates the release of great quantities of energy into the atmosphere, and this process directly affects climate. Additionally, tropical old-growth rainforests are naturally a “carbon sink”; however the destruction of these environments turns these sinks into a source. As deforestation occurs, carbon dioxide emissions are released which then in turn further depletes the ozone layer. Researchers have warned that if humans obliterate this vast tropical old-growth rainforest, they will undoubtedly and detrimentally affect this important energy transfer process that ensures the stability of their own climate (Bunyard, 1999).”

References:

Bunyard, P. (1999). Eradicating the Amazon rainforests will wreak havoc on climate. The Ecologist,(29)2, 81-84.
Butler, R. (2006). Consequences of deforestation. Retrieved from http://rainforests.mongabay.com/0901.htm

Chivian, E. (1994). The ultimate preventive medicine. Technology Review, 97(8), 34.
Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. E. (2009). Sustaining the earth. (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brookes/Cole
Ninan, K. N., Jyothis, S., Babu, P., & Ramakrishnappa, V. (2007). The economics of biodiversity conservation: valuation in tropical forest ecosystems. London, UK: Earthscan

Week 2

Chapter 1 – Environmental Problems, Their Causes, and Sustainability.

Explanations as to why I agree or disagree with each of the following statements, are published in italics:

(a) Humans are superior to other forms of life; Agree: All organisms have to compete for resources, and largely due to our technological advancements, such as guns and chain-saws, we have a clear advantage over other life forms. The domination by humans leads to the daily extinction of approximately 40 to 100 species (Chiras, 2010, p. 57). Although we may be superior in this sense, it does not make us more important.

(b) Humans are in charge of the earth; Agree: “We hold power over the future of the biosphere, the power to destroy or preserve.” (Chiras, 2010, p. 58). This great power necessitates great responsibility; and humans have the responsibility to protect the earth, not conquer it (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 16).

(c) All economic growth is good; Disagree: Fast economic growth can have negative implications for the environment; including the increased exploitation of natural capital and further inequalities in wealth distribution, expediting poverty (Healey, 2008, p. 2). Focus should instead be directed to environmentally sustainable economic growth (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 10).

(d) The value of other forms of life depends only on whether they are useful to us; Agree: As all forms of life are or have the potential to be useful to humans, they are all therefore valuable. Some uses include natural capital, economic ecotourism benefits, genetic information and recreational pleasures (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 99-100).

(e) Because all forms of life eventually become extinct we should not worry about whether our activities cause their premature extinction; Disagree: Premature eradication of organism can be detrimental to future generations, and unfortunately humans have accelerated some species extinction to 32 times its natural rate (Chiras, 2010, p. 58). 99% of Tropical forest flowering plant species are yet to be examined for their medicinal properties, and many will become extinct before this can occur (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 99).

(f) All forms of life have an inherent right to exist; Agree: All life has value, therefore an inherent right to exist. Humans are a part of, and completely reliant on nature, therefore should endeavour to care for all life forms (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 333-334).

(g) Nature has an almost unlimited storehouse of resources for human use; Disagree: Many of the resources that nature provides are unlimited, including wind, sun and water flows. However, these are not just for human use, and alone are not enough to sustain life on earth. Other natural resources such as plants, water and soil are also needed, and are not limitless (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 6).

(h) Technology can solve our environmental problems; Disagree: There is no single solution to our environmental issues; being flexible and administering a range of cultural and scientific solutions is better than “blind technological optimism” (Miller & Spoolman, 2009, p. 335-336).

References

Healey, J., (2008). Issues in society. The Globalisation Issue. Thirroul, NSW: Spinney Press.

Miller, G. T., & Spoolman, S. E. (2009). Sustaining the earth. (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brookes/Cole.

Chiras, D. (2010). Environmental Science. (8th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.