A Dream for a Better World

Our previous presidents unfortunately were not too environmentally conscience.  I understand that being environmentally conscience can cost money.  Filters for smoke stacks, better car engines, and less pollution from the energy making companies that use coal all take money.  It may hurt, but if it is done unilaterally then no company will have an advantage over another, so if company A has to increase the costs of its products to make its company green friendly so does company B.   But even forgetting about the cost part, there is the part that this really is necessary.  If we keep going the way we are going we could end up being more like the planet Venus than we want to be!

Although Venus is the 2nd closest planet to the Sun, it is MUCH hotter than Mercury.  Why is that?  It is because of the greenhouse gases in its atmosphere.  The sunlight comes in then is trapped unlike Mercury and Earth where the heat can escape the atmosphere.  If our polution gets much worse then the heat will just keep adding up.  This of course would be very bad if our polar ice caps melted as it would cause a huge rise in the oceans causing many islands to be lost and of course a lot of the land exposed to the ocean would be under water.

So, while it may seem expensive, I think it is better than us living on a planet of ONLY water with no land!  While it may seem extreme, the bad thing about the greenhouse effect is that it can build quickly.  We need to act now.  I do hope our new president can turn things around for us.

The world is undergoing an acute food crisis with soaring prices for basic food.  Prices of rice and wheat were about double their levels a year earlier, and corn prices were over a third higher.  The crisis in food prices is the result of a combination of factors, among which the reduction of supplies due to farmers’ switch from growing crops for food to crops for agrofuels. Rich countries have promoted the production of agrofuels despite strong arguments warning about the ecological and social disaster they would imply on the world’s food security and on local peoples’ livelihoods and environments.  Agrofuels will indirectly destroy forests and lead to more costly food by increasing land pressures upon natural forests and agricultural crop lands

Environmental destruction processes usually lead to a series of causes, which can be classified as either direct or underlying causes.  An example of a direct cause would be the destruction of forests to convert into monoculture plantations such as soybeans (Brazil, Paraguay) or oil palm trees (Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Colombia), among other types of plantations worldwide.  Almost all environmental destruction processes share a common underlying cause and that is excessive consumption.  For example, the paper industry in which worldwide consumption has already long surpassed the threshold of sustainability.  Despite this fact, the industry plans to increase this consumption even further by creating and maintaining the false notion that there is a huge need and demand for disposable paper products such as paper cups, tablecloths, and napkins among others.  This level of paper consumption requires a steady supply of vast quantities of abundant and cheap raw material.  Thus, the industry turned to the establishment of huge monoculture plantations of fast-growing trees (eucalyptus, acacia, pine), which resulted in the destruction of forests and grasslands.  These plantations, which continue to expand, are now becoming the main source of raw material for paper production.  To save the environment and their way of life, numerous local communities in Africa, Asia and Latin America are fighting back against the spread of monoculture tree plantations and pulp mills.  

Plastic is widely used since it is cheap, easy to make and also lasts for quite a long time. Unfortunately it is these very qualities that are leading to an increasing pollution problem. In fact the phenomenon of plastic pollution needs the serious attention of the concerned authorities, around the world. Plastic is not that easily prone to biodegradation and therefore continues to wreak havoc with the environment for a long time. Increased urbanization is one of the major reasons for plastic pollution. This form of pollution has already affected several species of mammals and birds adversely and therefore needs to be seriously looked into in all urgency.

The spilling of either refined or crude petroleum into the environment is one ecological disaster that unfortunately often happens these days. Almost every passing day we come across reports stating accidental spills from ships which lead to destruction of precious underwater plant and animal life in the vicinity. Not only do fish inside such murky waters get affected, very often birds which depend on the area for their food, also get affected. There have also been instances when the coral reef has been badly damaged due to oil pollution. Fortunately marine toxicologists are working overtime nowadays to tackle the problem and come out with solutions.

Although human beings have invented many things right from the ancient times, they have never been able to duplicate anything that nature provides us with. This is one reason why mankind has always been in awe of nature. Unfortunately mankind has been unkind to Mother Nature and has plundered it beyond recognition, which is leading to the doom of all human beings. Forests have been cut down, animals have been killed to extinction and there seems to be no sign of stopping. All this has been done in the name of development. It is high time people realized that development and environment are closely related. Environment protection is something that everyone on this planet must be aware of. Stricter laws should be implemented to stop the plunder of natural resources. Only stringent laws can act as a deterrent and prevent this rampant destruction of our beloved earth.

In March 2007, Fidel Castro criticized President Bush’s push for biofuels.    Saying not only would billions of people starve but also that the environment would be harmed. 

Yes, we need to get rid of Oil as a source of fuel.  Yes, corn would be a cheaper alternative but is it really better for the environment?  Now, environmental groups and scientists are saying that it is NOT better for the environment when you consider everything that goes into making the biofuels.  So, is it again about money?  

Do I personally think Fidel Castro was right?  Absolutely.  Now, before you start saying I am anti-American, let me explain why.  However, before I explain why – shouldn’t all knowledge be worth looking at it no matter who said it?  Why should the person you hate most in this world have nothing to teach you?  Just because you hate that person does not mean they do not have anything meaningful to say.  You need to approach this as a teacher would to a student.  If the student came up with an idea that the teacher disagreed with or never thought of before, should the teacher spend time thinking about what the student has said or should the teacher treat his student as if he could never learn anything from him/her?  I personally believe that as a teacher one never ceases to learn, so we need to open our eyes and ears to everyone especially when it comes to benefiting the environment.  Now, back to the question at hand.  Why do I think that Fidel Castro was right? 

1. As anyone with the most basic knowledge of Economics can tell you price is determined by supply and demand.  Yes, corn is cheap now, but what will happen to the price of corn when you start requesting 100’s of millions of tons of corn?  The price will go up and this will affect the poor EVERYWHERE.  Now, in order to prevent the price from going up – you have to increase the supply.  How are we going to do that?  From what I see prices of land all over the world is going up and up.  If we use existing land then prices of other foods will go up as other foods are being replaced.  We are decreasing the supply of those other items so their price must go up.
2. If poorer countries start participating in the fuel oil plan we can kiss our rainforests goodbye!  We already know farmers care little about rainforests when they can see money in their pocket for destroying it. 
3. Look at what happened in the plains of America when we cut down too many trees, growing crops became close to impossible because of the wind.  Will this happen all over the world when you start requesting huge amounts of corn and other items for fuel oil?  I think yes. 

I totally agree we need to get rid of oil as a source of energy.  But, why do we have to have our sites set on food as a source?  Why can’t we think of other items (Note, I am not a scientists, so I don’t know if any of the following ideas are plausable) like Carbon Dioxide (use our pollution as a source), electricity, and trash.

Did you know that one lightning storm can supply enough electricity to power all of America for approximately 20 minutes?  Now unfortunately we do not have a way to convert that raw power into electricity?  Plus our batteries have not come a long way like our computers have.  I believe that if someone (say President Bush or Bill Gates) put up an Xprize (that is how we got a commercial plane into space) for someone to convert this raw power into energy then we would solve a LOT of our environmental problems.

All I am saying is that there has to be other sources of energy other than food (how about desert sand, we have a lot of that! haha).

What do you all think?

Have you seen those big smoke stacks blowing out pollution?  Did you know they make air filters for those smoke stacks?  Do you think any of them use it?  Why?  Don’t want to waste any money!  I mean why waste money that could go out for for bonuses just to save the environment.  I mean what help would it be if we did it and no one else did it?  Doesn’t everyone have to do it, to make a difference?  Is this the way businesses think?  Does everything have to be connected to the bottom line?  What about the public image? Can’t they say “Hey, we are a green – compliant company, we use air filters in smoke stacks thus reducing polution 90%, come buy from us”? 

There needs to be incentives for companies to be green-compliant.  How else will we survive?

I hear arguements about Chocolate lovers and Coffee Drinkers needing to stop deforestation because it is the forests, more specifically the rainforests that produce the chocolate we eat and the Coffee that people drink.  My question is, it seems that the Chocolate making companies and the Coffee Companies would have more to lose.  Why don’t they buy up big plantations and help save the rainforests?  If the rainforests are gone, yes we lose our Chocolate and coffee and possible cancer fighting drugs but they will lose the entire company.  So, it seems we all need to do something.  I just think that the companies have bigger pockets and more weight to throw around than us little guys.  Agree?