Response to: Rethinking Water

ARTICLE: Rethinking Water
It is clear that freshwater is becoming a subject of conversation. It is not only Sandra
Postel, who published Water: Adapting to a New Normal, catching on to the issue, but even journalists from Texas. Our population is growing too rapidly to be supported by natural resources. In the article Rethinking Water, Farzad Mashhood includes a quote from Michael Webber(a university of Texas Professor) "A hundred years from now, your grandkids would ask you, `You sprayed what on your lawn?" This quote really caught my attention because of the realism behind it. By 2025 it is estimated that half of the world's population will not have access to freshwater. It is scary to imagine this especially since my children will not even be old enough to even have children by then. To most people right now it is unthinkable to value water as a valuable resource. It is becoming obvious that we need to begin to work on this problem and find a resolution to our future issues. The worlds population is only going to be greater, and so are our problems. I don't believe that we should conserve by not drinking water, but by taking on the biggest consumer of water and uncover new technologies to reduce required water for agriculture and manufacturing.

Response to "End of a River? by Jonathan Waterman"

VIDEO: Drought Hits Southern Iraq (Euphrates River)

The Euphrates River route runs from Turkey through Syria, and then finally through Iraq. There has always been issues with the river because of the unsuitable, dry climate, but in recent years the river has almost completely dried up. Because Iraq is the last country the Euphrates River runs through, it is left with the least and most polluted water. Iraqis are trying to sanction Turkey and Syria for stealing their water and building damns to limit their resources. The water is rerouted to reach the farmlands of Syria and Turkey. This has been a major problem recently because of the development in the three countries.There has been tension because of this issue between the three countries. It is one of Iraq's only freshwater sources and the river is so important that even scriptures and old testaments state that if the Euphrates will ever dry up, it will be doomsday. It can be seen that the issue of damming and rerouting water sources is not just a local problem, but all over the world. Freshwater is essential for life and necessary for growth, so it easy a resource very well demanded.

Wind-farms In Hungary

                                          You can notice the wind-farms found a stretch of the M1
                                                       Motorway in Hungary from (0:01-0:22)

McKibben Haiku

No room for bigger,

Economy is too big,

Local is the way.

Google Alerts and Twitter Experience

My recent experience with Google Alerts and Twitter has been very positive. I have always had a twitter account but I never became accustomed to using it. But through this exercise, I have learned that it not only user friendly but it is also a very helpful tool. I received a couple of alerts from Google with great links to websites. They were right on topic with what I asked it to alert me on. The sources were credible and they weren't blogs or forums. On twitter I began to follow Greenpeace and various other sustainability associations. Even though their tweets are not directly about sustainability, they mention great events they are hosting, and sometimes they even enlighten you on fun little quick facts. Google Alerts and Twitter are very essential tools to keep you updated and informed on what is happening in the world around you.Through these resources I have learned that sustainability is not only conserving but living at peace with earth.

Issue: Biodiversity Loss

Environmental instability is slowly coming to the attention of the world's citizens. Many scientists have realized the increasing rate of extinction across species. Some scientists have classified this issue as "unnatural" due to the extreme biodiversity loss. Fossil records have confirmed this issue. The standard extinction rate for marine life is 0.1-1 extinctions per million species per year and 0.2-0.5 extinctions per million species per year for mammals. To this day, scientists have concluded the rates to be 100-1000 times more than the standard. At this rate the world will quickly be deprived of biodiversity. Soon we will only see mammals that are used for livestock, but only because it is human controlled. Marine life will be exhausted to the point where we will only see fish used in fish-farming practices. The reason for this issue can only be traced to humans, as we pollute the environment with toxins and settle on the habitats of creatures without a voice.
In the article linked below, three of the nine interlinked planetary boundaries that have been exceeded are discussed. It is crucial the realize how humans, as a whole, have affected the world, and this is a reason an island civilization would be essential. The image below shows the nine boundaries and how much they have been exceeded.

Article:  Nature:A safe operating space for humanity

Image link: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/fig_tab/461472a_F1.html

Response to Roderick Frazier Nash's "Island civilization: a vision for human occupancy of earth"

            The ideas of Roderick Frazier Nash in Island civilization: a vision for human occupancy of earth are completely abstract. The concept of  “island civilization” is far-fetched and not promising for the future. It is true that the earth is running out of space and Homo sapiens are the cause, but it is also true that Homo sapiens are stubborn and many are not for change unless it will benefit them. For many citizens of earth, the existence of another species is the least their worries. Humans often take action to fulfill the greater good, but the greater good in their eyes is not aiding the planet and its other species, but themselves. The idea of an “island civilization” is quite brilliant, yet if it is put in reality many will conclude that the theorist is a fool.

            The cost of living in an island civilization will outweigh the benefit for most people. Today people prosper and flaunt on how many acres they have and how they have over 6000 sq ft homes. It will be hard to convince any sane human that we should go live on a “island civilization” that is isolated and condensed with millions of other fellow humans. Even if it were to save biodiversity, I am sure people would be envious of how other species on earth can have so much space and freedom while humans are confined to a 1000 sq ft or less apartment or cottage.   It sounds as if an island civilization would be an isolated New York City, except more advanced with cool technological features and barbwire to keep us in, with even more citizens than there already are. I have lived in Manhattan for over 11 years and to this day I prefer being out in the “country” with wilderness and trees, and readily available Oxygen. People will feel caged in these “island civilizations” and either there will be many riots or the government will have drug its citizens. To have the entire human race agree to live within “island civilizations” will be terribly bewildering. Hostile countries such as North Korea and Iran would be just the pinch of the problem.

            Besides the fact being incarcerated on an island, with so many people there will be many deadly diseases. If one person attains a virus, you can almost guarantee that it will be transferred, especially in such close quarters. Nash is trying to convince us to care for the ecosystem and biodiversity but at the same time he is convincing us to wipe out our own biodiversity. If an epidemic did break out there could be many causalities and the epidemic may even wipe out the entire “island civilization”. It can be anticipated that there will be technological advancements that can most likely ward of any virus or bacteria, although, one thing that will never change is the characteristic of micro organisms, in which they will always be able to mutate for the better or worse.

            Nash makes an effort to convince us by using words and publications of renowned environmentalists. Those he recites have a strong background and knowledge but never do they say we should contain ourselves on an island. It is a fact of life that we will ever die out or flourish, and Homo sapiens chose to flourish. It is natural selection in which the smarter species survive. As humans we should protect other organisms from extinction. It is essential to sustain biodiversity but we will not confine ourselves to an island to support it. By the next millennium technological advancements will be extraordinary where we will be able to have sustainable living with the minimum footprint on diminishing biodiversity. There are many possibilities to protect mother earth. It is rumored that if mother earth reaches full capacity, she will have natural disasters to dissipate the population. As you may know the prophecy of the end of time on December 21, 2012 is inching up, can it be the extermination of millions of humans on earth by mother earth? It is for destiny to decide the course of planet and its inhabitants. Like Nash states, live in pursuit of happiness.