Category: Climate

The development of technologies has inevitably affected all spheres of humans lives, bringing benefits and enhancing commodities to the extent that could not have been imagined several decades ago. What is more important, technological innovations help people to deal with one of the greatest threats of the new millennium: climate change. Specifically, there is the potential of technologies positive effect on carbon emission due to causing its reduction. At the same time, it is crucial to consider the economic outcomes of technologies in relation to climate change. Overall, specialists and researchers in the field of climate change single out both positive and negative ways technology can influence the future of the planet. Whereas new technologies help to track climate change and allow finding solutions to dangerous emissions, the excessive presence of automation in peoples lives can lead to adverse outcomes.

The most evident effect of technology on climate change is the possibility of finding new solutions to climate change problems. At the Global Climate Action Summit, which was held in 2018, a new approach to estimating and decreasing the emissions of methane was discussed (Krupp). Methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas, is reported to have over eighty times the near-term warming power of carbon dioxide. Methane emissions are accountable for one-fourth of all the global warming that humanity is experiencing at present. However, according to researchers, these statistics outline not only numerous difficulties but also a variety of opportunities (Krupp). Specifically, with the help of technology, it becomes possible to reduce methane emissions, which is the most convenient and cost-effective solution for eliminating the level of global warming (Krupp). In 2013, the Environmental Defense Fund involved 140 scientists from forty institutions, as well as about fifty oil and gas companies, in an extensive research study aimed at assessing methane emissions in the US oil and gas sector.

It is necessary to emphasize that such a profound investigation became possible due to technology. Scholars utilized airplanes, sensors mounted on drones, and Google Street View cars. Such methods allowed them to measure emissions at each of the supply chain links, starting with remote wellheads and ending with the pipes under each street (Krupp). With the help of the newest technological developments, it was found that the oil and gas industry of the USA emits 13 million metric tons of methane annually. This amount exceeds the estimates made by the Environmental Protection Agency by 60% (Krupp). Therefore, the most evident benefit of technology use in the fight against climate change is the opportunity to obtain valid information about the levels of dangerous emissions. With the help of these data, the companies operating in the oil and gas industry, along with researchers, will be able to come up with solutions to the problems identified. As a result of technologies involvement, governments can develop more effective policies against dangerous emissions and control the situation better.

The transparency gained with the help of technological advancements can reach beyond the common places of tracking methane emissions. MethaneSAT  a satellite mission that is about to be launched in 2021  was designed with the aim of mapping and measuring methane emissions practically in any part of the planet (Krupp). With the help of this innovation, companies and countries will be able to notice problems timely, come up with ways of solving them, and evaluate the process of alteration. As a result, dangerous emissions will be reduced, and the situation with climate change in the world will be enhanced.

Energy technologies constitute another important part of the process of mitigating climate change. Van der Zwaan et al. note that the utilization of technologies in the energy sector has the potential to scale down carbon dioxide emissions (p. 526). In their article, Van der Zwaan et al. analyze the situation in Latin America and emphasize the positive role of technologies in the process of measuring the most dangerous contributors to climate change (p. 527). Researchers acknowledge that the effect of carbon dioxide cannot be measured with a hundred-percent certainty. However, they note that technologies can bring the issue to a whole new level and grant the highest precision possible (Van der Zwaan et al, p. 527). The application of technology helps to understand the changes necessary in the energy system, with the use of which carbon dioxide emission can be eliminated. To pursue such an aim, a variety of technological models can be employed (Van der Zwaan et al. 527). These may be general and partial equilibrium ones, those with various levels of simulation and optimization, and the models with different degrees of inclusiveness and diversity in the energy system.

Along with the evident benefits of technology in the sphere of carbon dioxide emissions reduction, scholars point out the need to notice the effect of technology on the growth of the economy. As Li and Wang remark, economic growth causes alterations in the extent of carbon dioxide emissions (p. 61). Therefore, researchers argue that the environmental and economic outcomes of technologies should be viewed as separate entities. With the intention to analyze the intensity of the technologies influence on carbon emission intensity and economy, Li and Wang studied the data from 95 countries over the period from 1996 to 2007 (p. 61). The authors reported that technological progress led to a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. However, at the same time, Li and Wang found that a separate analysis of technologies intensity effects indicated both beneficial and adverse results (pp. 65-66). Therefore, one cannot say that technology has a purely positive influence on climate change.

Another set of ideas concerning the effect of technology on climate change refers to the so-called industry 4.0, or the fourth industrial revolution. With the advent of more and more technologies, many processes and tasks previously performed by people have become automated (Wright). The number of disruptive technologies is increasing, which leads to alterations in peoples ways of living, working, and communicating. Such disruptive technologies include virtual reality, the internet of things, artificial intelligence, and robotics. As Wright remarks, understanding of the influence of the mentioned technologies on climate change is quite complicated. On the one hand, innovations can eliminate greenhouse gas emissions and allow for collecting and analyzing data that will help to mitigate climate change. On the other hand, however, mass automation can bring negative outcomes, such as the growing levels of emissions and consumption (Wright). The most viable unfavorable effects of technologies are expected to be noticed in the spheres of automobile manufacturing and agriculture.

The process of car manufacturing is currently almost entirely automated. The majority of processes that humans used to perform have been replaced by robotic workers (Wright). Technologies lead to highly efficient energy management at automobile factories. As a result, companies are able to eliminate waste and emissions in all processes involved in car manufacturing. Unfortunately, excessive use of technologies also has an adverse effect on climate change. Since the process of making a car is more efficient, automobiles are cheaper, hence, more people can afford them (Wright). Consequently, there are more cars on the roads than there used to be, which results in an excessive amount of emissions.

In the agriculture industry, the mechanization of machines allows producing food with less labor. However, this fact also means that the level of environmental degradation increases (Wright). The use of new tractors, robots, and other machines for making farmers work easier causes an increase in the negative environmental impact. Along with that, lower prices on food mean increased consumption, which also has an adverse influence on climate change.

In the question of technologys impact on climate change, one cannot draw a clear line between the benefits and limitations of such an effect. Undoubtedly, the evolution of automation and technological devices enables researchers to track the levels of dangerous emissions and find ways of decreasing them. At the same time, it cannot be denied that the simplification of labor in many spheres causes excessive consumption and additional emissions, which are unfavorable for the environment. While new technologies help to control emission rates, they also contribute to the growth of these rates. Therefore, innovation should be embraced with caution in order to use its benefits for the planets welfare and minimize the imitations that can harm the environment.

Works Cited

Krupp, Fred. How Technology Is Leading Us to New Climate Change Solutions. World Economic Forum, 2018.

Li, Mingquan, and Qi Wang. Will Technology Advances Alleviate Climate Change? Dual Effects of Technology Change on Aggregate Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Energy for Sustainable Development, vol. 41, 2017, pp. 61-68.

Van der Zwaan, Bob, et al. Energy Technology Roll-Out for Climate Change Mitigation: A Multi-Model Study for Latin America. Energy Economics, vol. 56, 2016, pp. 526-542.

Wright, Laurie. What Will More Advanced Technology Mean for Climate Change? Independent, 2019.

Unquestionably, global transformation is becoming a challenge encompassing a broad scope of human life, including its economic and social features. Conducted investigations indicate that climate change will continuously affect the globe so long as necessary precautions are not taken to preserve the environment. Therefore, I believe in all the hype about climate change and global warming rising under human influence since there are already evident climatic changes in the current environment. Most individuals acknowledge the magnitude of these alterations. Global warming can drastically derange some of natures indispensable conditions for food, air, water, and health.

Daily, globalization keeps growing, making it difficult to predict the future of human security. Some of the climatic alterations and environmental threats bred from global warming include the role of human pursuits such as burning fossil fuels and industrial undertakings upon which modern civilization relies (Henderson et al., 2018). Additionally, human activity and natural events are the major causes of global warming. In that respect, I mainly make the world clean and help cut down pollution by pulling out my finances from businesses that I deem as causing damage to the climate and environment. Moreover, it is essential to recycle, create awareness, buy organic products, and finally be responsible and environmentally conscious when making choices. Fossil fuels are not the most dangerous polluters, human beings are. Therefore, personal actions, for instance, taking ones bike or shopping organic, are vital for climatic protection, especially in this era.

Climate change is essentially piloted by the utilization of fossil fuels and collaterally by greenhouse effects and other less prominent undertakings. Therefore, the overriding means of solving global warming would be eliminating fossil fuel utilization in the contemporary world whenever practicable (Henderson et al., 2018). This would mean the globe is transitioning from fossil fuel utilization to carbon-free and infinite energy derivations, such as wind, hydro, and solar power, which have a percentage below three of the fossil fuel energy sources. Despite the vitality of cutting down pollution, I think that bringing a complete end to fossil fuels would not be practical or possible. This is because it would largely put a hold on transportation, industrial production, agricultural production, and electricity production, resulting in the world going back to how it used to be before civilization. Nevertheless, I think it is possible to come up with a way to resolve this problem short of burning fossil fuels.

In terms of climatic change and environmental issues, I believe technology can develop solutions that make it possible to secure the environment and manage climatic changes without completely cutting out the burning of fossil fuels in the long run. According to research, there is a possibility that in the future, inventions that allow us to burn fossil fuels and not cause pollution at the same time may be manifested, including carbon removal technologies (Henderson et al., 2018). This would consequently provide a global warming solution that does not necessarily require the cutting down of pollution. Another possible solution to this problem is creating a filter-like technology, which allows for the burning of fossil fuels without emissions going out into the atmosphere. Windmills, nuclear energy, and hydro energy would also be a great way to tackle global warming. However, these are just speculations of advanced science and technology, although they are a strong possibility considering how innovative technology is growing.

In conclusion, climatic change poses a threat to the planet in various forms, including vital impacts on health, food, water, and air. It presents a possibility of terrible and worse implications on humanity universally if not countered on time. However, there is a glimpse of hope in the developing technologies where global warming and climatic changes might be managed and the danger of an inhabitable planet deleted.

Reference

Henderson, R., Reinert, S., Dekhyar, P., & Migdal, A. (2018). Climate change in 2018: Implications on business. Web.

Explore the impacts of climate change with our effects of climate change essay. Learn more about climate change causes, effects, and solutions with the help of our sample. Keep reading to gain inspiration for your essay on climate change and its impact.

Effects of Climate Change: Essay Introduction

It is doubtless that global change has become one the challenges, which encompasses a wide range of human life, including social and economical aspects of human life. Research has indicated that climate change will continue affecting the world as long as proper measures are not taken to protect the environment.

In this line of thought, human activities have been widely blamed for escalating effects of climate change around the world (Hillel & Rosenzweig 2010). Only time will tell whether taming climate change is possible or not.

In this regard, this assessment covers the impact of climate change in our lives today even as world leaders burn midnight oil to develop strategies, aimed at taming the scourge. This proposal topic has an array of benefits, especially in understanding the fatal nature of climate change.

It will mainly focus on the effects of climate change and make proposals on how to counteract the effects of climate together some of the preventive measures being considered by international leaders.

Through literature review, this project will compare different views as argued by different authors in order to synthesize the issue with varying view points. This will be crucial in capturing the main objective of the projects, which revolves around the analysis of the effects of climate change in the world today.

Climate change

How is climate change defined? Although different environmental experts tend to have different definitions, the Australian Government defines climate change as the weather pattern observed for several years. These changes are mainly caused by human activities, which negatively impact the environment.

With reference to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released in the year 2007, climate change is no longer a myth, but a reality, whose impact has continually escalated from 1950s, mainly due to rising levels of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

This implies that human activities have significantly contributed this environmental scourge, which continues to affect most parts of the world. The IPCC report was a representation of the world view on climate change, collected from various scientific journals published around the world (Australian Government 2012).

The Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency affirms that there is enough evidence to support the fact that the climate system of the earth has continuously been warming. Some of the observations made include the rising level of air in the world and high ocean temperatures. Others are the rising sea level, constant melting of snow and ice in most parts of the world.

One important fact to note about climate change is that it involves the rising temperatures of the climate system holistically, including all the oceans, atmosphere and the cryosphere. These findings concluded that the climate system is in a heating mode.

Even as we review other peoples work, it is important to note that climate change is more than mere global warming as perceived by most people. From scientific revelation, the climate will be varied broadly especially if the warming continues uncontrollably (Australian Government 2012). As a result, the world is likely to experience irregular rainfall patterns, occurrence of severe climatic events like heavy currents and droughts among others.

Climate change impacts

The impact of climate change has been felt in every part of the world. According to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Asia, Africa and Latin America are among the regions of the world, which have severely been affected by the scourge. In a 2010 survey carried out by Climate Change Secretariat, Africa is under the pressure of climate change and remains vulnerable to these effects.

Unlike most parts of the world, Africa experiences varying climatic changes. Common occurrences in Africa are severe droughts and floods, which have had negative implications on the continents economy (UNFCCC 2010).

The two events are widely known to predispose famine and overall interference with the socio-well being of the society. According to the UNFCCCs analysis, close to a third of Africas population inhabit drought-prone regions, while more than two million remain vulnerable to drought every year (UNFCCC 2010).

In understanding the implication of climate change in Africa, the survey found out that the issue of climate change is intertwined with several factors, which contribute to its escalation across the continent.

Some of these factors include poverty, weak institutions, illiteracy, lack of information and technology, limited infrastructure, poor accessibility to resources, poor management and conflicts. In addition, there is widespread exploitation of land, which remains a major threat to the climate.

Due to pressure on farming land, most farmers exert pressure through over-cultivation and deforestation. In addition, other factors like dunes and storms continue posing more negative threats to the environment and human beings (UNFCCC 2010).

As a result of these events, the continent experiences drought and overall scarcity of water. Due to this emerging trend, Africa is likely to face shortage of rainfall and overall scarcity of water. With Africa having several trans-boundary river basins, the continent is likely to experience conflicts over these basins. Another important aspect captured in the report is agriculture (UNFCCC 2010).

Since most subsistence farmers in Africa depend on rainfall and irrigation, the sector has been affected by insufficient supply in most Sub-Saharan regions. Besides this, UNFCCC notes that climate change has resulted into loss of agricultural land and a drop in subsistence crop production. With a good percentage of the population under the threat of starvation, climate change has undoubtedly led to escalation of insufficient food supply.

It is amazing to note that climate change has also contributed to the spread of some diseases like malaria, tuberculosis and diarrhea in most parts of Africa. As stated by the UNFCCC, there has been a shift in the distribution of disease vectors.

For instance, migration of mosquitoes to regions of higher altitude is likely to expose people in such regions to the risk of contracting malaria (UNFCCC 2010). Additionally, climate change is likely to result into negative impact on African ecosystems and habitats, which are already threatened by these changes. Due to reduced habitat and changing climatic conditions some species are likely to move to more tolerable regions.

In this line of though Robert Watson, Marufu Zinyowera and Richard Moss found out that climate change can have severe effects on human health. In a research carried out in 1998, the three reiterated that human health may be affected as a result of heat-stress mortality, urban air pollution and vector-borne diseases, which could be favored as a result of change in temperature or rainfall in a given ecosystem (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998, p. 7).

Additionally, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss argued that these effects are commonly felt in developing countries, where lives are lost, communities affected and the cost in medical care rises due to high prevalence of some health complications.

With regard to the impact of climate change on biodiversity, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss, agree with UNFCCCs findings. In their 1998 survey, the three argued that all ecosystems play a fundamental role in the society (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

For instance, they are a source of goods and services to any society. In particular, these goods and services include provision of food, processing and storage of carbon and other nutrients, assimilation of wastes and provision of recreation and tourism opportunities among others.

As a result, they argued that climatic changes are known to alter the geographical local of various ecological systems, including the presence of certain species and their ability to remain productive to support the society. According to their findings, ecological systems are essentially dynamic and are commonly affected by climatic variations of whichever magnitude.

Nevertheless, the extreme to which the climate varies determines the changes, which occur in the ecosystem. In addition, the three authors noted the high level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was a major contributing factor towards climate changes taking place in the world today (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

Besides influencing the ecosystems, Watson, Zinyowera and Moss noted that climate change may also have secondary effects, say, variations in soil characteristics and interference of regimes. These include diseases, pests and diseases, which are likely to support the existence of some species favorably than others (Watson, Zinyowera & Moss 1998).

This will automatically affect the survival of some species and the overall population of organisms. Similarly, they argued that that climate change has direct impact on food production in most parts of the world. According to the 1998 survey, the type of agricultural systems in place determines the manner in which crop productivity is affected by changes in climatic conditions and patterns.

Like many other scholars, Barrie Pittock spent his life studying the environment and how it is affected by changes in climate. In his 2009, survey, Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions, Pittock outlined several reasons why there is cause for alarm, regarding climate change in the world today.

According to Pittock, the UNFCCC seeks to reduce the impact of climate change by being on the frontline in the war against global warming (Pittock 2009, p. 107). He further noted that human-induced climate change is a major security threat in the world today. This stance is mainly backed by the well-known effects of climate change described by the UNFCCC and the IPCC.

Moreover, Pittock reiterated that climate change has complex effects in the world today, citing a number of examples. In cases where there is high rainfall resulting from climate change, the world may experience direct or indirect implications.

This could be seen through high or low crop yield, depending on the type of soil or crop. On the other hand, indirect effects may refer to changes in demand and supply, emanating from either low or high yield, depending on other factors. He therefore agreed with several authors and researchers who have enumerated implications of climate change on the environment and human life at large.

For example, Pittock noted that climate change has been a major cause of water shortages in most parts of the world (Pittock 2009, p. 108). He however attributed this to a number of factors, including precipitation decrease in some regions, high rates of evaporation in the world and general loss of glaciers.

Economically, Pittock noted that climate change affects the economic progress of a nation since resources may be diverted to disease control instead of advancing developing projects.

Moreover, it is important to note that most of the countries, which suffer severely as a result of climate change, are poor nations that lack stable economic muscles. As a result, there is a likelihood of richer countries becoming stronger as developing economies weaken further. Lastly, Pittock noted that some of the threats emanating from climate change cause irreversible damages, which end up haunting human beings forever (Pittock 2009, p. 109).

With reference to a number of scholars who have done research on the impact of climate change, it is evident that human activities have a role in the escalation of these effects. In his 2010 survey, Martin Kernan noted that there is a relation between human activities and global warming.

As a result of this global relationship, the world has registered an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In this survey, he noted that the increase in green house gases is rampant in the northern hemisphere than any other part of the world.

As a result of high temperatures, Martin underscore that the changes have impact on the composition of natural ecosystems, regarding species population and their ability to survive (Kernan 2010, p. 15). What is most evident in Martins research is his comparison of the current state of the climate, to what was known hundreds of years ago.

Climate change also affects the quality of water in the United States. According to a research carried out by Robert Mendelsohn and James Neumann, water plays an important role in the life of a human being. Some of these functions include but not limited to power generation, food production, recreation and ecological processes (Mendelsohn & Mendelsohn 2004, p. 133).

However, this is only possible if the water is available and of good quality. Thus, changes in spatial distribution and quality can have direct social and economic effects on the society.

This alteration may occur as a result of increased concentration in greenhouse gases. Climate change can be detected by observing variation in temperatures, frequent and intense droughts and altered precipitation patterns among other factors (Mendelsohn & Mendelsohn 2004, p. 133).

The findings on the impact of climate change on the quality of water have also been pursued by Jan Dam, who argued that natural systems are usually sensitive to changes in climate variation. Hydrological quality is mainly affected by the temperature or concentration of water (Dam 2003, p. 95).

When oceans and other water bodies overheat because of high temperatures, this may result into negative impact on aquatic animals, which adapt to certain hydrological temperatures. Similarly, the quality of water is always altered when gases like carbon dioxide are dissolved in water basins. This may affect the mix of species present in a given ecosystem.

Managing climate change

Based on the impact of climate change, it is doubtless that management of the risks has to be effected promptly before they become fatal and irreversible. One of the ways of controlling climate change is through reduction of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

This can be achieved through several ways, which minimize the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere (McCarthy 2001, p. 222). According to James McCarthy, this can be realized by adopting alternative sources of energy unlike how most economies rely of oil and petroleum products as the main source of energy. Additionally, good methods of farming are important to maintain the value of the environment for sustainable support.

Use of international legislations is also necessary in ensuring that rich countries do not exploit developing nations as they are major contributors of effluents into the atmosphere (Hillel & Rosenzweig 2010). Above all, the fight against climate change calls for environmental campaign, which requires the efforts of everybody in the world.

Effects of Climate Change: Essay Conclusion

From the above review of literature, it is clear that climate change is a major socio and environmental issue affecting the world today. Mainly caused by human activities, climate change poses a chain of challenges and threats to the environment.

For instance, there are several diseases, which affect human beings as a result of climate change (Rosenberg & Edmonds 2005). Of importance is also the alteration of the quality of the natural environment, which affects biodiversity. This has led to the extinction of some species, while others have increased exponentially in numbers.

Moreover, it is imperative to note that some of the occurrences, which are considered to be natural, are caused by climate change. Common ones include floods and draughts (Faure, Gupta & Nentjes 2003, p. 340).

Most of these calamities continue to be recognized as natural disasters yet they can be controlled using simple mitigation measures. In most cases, adoption of renewable sources of energy has always been considered to be the most important way of saving the world from climate change. Although it is a complex issue to handle, joint global efforts are important in making progress.

References

Australian Government 2012, Impacts of climate change.

Dam, J 2003, Impacts of Climate Change and Climate Variability on Hydrological Regimes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Faure, M, Gupta, J & Nentjes, A 2003, Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol: The Role of Institutions and Instruments to Control Global Change, Edward Elgar Publishing, United Kingdom.

Hillel, D & Rosenzweig, C 2010, Handbook of Climate Change and Agroecosystems: Impacts, Adaptation, and Mitigation, World Scientific, Singapore.

Kernan, M 2010, Climate Change Impacts on Freshwater Ecosystems, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.

Mendelsohn, R & Neumann, J 2004, The Impact Of Climate Change On The United States Economy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Pittock, B 2009, Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions, Csiro Publishing, Sydney.

Rosenberg, N, & Edmonds, J 2005, Climate Change Impacts for the Conterminous USA: An Integrated Assessment, Springer, New York.

UNFCCC 2010, Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Adaptation In Developing Countries.

Watson, R, Zinyowera, M & Moss, R 1998, The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

Introduction

These days, various ecological problems present a hot debates in the global society. In the modern world, it is evident that it is crucial to preserve nature and avoid pollution and damaging the planet. The consequence may significantly affect the current population and the nest generation. One of the most pressing concerns implies climate change and the rise of average temperature level. This problem appears to be extremely threatening for the life of humanity in the long run, and it has a direct link with sufficient food supplies. However, there are multiple inaccuracies and misunderstandings in this regard. Therefore the purpose of this paper is to clarify them, including differentiating global warming and climate change, the possible consequences, and challenges for food security.

Difference between the Terms Climate Change and Global Warming

In the context of discussions of ecological topics, there are a large number of misunderstandings on the terms climate change and global warming. Therefore, there is a need to clarify this issue and present differences between these collocations. As for global warming, it implies the long-term heating of Earths climate system (1, para. 3). This tendency was firstly discovered even in the preindustrial period, in the second half of the 18^th century (1). The reason for it is human activity, namely fossil fuel burning, which causes the greenhouse effect. Therefore, global warming involves a rise in the average temperature level on the Earth.

On the contrary, the term climate change is used to name to some extent different events in this regard. It means a long-term change in the average weather patterns that have come to define Earths local, regional and global climates (1, para. 5). This event was observed at the beginning of the 20^th century, and as it is similar to global warming, the cause is human activity, or more precisely, fossil fuel burning (1). However, the major difference between the collocation is the inclusion of natural contribution to climate change. Internal and external factors, for instance, cyclical ocean patterns, volcanic eruption or activity, and changes in Earths orbit, may have an impact on climate.

It is a common sight that people confuse these two terms. The most probable reason for it implies the fact that the meaning of these collocations is extremely close. Another possible cause is the lack of awareness of these issues, as these terms are usually used together. All people interested in ecology are highly likely to comprehend the difference between global warming and climate change.

The Consequences of Temperature Rise

Regardless of the difference between global warming and climate change, it is a scientifically proven fact that the global average temperature level is gradually rising. Graph 1 illustrates the considerable change in climate, which occurred in the second half of the 19^th century, and a drastic rise in global surface temperature in the 20^th century (2). NOAAs 2020 Annual Climate Report, which contained an evaluation of both land and ocean temperature, revealed the rise of 0.08 degrees Celsius since 1880 (2). Lindsey & Dahlman highlight: the average rate of increase since 1981 (0.18°C / 0.32°F) has been more than twice that rate (2, para. 5). In Paris, 195 countries confirmed that the global temperature increase on 1,5 degrees Celsius since 1900 year (3). These tendencies are considered to be extremely destructive for the planet and life on it in the long run.

There are assumptions that the current statistics and its continuance may affect the natural world, namely glacier melting. Kraaijenbrink et al. (3) conducted an exploration of the influence of temperature rise on glaciers in the mountains in Asia. They state that the heating tendency will lead to 64 ± 7 per cent of the present-day ice mass stored in the HMA glaciers will remain by the end of the century (3, para. 1). Consequently, the study confirms the negative consequence of the wild nature of temperature increase.

Another possible impact regards the climate in droughts, which is considered to aggravate. Naunmann et al. (2018) provided an insight into this issue, analyzing the probable consequences for drought areas in 1,5, 2, and 3°C warming. The conclusions are: two thirds of the global population will experience a progressive increase in drought conditions with warming (4, para. 1). Therefore, drought areas are highly likely to become even hotter and incur a supply-demand deficit. Thus, it is possible to summarize that the assumption on the significant negative impact on nature in many aspects is credible.

Climate Change and Challenges for Food Security

Since climate change affects the natural world, it is evident that it poses particular challenges for food security in the future. The negative consequences will have a considerable impact on crop yield and livestock and fisheries production. An increase in average temperature will lead to water shortage, droughts, floods, and a high concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere, which worsen the quality and number of stable crops to a large extent (5). These days, maize and wheat production encounter challenges, which are posed by climate change.

Another probable consequence, which affects food security, is the rising sea level. Apart from reducing the place for possible food production, saltwater kills rice crops. This product is especially important for Asian countries, as it is one of the major products in their cuisine. Consequently, their food supplies and economic condition may be harmed to a large extent (5, 6). For instance, in Vietnam, rice crops are located in the Mekong Delta region, which are vital for feeding the population of the country (5). Probable flood may kill all the fields and pose risks to the food security of the state.

Droughts may aggravate the situation with food supplies in countries, which already have problems with them. Possible disasters in nature may significantly limit the access to food supplies among low-income people. In the 21^st century, the problem of hunger still exists, and climate change may worsen all the progress. In addition, high temperature may make dry areas even more restricted in water supplies, which is destructive for crops. Thus, it is apparent that climate change is highly likely to result in a variety of challenges in food security for humanity.

Financial Support for Food Security

In the context of present-day developments, appropriate financial support for maintaining food security is established, and it is expected to prevent global hunger in case of threats to some extent. However, there is an assumption that the money in this fund is misused by government officials. This issue presents a matter of hot debates among the International Monetary Fund, UNICEF, and AID. Opponents are convinced that there is proper monitoring of these funds, and misappropriation is impossible in these conditions. It appears to be challenging to provide an in-depth insight into this problem, as these discussions are conducted on the governmental level. As an ordinary citizen, I cannot have direct access to actions of officials, though it is possible to base the conclusions on data available in media.

It should be noted that there is significant evidence for proving governmental officials guilt in misusing the money for food support. There is information on the misappropriation of food relief, which was intended to be supplied for hungry people (7). This event happened in Yemen, and it was widely broadcasted in the press. However, this case is too small to threaten food security. Furthermore, it does not regard the funds devoted to this issue directly.

From my perspective, I trust the government in this regard. I am convinced that food security finding is a matter of special concern, and it is monitored thoroughly. I do not deny the possibility of mistakes, though I consider that all the measured are taken in order to prevent them in the long run. In addition, misappropriation of this money will be considerably judged by global society, which makes officials unwilling to misuse them.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is evident that the condition of the environment is worsening from year to year. In the context of present-day developments, the population may perceive the negative consequences of this tendency only slightly. However, in the future, it is highly likely to threaten the life of the entire humanity. Climate change has a direct impact on food supplies and security, and for this reason, it is crucial to take appropriate measures in order to prevent the aggravation of the situation. Otherwise, droughts, lack of water, the rise of ocean level, and other numerous negative consequences may lead to global hunger, as food production will be impossible in these circumstances. Therefore, the necessity to address this pressing concern urgently is undeniable.

References

1. Overview: Weather, Global Warming and Climate Change. n. d. Nasa: Global Climate Change. Web.
2. Rebecca Lindsey & LuAnn Dahlman. 2020. Climate Change Global Temperature. Web.
3. Kraaijenbrink et al. 2017. Impact of a Global Temperature Rise of 1.5 Degrees Celsius on Asias. 257260. Web.
4. Naunmann et al. 2018. Global Changes in Drought Conditions under Different Levels of Warming. 3285-3296. Web.
5. How Climate Change Threatens Food Security  And Why Were All at Risk. 2019. Concern Worldwide US. Web.
6. Campbell et al. 2016. Reducing Risks to Food Security from Climate Change. 34-43. Web.
7. WFP Demands Action after Uncovering Misuse of Food Relief Intended for Hungry People. 2018. Reliefweb. Web.

Introduction

The issues of climate change are a significant concern for many scholars throughout the world. Many scientists have pointed out the need to address these problems in order to find an effective approach towards their resolution (Crate & Nuttall, 2016). Even though the body of research on this topic is extensive, it is still essential to consult meteorological specialists to create the most prominent solution (Baklanov et al., 2018). In this work, I will describe an interview with an expert meteorologist Randy Johnson, and provide information necessary to understand his background and experience. In addition, I will discuss my impression of the interview conducted.

Discussion of Experience

Meteorology is one of the vital sciences required to understand the issues behind global warming properly. One of the professional meteorological consultants is Randy Johnson, a bachelor of meteorology from Tampa, Florida. Randy Johnsons education was completed at Florida State University in 1979, where he studied physical, dynamic, and synoptic meteorology sequences. Prior to that, Johnson was involved in an undergraduate program considering mathematics and physics, one of the major disciplines necessary for successful meteorological advancements. Overall, Randy Johnson is a highly affluent specialist in his field.

Additional qualifications are an exceptional statement of a persons credible academic achievements. Johnson has received an extra certification from the American Meteorological Society, which is significant proof of the applicants technical competence, informational value, and communication skills. Moreover, Johnson is an active expert for plaintiffs and defendants, capable of providing scientific analysis on weather cases. His meteorological advancements also include an extensive amount of reports written on tropical cyclones and severe weather conditions.

The expertise acquired allowed Johnson to contribute a significant amount of resources towards global issues. He investigated numerous occasions of tropical cyclones, such as Wilma, Katarina, Sandy, and Matthew. The reports written on these events were site-specific, which is an essential requirement for a proper study outcome. Additionally, Johnson participated in other site-specific analyses of extreme environmental conditions, such as hail and thunderstorms that caused property damage and various personal injuries to other people. These on-site reports are an especially valuable addition to the knowledge that is available to us on such catastrophic events.

As a distinguished meteorologist, Randy Johnson is highly proficient with the technological instruments required for thorough research. His specialties include working with the Doppler radar data, which he is able to successfully analyze in order to provide post-storm reports and analyses. Furthermore, Johnson has shown a profound professional record as an on-air meteorologist on WTVT weather services, as well as a certified consulting meteorologist on both WeatherVision and Gulf Coast Weather Service. These qualifications describe Johnson as an affluent meteorological professional, capable of fulfilling various responsibilities.

My choice of Randy Johnson as an interviewee can be explained by my particular interest in meteorological insights on climate change issues. An expert in this field has an incredible potential to pinpoint the most problematic areas and provide the scientific community with a viable solution (Seinfeld & Pandis, 2016). In my opinion, Randy is a certified specialist with a broad range of interests who can contribute a tremendous amount of knowledge to the discussion of global environmental change.

The conversation with Randy Johnson has offered me a novel perspective on the environmental issues our planet is facing. Johnson was able to present the evidence on global warming in a more scientific manner, stating pertinent facts from his experience and research. This experience has shown me how intensely climate change is affecting the nature of our world and how important it is to address the consequences of such rapid alterations. Remodeling our ways of interacting with the worlds resources should be a substantial priority to scientists worldwide.

This paper has significantly reshaped my opinion of the breadth area in question. I believe that much more effort should be applied to research on climate change. This topic is gaining increased popularity, but only a small amount of scientific studies are able to forage lucrative results. I hope that in the future, I will be able to advance my academic achievements and provide additional support in the battle against the environmental problems we are facing today.

A general misconception I had before the interview was conducted is related to the application of meteorological data in legal cases. I was not aware that a testifying expert might be required in order to perform site-specific research, as well as pre-trial preparations related to litigation. Additionally, weather cases can sometimes be extremely difficult, demanding a professional insight from a meteorological consultant. Altogether, I am now able to recognize the importance of meteorology in the legal system.

Conclusion

To conclude, several essential climate change issues were discussed in this essay in relation to an expert meteorologist Randy Johnson. His professional expertise proved to be exceptionally useful in our discussion about global warming difficulties and the meteorological impact on this topic. I believe that this interview experience was incredibly beneficial to my education process, allowing me to acquire the knowledge necessary for successful academic advancements.

References

Baklanov, A., Grimmond, C. S. B., Carlson, D., Terblanche, D., Tang, X., Bouchet, V., Lee, B., Langendijk, G., Kolli, R. K., & Hovsepyan, A. (2018). From urban meteorology, climate and environment research to integrated city services. Urban Climate, 23, 330341. Web.

Crate, S. A., & Nuttall, M. (2016). Anthropology and climate change: From encounters to actions. Routledge.

Seinfeld, J. H., & Pandis, S. N. (2016). Atmospheric chemistry and physics: From air pollution to climate change. John Wiley & Sons.

Introduction

Climate change has serious effects on the environment and the existence of living organisms. Environmentalists and policymakers have been designing strategies to ameliorate climate change in a sustainable manner.

As one school of thought believes that planting trees is an effective strategy of ameliorating climate change, the opposing school of thought believes that tree planting is a distraction and ineffective strategy of ameliorating climate change.

Therefore, the environmental consultancy company opposes the assertion that tree planting is an effective strategy of ameliorating climate change because of the following reasons:-

The size of land required to sequester current emissions

• Despite the presence of vegetation, the global emission of carbon has increased in the last decade by about 30%. According to the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2013), carbon emission had increased from 26.1 billion tonnes in 2002 to 34.4 billion tonnes in 2012.
• According to the United Nations Environment Programme (2012), the projection of carbon emissions is 49 gigatonnes by the year 2020 with an emission gap of about ten gigatonnes, which requires sequestration to reduce the temperature by 20C.
• A trillion trees are necessary to sequester ten gigatonnes of carbon dioxide for the global temperature to reduce by 20C (Plant for the Planet, 2014).
• If one hectare takes 1000 trees, the size of land required to sequester ten gigatonnes of carbon dioxide is one billion hectares.
• To sequester 49 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide, about five billion hectares of land and 5 trillion trees are necessary.
• Five billion hectares comprise 37% of productive earths surface, which is essential in planting five trillion trees, which act as carbon sinks.
• Current forest cover is about four billion hectares, which means that 1 billion hectares are required to contain the increasing carbon dioxide emissions (Kirilenko & Sedjo, 2007).
• To plant one trillion trees in the one billion hectares is an extensive work when compared to a simple intervention of reducing carbon emissions.
• Increasing forest cover by one billion hectares consumes a significant part of productive land and consequently reduces agricultural production.
• Moreover, the sequestration capacity decreases as trees mature, and thus unsustainable in ameliorating climate change (McGuire, 2010).
• Therefore, the limiting size of land and the extensive work necessary to plant a trillion trees make afforestation an unfeasible strategy of ameliorating climate change.

Competing Land Uses

• Competing land uses due to the increasing population makes the expansion of forest cover untenable.
• As the population grows, more land for agricultural production, industrial development, urban development, and human settlements is essential.
• From 1960 to 2010, the population of the world has doubled, and projections show that by the year 2050, the population would be nine billion (Smith et al., 2010).
• As the population increases by three billion, extra space for settlement is necessary, which implies that people will encroach into the forestland and consequently reduce the forest cover.
• Additionally, the increase in the population by three billion would mean that agricultural production and industrial goods should increase by 50%.
• The expansion of the agricultural sector and the industrial sector by 50% implies that productive land should increase commensurately.
• Urbanization and migration patterns of people in modern society put more pressure on declining space and relegate afforestation to the remaining space.
• Land degradation due to human activities such as induced fires, logging, deforestation, overgrazing, and encroachment of forests significantly affect tree planting (Smith et al., 2010).
• Bio-energy has emerged and utilized a significant size of the arable land, thus increasing competition for land use (Rathmann, Szklo, & Schaeffer, 2010).
• Development of infrastructure due to increased population, industries, urbanization, and technological development need expansive land.
• Land use in wildlife conservation takes the considerable size of land, and therefore, competes with agricultural and industrial land uses.
• Catchment areas and water bodies are important water resources that require the extensive size of land (Wagner, Kumar, & Schneider, 2013).

Barriers that prevent forestation

• Tree planting requires one billion hectares, which is limited by the increasing population, as people require more land for settlement, industrialization, and agricultural activities.
• Harsh climatic conditions in arid and semi-arid areas limit forestation even though they have an extensive tract of land (Allen, 2009).
• Conservation of wildlife in natural settings limit forestation as artificial forests could be destructive to the natural environment.
• Urban planning policies focus on economic activities and treats afforestation as an unimportant activity in urbanization (Oldfield, Warren, Felson, & Bradford, 2013).
• Lack of funds or insufficient funds limits afforestation because it requires a million dollars, which are not readily available.
• Political will to advocate for the afforestation as a strategy of ameliorating climate change is absent.
• Awareness of the importance of afforestation in ameliorating climate change is very low among the population.
• Poor and landless people among local communities are focusing on encroaching forests and conducting deforestation, instead of supporting afforestation.
• International and regional treaties, which conflict, restrict afforestation in most countries (Backstrand & Lovbrand, 2006).
• Ethical issues surrounding the distribution of the climate change burden among nations, regions, nature, and individuals (Gardiner &Hartzell, 2012).
• Conflicts of interests between developing and developed nations concerning the sharing of burden threaten afforestation; even through developing, nations have vast space for afforestation.
• Poor management of forests due to weak policies reduces the effectiveness of afforestation in ameliorating climate change in a sustainable manner (Allen, 2009).
• Changing climate patterns affect the growth of trees in some regions that experience frequent natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods, droughts, and global warming (Smith et al., 2010).

What other effects of greenhouse gases

• Across the world, greenhouse gases cause 150,000 deaths and affect daily-adjusted life years of about 5.5 million people, which poses a significant burden to the health care systems (Shelfield & Landrigan, 2011).
• Greenhouse gases such as ozone, sulfur dioxides, nitrogen oxides, and chlorofluorocarbons increase the occurrence of diseases because they expose humans to many chemicals that have diverse impacts on their health (Smith et al., 2009).
• Greenhouse gases increase the average temperatures of the earth and consequently enhance the spread of infectious diseases such as malaria, tick-borne diseases, and dengue fever amongst others due to migration of vectors (Smith et al., 2009).
• Aerosols and related chemicals that people use in their households trigger the occurrence of allergic diseases such as asthma (Shelfield & Landrigan, 2011).
• Particulate matter of greenhouse gases contaminates the air and affects children because it causes infant mortality, low birth weight, and preterm birth (Shelfield & Landrigan, 2011).
• Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides accumulate in the air and mix with rainwater to form acid rain, which causes acidification of lakes and oceans, and thus, threatens the lives of aquatic organisms (Hodgson, 2011).
• Nitrogen oxides when mixed with water form nitrates, which are important nutrients for the growth of phytoplankton and eutrophication (Moss et al., 2011).
• Due to eutrophication in lakes and oceans, decaying phytoplanktons release massive amounts of methane gases into the air (Moss et al., 2011).
• This implies that even if trees absorb carbon dioxide from the air, other greenhouse gases that have adverse effects on human health and global warming still exist.
• In this view, the reduction of greenhouse emissions is paramount in preventing diseases and stabilizing global warming.

Over what timescale can forests be implemented and adapted to a changing climate? Afforestation requires a timescale ten years for trees to have a significant effect on the level of carbon emissions in the atmosphere (Plan for the Planet, 2014).

The current emission gap carbon dioxide is 10 billion tonnes in which, if absorbed by the plants, the temperatures would decrease by 2­0C (United Nations Environment Programme, 2012).

Predictions show that planting one trillion trees and maintaining current levels of carbon emission would eventually lead to a zero-emission gap by the year 2050 (United Nations Environment Programme, 2012)

As trees mature, their capacity to reduce carbon emission decreases, and hence, rejuvenation of forests is essential to the main absorption capacity of carbon dioxide at an optimum level.

However, natural disasters such as droughts, hurricanes, floods, and natural fires reduce the effectiveness of forests in absorbing carbon emissions that are in the air (Smith et al., 2010).

The disturbance of forests caused by natural disasters has detrimental effects on the capacity of trees to absorb carbon dioxide, and would consequently lead to an increased period needed for the absorption to be significant.

Therefore, given the unreliability of forests in reducing carbon emissions, afforestation is not a feasible strategy of ameliorating climate change.

What are the alternatives to forest-sequestration

According to Obersteiner et al. (2001), bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is an alternative method of sequestering carbon dioxide to forest-sequestration, as it utilizes biomass in capturing and storing carbon for a long period without causing undue fears of releasing it into the atmosphere.

Using landfills as burying grounds for biomass to imitate the natural processes that lead to the formation of fossil fuels is appropriate in removing carbon from the carbon cycle and storing them in the ground permanently.

Storing carbon in subterranean reservoirs of oil and gas, as in the case of the Sleipner Project, has proved to be effective in reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the air (Herzog, 2001).

Ocean storage allows the sequestration of carbon dioxide emissions in the deep ocean, where they undergo the process of forming fossil fuels (Herzog, 2001).

Mineral sequestration is a sequestration method that converts carbon dioxide into minerals by reacting it with oxides such as calcium oxide and magnesium oxide, which are available naturally, to form stable carbonates.

Conclusion

Overall, the analysis of the assertion that tree planting is an effective strategy of ameliorating climate change shows the contrary.

The space, the number of trees, competing for land uses, the existence of other greenhouse gases, extended timescale needed to realize the impacts, and the presence of alternative strategies negate the use of afforestation as a strategy of ameliorating climate change.

In this view, the environmental consultancy company disapproves that tree planting is an effective strategy of ameliorating climate change due to the aforementioned reasons.

References

Allen, E. (2009). Restoration ecology: Limits and possibilities in arid and semi-arid lands. Web.

Backstrand, K., & Lovbrand, E. (2006). Planting trees to mitigate climate change:

Contested discourses of ecological modernization, green governmentality, and civic environmentalism. Global Environmental Politics, 6(1), 51-75.

Gardiner, S. M. & Hartzell, L. (2012). Ethics and Global Climate Change. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10), 1-5.

Herzog, W. (2001). What Future for Carbon Capture and Sequestration? New technologies could reduce carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere while still allowing the use of fossil fuels. Environmental Science & Technology, 35(7), 148-153.

Hodgson, E. (2011). A Textbook of Modern Toxicology. London. John Wiley & Sons.

Kirilenko, A., & Sedjo, R. (2007). Climate change impacts on forestry. PNAS, 104(50), 19697-19702.

Plant for the Planet (2014). Our three-point plan to save our future. Web.

McGuire, C. (2010). A Case Study of Carbon Sequestration Potential of Land Use Policies Favoring Re-growth and Long-term Protection of Temperate Forests. Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(1), 11-16.

Moss, B., Kosten, K., Meerhoff, M., Battarbee, R., Jeppesen, E., Mazzeo, N., & Havens, K. (2011). Allied attack: climate change and eutrophication. Inland Waters, 1(2), 101-105.

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (2013). Trend in global carbon emissions.

Obersteiner, M., Azar, P., Kauppi, K., Möllersten, J., Moreira, S., Nilsson, P., & Read, K. (2001). Managing climate risk. Science 294(5543): 786-797

Oldfield, E., Warren, R., Felson, A., & Bradford, M. (2013). Challenges and future directions in urban afforestation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2(1), 1-9.

Rathmann, R., Szklo, A., & Schaeffer, R. (2010). Land use competition for the production of food and liquid biofuels: An analysis of arguments in the current debate. Renewable Energy, 35(1), 14-22.

Smith, P., Gregory, P., Vuuren, D., Obersteiner, M., Havlik, P., Rounsevell, M., & Bellarby, J. (2010). Competition for land. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal society B, 365(1554), 2941-2957.

Smith, K., Jerrett, M., Anderson, R., Burnett, R., Stone, V., Derwent, R., & Thurston, G. (2009). Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: health implications of short-lived greenhouse pollutants. The Lancet, 374(9707), 2091-2103.

Shelfield, P., & Landrigan, P. (2011). Global Climate Change and Childrens Health: Threats and Strategies for Prevention. Environmental Health Perspectives, 119(3), 291-298.

United Nations Environment Programme (2012). The emissions gap report 2012.

Wagner, P., Kumar, S., & Schneider, K. (2013). An assessment of land use change impacts on the water resources of the Mula and Mutha Rivers catchment upstream of Pune, India. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 10(1), 1943-1985.

In the environmental health theory, there is a view on how environmental health, human ecology and health affect the public. The three concepts help in addressing problems in relation to the environment, health and development. Environmental health, therefore, contributes to explaining and controlling the environmental factors, which can affect the health of human beings. The theory has therefore helped in controlling some of the diseases like malaria and cholera, which are directly linked to environmental exposures. The main contribution of environmental health is the provision of resources like water, food and air, which are not contaminated and safe work as well as living environments (Aron & Patz, 2001).

Initially, environmental health was illustrated using the cause-effect approach where environmental factors were linked directly to the health outcomes. For instance, the epidemic of cholera in London was linked to the removal of the handle that was in the Broad Street pump. However, later due to a lot of research on the disease, the concern shifted to the source of water and this disapproved the approach of cause-effect relationship (Follér, 2001).

Linking environmental exposures to disease outcomes have proved to lack an epidemiologic basis of argument since there is no sufficient information to explain the link between the environmental hazard and the health outcome. Due to such challenges, researchers have therefore come up with more developed formulae of collecting data and devised methodologies of using the already collected data for different purposes that were not intended initially. The data is therefore used to express the link by clearing up the gaps in the methodology. Appropriate rules for linking data sets have been defined which calls for a better understanding of the data sets and clear articulation of their uses and limits to avoid cases of invalid conclusions (Waltner, 2001).

When linking different types of data to be used, there are basic factors to consider such as the basic scientific connection of the data and the appropriateness and adequacy of the information in addressing the issue in question. To handle the information accurately, a framework is provided for one to adhere to when examining the basic factors to be considered. The framework gives the steps that an agent takes through the environment to enter the person, which finally results to the production of the health outcome (Adams & Greeley, 1996).

This entails the surveillance of the hazard where there is the tracking of the agent presumed to have caused the health outcome. It is tracked in the environment to get the origin before using the set of data presented. Exposure surveillance is another step where the host of the agent is monitored. In this case, the human tissues are examined to check those that are infected. In addition, the surveillance of the health outcome is another step where one examines the sign and symptoms of the attack. To come up with a strong tool in measuring the causes someone needs to combine more than one set of data accurately by following the steps provided (Follér, 2001).

Data inadequacy is also another challenge when linking environmental factors and health outcomes. During the linking, therefore, there is a need to examine the necessary data sources before looking at the possible statistical methods for linking. The sources of the information, in this case, include the exposure, health outcome and the environment. For a successful link, there must be the use of quality information appropriately taking into account the limitation of the data. As much as this theory tries to explain the link between the hazard, exposure and health outcomes, the data in each step may be diverse and therefore their uses and limitations outside their original purpose may not be clear as expressed below (Waltner, 2001).

Hazard data

This kind of data gives information in relation to the presence and quantity of the contaminants in the environment. A hazard is presumed to cause harmful effects in the exposure but in most cases, it is not the case since on its own it cannot. Some of the environmental data include pesticide exposures and toxic release. Analysis data is always limited when comparing each set of data with the environmental guidelines. In most cases, the environmental guidelines do not tally with all the environmental contaminants because those, which exist, are developed from toxicological studies. Exceeding environmental guidelines results in failure in predicting health outcomes (Adams & Greeley, 1996).

Exposure Data

This is used to link the hazard environments and the effects they create in human beings. Examples of exposure data include the biological samples such as urine, stool, blood and saliva. After the analysis, the result shows that in most cases, the concentration of the agents in the biological sample is not proportional to that of the environment. There are several factors therefore which affect the internal concentration of the agent in human bodies.

Such factors include base line health status of the individual, behavioral factors and exposure level. Exposure data is one of the factors, which contribute to linking gaps since its source is not steady. For instance, the level of exposure in children might be different from that of adults or even vary among adults (Aron & Patz, 2001).

Another factor, which may create the gap in the linking system under exposure data, is the monitoring of the data in the different environments as well as different individuals. This has been difficult due to lack of bio-monitoring programs to cover exposure data. Metabolism rate in individuals may also affect the exposure data to be used since it differs in individuals as it is affected by many other factors. Due to inadequate measures of exposure data, the parameters are therefore estimated and this creates risks in assessing the data hence assumptions, which distort the whole process of linking (Waltner, 2001).

Health Outcome Data

Health outcome data is achieved through the analysis of the chronic effects of the diseases caused and the mortality rates caused by the hazards in human beings. Some of the health outcomes include asthma, cancer or malaria. Health outcomes are evaluated individually just like in the cause-effect approach. At times information is obtained through the aggregation of the population like those from regional or national surveys. Since the methodology focuses on using the limited data based on the population aggregate, the theory does not succeed since it differs from the individual data hence the inability to use the data obtained from each set (Adams & Greeley, 1996).

The theory, therefore, fails to work because apart from the three factors of data to be used to show the link among hazard, exposure and health outcome it failed to acknowledge other relevant factors, which contribute to the linking. For example, in the examination of asthma as the health outcome, there are other factors to consider like the place of residence, age, socioeconomic status and air pollution.

References

Adams, S. & Greeley, M. (1996). Establishing possible links between aquatic ecosystem health and human health: An integrated approach: Interconnections between Human and Ecosystem Health (Di Giulio RT, Monosson E, eds). London: Chapman and Hall.

Aron, J. & Patz, J. 2001. Ecosystem change and public health: A global perspective. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

Follér, M. (2001). Interactions between global processes and local health problems: A human ecology approach to health among indigenous groups in the Amazon. Cad Saude Publica, 17, 115126.

Waltner, D. (2001). An ecosystem approach to health and its applications to tropical and emerging diseases, Cad Saude Publica, 17, 736.

Uncontrolled reproduction is one of several behaviors promoting climate change. It increases the size of the population and changes its distribution and density. As the number of people on earth rises, the emission of greenhouse gases also increases. Large crowds also put more pressure on natural resources, hastening their depletion. Notably, the concentration and distribution of people feature a complex association with climate change. Remarkably, in countries with high per capita emissions, population growths impact on climate change is much more significant. Hence, controlling reproduction can reverse the problem, although it may not guarantee a straightforward and speedy process.

Economic consumption is another human behavior that supports climate change. It entails purchasing consumer goods and services and investing in housing and transportation, among similar activities. When individuals buy products wrapped in plastic, for example, they contribute to climate change in two ways. First, they encourage plastics continued production, and second, they increase the size of non-biodegradable piles on earth. Plastics and similar wastes contribute to climate change through intricate processes that culminate in greenhouse gas emissions. For instance, some of them end up in incinerators, and their combustion releases a large volume of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Unsustainable natural resource utilization, driven by individualism and capitalism, is another undesirable behavior leading to global warming. As populations increase and supplies reduce, people scamper for what they can find. This tendency has led to mass deforestation and ongoing exploration of oil and gas to run the global economy. Unfortunately, most of the existing systems are inefficient; they are unable to utilize 100 percent of the resources. Many wastes emanate from the attempted consumption of some goods, which speeds up these resources exhaustion. Dealing away with capitalism or managing it better can reduce demand for natural resources, positively impacting the short and long-term climate.

Inaction and a laissez-faire attitude towards pollution despite the clear warning about ongoing climate change have also exacerbated the problem. Scientists have cautioned humans about climate change for years, but the latter has done very little, very slowly, to tackle the matter. For example, fossil fuels remain the essential energy source globally despite their pollutive nature and notwithstanding the availability of cleaner alternatives such as wind, solar, and hydroelectric power. It is only now that the world has started taking the design and manufacture of fully autonomous and electric vehicles seriously to reduce dependence on oil and gas. Even so, it will be decades before the world fully commercializes these vehicles and realize their benefits to the environment.

Failure to coordinate the effort to respond to climate change is also contributing to the problem. Although the world is aware of global warming, it lacks efficiently synchronized plans to confront the matter. People have also not agreed on the urgency of the issue and why it needs immediate and concerted efforts. For instance, some individuals believe that the whole idea of climate change and global warming is a hoax. Others use the Gaia hypothesis, which proposes that the world is a complex self-regulating system, to argue that pollution (and calls to action to end climate change and global warming) are ignorable. Although the world may be capable of self-regulating, people have an ethical obligation to act responsibly and coordinate their efforts to reduce pollution, climate change, and global warming.

While there are critics who still doubt climate change and its impact on the future of human generations on the earth, the shifts that are occurring in the environment are hard to ignore. Most of the informed public that pays attention to global issues understand the seriousness of the issue as well as the need to resolve it urgently; however, its scale is often misunderstood. The little things that are often being advertised as solutions, such as changing light bulbs or removing plastic from daily use, do not add up as real solutions that could be effective. The real solution could be to decarbonize the global energy system that is 80% fossil fuel, but it is significant in scale and is inconvenient for governments and large corporations.

When looking for ways to limit global warming to 1.5°C, which is the recommended benchmark, the public usually finds large volumes of advice on how to change their behaviors and benefit the planet. For example, taking public transport, choosing the train over flying, eating less meat, buying reusable cups, or turning the lights off when leaving a room (Byskov, 2019). The public is being tricked into thinking that they are the ones who could solve the climate change problem, which is very convenient for corporations and the government. Blaming regular consumers is more cost-effective than implementing real changes that could save the environment. According to Byskov (2019), just 100 companies are responsible for producing 71% of global emissions since 1988 (para. 4). Furthermore, only 25 corporations and governmental entities are responsible for more than 50% of worldwide emissions from the industrial sector in the same period. However, governments and corporations continue the narrative of blaming the public for climate change and making the problem worse than it is.

The financial connections that exist between governments and large corporations facilitate misinformation about climate change and the role of the public. Despite the fact that the own scientists of corporations and states warn about the continued extraction of fossil fuel as causing catastrophic consequences, oil companies invest billions of dollars into limiting government action to avoid being penalized (Monbiot, 2019). Corporations also sponsor politicians in Congress to restrict international attempts to curtail the emissions of greenhouse gases. As mentioned by Monbiot (2019) for the Guardian, oil companies have funded think tanks and paid retired scientists and fake grassroots organizations to pour doubt and scorn on climate science (para. 3). For example, Al Gores documentary An Inconvenient Truth, which explored the impact of the human activity on the environment, failed to acknowledge the economic potential of broadening the use of alternative methods of sourcing energy (Marshall, DCruz, & McDonald, 2018). No matter how well the documentary articulated the information, it did little to show people that global corporations and government should be challenged consistently to address the implications of climate change.

The problems of the decreased environmental quality and climate change are currently being addressed from the perspective of creating an infrastructure concerning political, economic, and physical affairs that creates an illusion that the public has a choice. This leads to further consumerism, which allows skilled marketers and advertisers to sell new eco-friendly lifestyles to the general public while oil corporations continue their harmful practices. Instead of addressing the real reasons behind climate change, governments and large corporations push the convenient narrative of shifting consumer choices, which, in reality, have little to no influence on improving the environment.

References

1. Byskov, M. (2019). Focusing on how individuals can stop climate change is very convenient for corporations. Fast Company. Web.
2. Marshall, D., DCruz, G., & McDonald, S. (2018). Un geste suffit? Unpacking the inconvenient truths about Al Gores celebrity activism. Persona Studies, 4(2), 66-82.
3. Monbiot, G. (2019). The big polluters masterstroke was to blame the climate crisis on you and me. The Guardian. Web.

Climate change is increasingly becoming a pressing global problem. In response to the growing concerns, established international organizations and new coalitions have attempted to create a number of agreements. These solutions aim to put limits on emissions, pollution, resources use, and other areas affecting the environment.¹ However, the effectiveness of such international treaties remains questionable, and recent incidents increased the urgency of reviewing the current processes. In 2015, 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, which aims to limit global warming by restricting the levels of greenhouse gas emissions.² Although the treaty appears to be legally binding, its constraints led to the United States leaving the agreement under former President Trump.³ This event exposes a great weakness of the existing system. Thus, this paper aims to investigate the limitations of current and past international environmental treaties and show that the recent agreements cannot effectively solve the global issue of climate change without centering the voices of the most affected groups in the treaties formation.

The paper will concentrate on the history of international environmental treaties. It will review examples of agreements such as the Paris Agreement, Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, and others.⁴ Then, it will delve into incidents that reveal their ineffectiveness or limited reach. The aforementioned example of the US leaving the Paris Agreement is a case that shows how individual views may destabilize global change. In the case of the Basel Convention, on the other hand, one may concentrate on the voices of countries majorly affected by ineffective restrictions and their attempts to adopt new treaties.⁵ As a result, one expects to discuss the current issues surrounding the creation of international environmental law and the ways in which it may be improved.

References

Henderson, Conway W. Understanding International Law. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Jotzo, Frank, Joanna Depledge, and Harald Winkler. US and International Climate Policy under President Trump. Climate Policy 18, no. 7 (2018): 813-817.

Payne, Richard J. Global Issues: Politics, Economics, and Culture. 5^th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2017.

Footnotes

1. Richard J. Payne, Global Issues: Politics, Economics, and Culture, 5^th ed. (Boston: Pearson, 2017), 129.
2. Frank Jotzo, Joanna Depledge, and Harald Winkler, US and International Climate Policy under President Trump. Climate Policy 18, no. 7 (2018): 813.
3. Jotzo et al., 813.
4. Conway W. Henderson, Understanding International Law (West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010), 337.
5. Henderson, 338.