Before a Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) Event
Preparing for an RDD event requires a comprehensive plan of action. First of all, it is paramount to determine a place to serve as a shelter in case of an emergency. It can be located either within a house or a separate building, but it should have no windows. In the case of living in an apartment, it is imperative to contact a manager and identify the safest place in the building or get in touch with local authorities and inquire about available fallout shelters. Moreover, having an emergency supply kit adequate for two weeks is critical as well. This kit should consist of water, non-perishable food products, batteries, flashlights, medications, scissors, a roll of duct tape, and anything that might be necessary for satisfying individual personal needs.
During a Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) Event
First and foremost, being cautious and breathing through a cloth is crucial. Another step is seeking shelter—a prepared space when indoors or a fallout shelter organized by local authorities when outdoors. In case is a shelter has windows, sealing them and external doors with duct tape are the first measure that should be taken. Finally, following the government’s instructions is recommended.
After a Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) Event
Decontamination is the most pressing task after an RDD event. First, affected clothes should be thoroughly packed with duct tape to completely cover radioactive particles. Next, it is essential to take a shower with soap and water. Finally, it is critical to follow authorities’ instructions, and once notified of safety, leave the shelter and seek professional medical care. It should be noted that even if the local officials inform that RDD consequences are ameliorated, it is advisable to avoid visiting any affected location and nearby territories.
Types of Radiation Emergencies
Nuclear Emergencies
They are connected to a nuclear weapon explosion. A bright flash of light and/or impulse of heat are initial signs of nuclear emergencies. The primary consequence is the production of fallout, i.e., atomic particles that are dispersed by the wind for long distances.
Dirty Bomb or RDD
This is a mix of dynamite and radioactive particles. Even though dirty bombs are not connected to an atomic blast, dispersion and contamination are caused by the initial explosion.
Radiological Exposure Device (RED)
RED is also known as a hidden sealed source because people are exposed to radiation, even while unaware of it, as there are no visible signs of RED attacks, such as explosions or flashes of light.
Nuclear Power Plant Accidents
This type of hazard involves a release of radioactive particles caused by industrial accidents at atomic power stations, such as nuclear meltdowns or explosions.
Transportation Accidents
The least possible type of accident is caused by crashes of vehicles carrying radioactive particles. Dispersion is easy to avoid because transportation means are marked and made of safe and strong materials.
Occupational Accidents
These are connected to the improper use of radioactive materials or violating safety regulations at healthcare or manufacturing facilities and research institutions (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention par. 1-7).
At-Risk/Special Needs Population
During radiation emergencies, some groups of people require specific treatment, as they are at higher risk of contamination, with a significantly negative influence on their health. They should be treated specially both during and after incidents. The first group of vulnerable people is elderly, as they might suffer from other diseases, have a poor diet, and be more susceptible to the impact of radioactive particles because of some medications or decreased bone marrow reserve.
Moreover, immune-suppressed people, pregnant women, infants, and children are also in a risk group. Specific attention should be paid to those who have had contact with the deceased who died due to contamination, disabled people, and those with diminished mobility and mental capacities, not to mention citizens lacking the knowledge of the official language, as they cannot follow authorities’ instructions and medical recommendations (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services par. 4-8).
A variety of assignments prepared over the course of the class allowed for a better understanding of important environmental issues and improved many of my skills. The preparation of an argumentative essay taught me to develop reasoning and defend my opinion.
Researching the problem of air pollution enhanced my analytical and writing skills. However, the most impressive and memorable of all the tasks were the ones based on reading essays or watching videos covering various aspects of environmental issues. These materials have a rather strong appeal to emotion, which makes the process of learning not only informative but also world-centered with the help of authentic examples and impressive anecdotes.
Probably the most crucial theme raised in course readings is the issue of people’s detrimental activity and disrespectful treatment of nature. In this category, such literary pieces as Heat-Moon’s “A list of Nothing in Particular,” Dillard’s “Seeing,” Stegner’s “Wilderness Letter” stand out. Each of the authors emphasizes that the extent to which people’s destructive deeds have changed the Earth is too great to neglect.
Although all of the writers express their opinions in rather poetic language, their bitterness and fear for the planet can be felt through the lines. Stegner mentions that humanity has become so obsessed with conquering more and more lands and using them for resource mining that soon, “something important will have gone out of us as a people” (1). Stegner’s idea that people should be more sympathetic and compassionate resonates with me. Protecting unique places, animals, and plants is indeed highly significant for the successful development of the planet.
The call to see the beauty around oneself is another focus of class readings that influenced my attitude toward nature. Dillard’s and Heat-Moon’s stories played the most significant role in this respect. Having read Dillard’s argument “what you see is what you get” (1), I realized that I had not been paying enough attention to small but vital things around me. Heat-Moon’s piece further developed that understanding: in the ironic tone, the author explained how many exciting things existed in the world. The only problem is that people are frequently too busy to notice these things. Thus, these two readings helped me understand and see the beauty that exists everywhere around me.
While those readings were inspirational, some movies and videos that we watched during the course were quite alarming. Most of all, the film An Inconvenient Truth featuring Al Gore impressed me. The story told by Gore includes scholarly and statistical data that explain how much the planet’s climate has changed and how dangerous these changes are. Before watching this film, I had not realized that the level of risk was so high.
The movie stands out to me both because of the information presented and because of the speaker: I did not use to think of Gore as an environmentalist before. An Inconvenient Truth may be inconvenient indeed, but it necessary for everyone to watch it and come up with the ways they can mitigate the risks discussed.
The described class materials were the most valuable for my worldview, but I cannot say they were the only important ones. All of our assignments were insightful and encouraged a thorough analysis of various problems existing in the world. Moreover, readings and videos explained in detail that the major trigger of these problems is the human. Overall, the course expanded my outlook and taught me to take much better care of the environment.
In the article, “Weather Extremes Leave Parts of U.S. Grid Buckling”, weather change was the major environmental issue affecting the United States. This change comes in different forms such as vicious storms, famine and high temperature, which have adverse effects on the nation’s infrastructure (Wald and Schwartz par. 1).
Notably, the environment is susceptible to human and natural activities; for instance, the heavy construction of highways in the country affects the natural ecosystem. In addition, the article indicated that the nuclear power plant in Illinois affects the natural attributes of the environment due to the consequences of reacting components.
There are considerable environmental effects arising from complicated engineering, steel and concrete works in the US, which have altered of natural ecosystem (New York Times 1).
The article further outlines the affects of asphalts on the landscape. For example, the condition interferes with the flight operations because jets sometimes stick in the asphalts, thus threatening the human life (Wald and Schwartz par. 2).
Similarly, train operations are also affected by the stretching of the track. This means that the environmental disasters could pose danger to the human life and interfere with the natural aspects of the ecosystem.
Another observation in the article was its revelation that the excess heat interferes with the behavior of clay soil, especially those found beneath the highways. This condition makes the soil shrink (Wald and Schwartz par. 2).
Consequently, it affects the roads since they crack to adjust to the weather conditions, thus becoming risky to the users. As outlined in the article, the other effect of heat on the environment was that it could lead to unprecedented expansion of certain sections of the highway.
This expansion sometimes goes beyond the planned limits and the force excreted from each end could lead to jarring and other dangerous speed bumps, which alter the traffic flow in the affected areas.
The article also pointed out that the intense heat affects the grid, a situation that increases changes in the environment.
For instance, the temperature of a water pond in Chicago that was used to cool the units in a nuclear plant increased to a high of 102 degrees, which has serious consequences on the aquatic life (Wald and Schwartz par. 3). Since the temperature of the pond should only reach 100 degrees, an increase beyond this limit is environmentally disastrous.
The other aspect of the environmental issue that was presented in the article was the devastating storms, flood and forest in some areas of the United States. For example, the article highlighted the flooding in New Orleans, which brought several damages to the environment and the inhabitants of the area, such as washing away bridges, roads, plants and loss of human life (Wald and Schwartz par. 8).
On the other hand, the forest fires and storms were attributed to prolonged drought and intense heat respectively. They create environmental disasters in the areas affected, thus must be controlled.
Solutions to the Environmental Issues
According to the article, the author proposed that since extreme weather patterns effect environment and the country’s infrastructure, the construction of highways and nuclear plants should be done while considering such extreme episodes (Wald and Schwartz par. 4).
For example, the designs for roads and railway tracks should consider the seasonal changes in rainfall and temperature because this could help minimize their affects on the environment. It could also reduce the amount of money wasted on the construction of highways on disaster prone areas.
In an essay entitled “The Place of Nonhumans in Environmental Issues”, in Honest Work, Peter Singer asserts that human decision-making must include a consideration of the welfare of nonhuman organisms if we are to claim moral consistency, and he compares our habitual heedlessness towards animal pain to the attitudes of slaveholders. Peter Singer has popularized the term speciesism to describe this anthropocentric blind spot.
In situations both large-scale and small, from the location of a building project or the wholesale extermination of pests, to the daily consumption of meat for our pleasure, he notes that we ignore the pain and damage we cause to individuals and populations of nonhumans. He makes a case that such prejudice is equivalent to racism and that our use and abuse of animals for food, and for other purposes and in other circumstances is morally equivalent to slavery.
Singer begins by reminding us that, although much human environmental destruction bites us in our human posterior, our nonhuman neighbors get it in the neck. He calls us to reflect on our prerogative to limit our decision-making to issues directly affecting us.
This ignores the damage to individuals and populations of other organisms. For example, in the example of a habitat-destroying construction project, in contemplating whether and how to move proceed, should we weigh the homelessness and deracination of the animals qua animals, or merely the loss of hunting/fishing revenue?
He goes on to assert that our obliviousness to animal suffering, albeit ancient, is without logic, and immoral. He points out that believing that a hurtful action’s moral implications can be inferred from the species of the victim is exactly parallel to slave-owners’ stance towards the importance of suffering by enslaved Africans. Singer then clarifies the subtle point that giving equal weight to the interests of two individuals or groups is different from saying that they are equal.
In specifying what he means by interests (he cautiously avoids rights) requiring evaluation, he limits the field to organisms that can subjectively experience pleasure/pain. There may be scientific suggestions of botanical potential for pain sensations (and he acknowledges this), but his definition is a clear enough delineation for the current state of human knowledge. If it clearly feels pain, then its pain has significance.
Singer also acknowledges that we may assess two different lives with different values. He also admits the inadequacy of all of our current means and methods of arriving at such valuations. He elucidates his principle of similarity in the degree of discomfort which two entities experience, a concept that he recognizes poses dilemmas for measurement.
However, he contends that we perform analogous comparisons regularly, taking into account such vague differences as degree of benefit from a particular action. Although such comparisons undertaken between species are even more challenging, Singer insists that we not avoid them simply because they are imprecise.
With this given, Singer challenges us to consider all the instances wherein our decision-making could be shaped by an examination of the pain potential for nonhumans. Pest control and lumbering are two examples he offers where our choices are based on cost and convenience, and could be made differently to reduce the pain to nonhumans. The most intimate relationship that we have with animals, Singer notes, is our daily consumption of meat.
The list of cruelties we perpetrate on animals to ensure swift weight gain, high volume production of milk or eggs, or meat of a character to please, is long, detailed, disturbing, and not novel to anyone in this generation. As he points out, no rationale exists for these appalling animal husbandry conditions, apart from taste and cost, given plant-based alternatives.
Singer finishes by drawing us back to his analogy with slave holding. He calls on us to ask ourselves; if we continue to eat (and abuse) animals on the grounds that their pain is less morally disturbing than that of a human, how are we different from slave-owners who held the pain of their enslaved African captives to be less than that of white folks?
The Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues, expanded 11th edition presents before us a number of existing controversial issues. They have been presented in an elaborate debate style format that stimulates the student’s interest and develops their decisive thinking abilities. The author of the book is Thomas Atwood Easton and he has thoughtfully framed each issue with a separate summary, introduction and postscript. For each volume, an instructor’s manual along with proper testing material is also available. Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues, expanded 11th edition can be used in our modern classrooms as it is an exceptional resource for the instructors and provides practical suggestions on how to incorporate the highly effective approaches in the classrooms.
The paperback edition of Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues, expanded 11th edition has 432 pages and has been published by McGraw Hill. It belongs to the universally acclaimed Taking Sides series and belongs to the genre of Science and Nature and Environmental Science. Nineteen of our important current environmental issues have been discussed in the book giving both their pros and cons in a debate format. The revised edition represents the issues through the arguments of many leading policy makers, educators, behavioral and social scientists, contemporary commentators and environmentalists reflecting a huge variety of viewpoints. The Issue Introduction is very important as it provides the students with a proper historical background and context to each of the issues or debates before the two contrasting viewpoints are given. The students can then read the debate and after reading it, they are provided with other important viewpoints that needs consideration in the Issue Postscript. This section also provides recommendations on further reading. Thus, this combination of Issue Introduction, Yes side of the issue, No side of the issue and Issue Postscript encourages critical thinking among the students and helps them to develop a concern for the environment around them.
The various topics and issues that have been debated in the book are:
Part 1. Environmental Philosophy
Issue 1. Is the Precautionary Principle a Sound Basis for International Policy?
Issue 2. Is Sustainable Development Compatible With Human Welfare?
Issue 3. Should a Price Be Put on the Goods and Services provided by the World’s Ecosystems?
Part 2. Principles versus Politics
Issue 4. Is Biodiversity Overprotected?
Issue 5. Should Environmental Policy Attempt to Cure Environmental Racism?
Issue 6. Can Pollution Rights Trading Effectively Control Environmental Problems?
Issue 7. Do Environmentalists Overstate Their Case?
Part 3. Energy Issues
Issue 8. Should the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Be Opened to Oil Drilling?
Issue 9. Should Society Act Now to Forestall Global Warming?
Issue 10. Will Hydrogen End Our Fossil-Fuel Addiction?
Issue 11. Should Existing Power Plants Be Required to Install State-of-the-Art Pollution Controls?
Issue 12. Is It Time to Revive Nuclear Power?
Part 4. Food and Population
Issue 13. Is Limiting Population Growth a Key Factor in Protecting the Global Environment?
Issue 14. Is Genetic Engineering an Environmentally Sound Way to Increase Food Production?
Issue 15. Are Marine Reserves Needed to Protect Global Fisheries?
Part 5. Toxic Chemicals
Issue 16. Should DDT Be Banned Worldwide?
Issue 17. Do Environmental Hormone Mimics Pose a Potentially Serious Health Threat?
Issue 18. Is the Superfund Program Successfully Protecting the Environment from Hazardous Wastes?
Issue 19. Should the United States Continue to Focus Plans for Permanent Nuclear Waste Disposal Exclusively at Yucca Mountain? (Easton, 2006)
Author
Dr. Thomas Atwood Easton is a leading expert in his own field and has dedicated his life towards improving the interests, careers and lives of readers all over the world. He is a professor of Life Sciences at the Thomas College in Waterville, Maine. He is also an eminent science fiction critic. He has received a Doctorate from the University of Chicago in Theoretical Biology. His numerous works on futuristic and scientific issues has been published in many magazines. His books on non-fiction include biology and various books on the denationalization of the social services, consultants and entrepreneurs and careers in science. He has also written another book in the Taking Sides series, Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Science, Technology, and Society, 8th edition.
Issue 4. Is Biodiversity Overprotected?
In the Part 2. Principles versus Politics of the book, the fourth issue is Is Biodiversity Overprotected? A renowned economic professor David N. Laband argues over the issue by agreeing to it. According to him, the public requires excessive and sometimes unreasonable amounts of biodiversity mainly because the voters and decision makers do not have to pay the cost for producing it. Writer and wildlife conservation researcher Howard Youth, on the other hand, debates that the various actions required for the protection of biodiversity have many economic benefits and the same measures are required to guarantee a sustainable and prosperous future for all of humanity.
According to David N. Laband’s views, biodiversity is sometimes overprotected. He believes that the public demands for the excessive protection of our biodiversity mainly because a number of them are not responsible for its preservation. Only the actual landowners are made to bear the cost of protecting our biodiversity. Most of the urban residents want to have animal habitats, biodiversity and aesthetic landscapes but they do not willing to pay a price for it. The Government is pressurized to pass certain laws that will compel the landowners to pay the financial requirement needed to maintain the different ecological amenities. The landowners unable to sustain the whole cost of protecting the biodiversity alone, solve the money problem by using their land for real estate development and for commercial purpose instead of using it for the production of timber. In such a scenario, even if one of the landowners by luck find a rare endangered species in his property, it is better for him to keep mum about it or worst shoot it. This clearly indicates that most of our environmental laws are required to be amended in order that all of the citizens equally share the actual cost needed to protect our biodiversity.
David N. Laband’s believes that it is mainly the urban occupants who demand the preservation of our biodiversity but do not always put their requirements into actual practice in their own backyard. Rather than allowing natural fauna and flora to grow wildly on their own around their beautiful homes, they pay millions of dollars for purchasing artificial synthetic pesticides and fertilizers in order to create ecological forests around their houses. They are ready to support the biodiversity in the rural urban areas as long as the cost of preserving the biodiversity falls directly on the rural landowners and not on them. Instead, it should be the timberland owners who should be supplied with financial aids by our government for preserving our ecological diversity and its properties.
David N. Laband tries to prove his point by giving us an account of his own life. He says that one summer a huge pine tree was killed due to lightning in his backyard and the pine bark beetles killed another tree. If both these trees fell then a lot of damage could be caused to his house. Therefore, for his family’s safety it would have been better to have the tree removed. However, he did not do so for the sake of biodiversity, putting his family in danger. If he had removed the tree then many animals that depended on the tree would vanish. He also says that while on one hand many people demand wooden houses, wooden furniture and paper products, they also want animal habitats and biodiversity. However, these two conflicting ideas cannot be obtained simultaneously. Similarly even, at the macro level we face a trade-off due to compromise between the production or consumption of timber and the production or consumption of various interrelated environmental amenities.
On the other hand, Howard Youth says that due to the overprotection of our biodiversity there has been a decline in the state of all of the world’s population of birds. He then goes on describing the reason for the decline and measures that can be taken for them. He also argues that if actions are taken for the protection of the birds then there will be numerous economic benefits too. These measures are also required for insuring a sustainable future for all of humanity.
Howard Youth does not agree to the issue and says that the biodiversity is not overprotected. He says that various changes in our environment related to global warming, depletion of ozone layer and pollution are important but can be reversed to certain extent. However, species extinction and loss of the biodiversity can never be reversed. Although we are not deliberately wiping out creation, he believes in some way we are responsible for the extinction of almost 20 percent of species in the next two or three decades. Each species is in itself a masterpiece of the process of evolution and has been continuously evolving for millions of years. Before humans came into being the average life span of some species was half of a million years but now the rate that we have inflicted now has been increased by a hundred to thousand times. By depriving the planet of the various life forms, we are not only reducing the productivity of our natural ecosystems but also its stability. The marine and land reserves and habitats need to grow big since if we reduce their size we are automatically reducing the total number of species, which can live on that reserve. The citizens and governments need to be persuaded so that they take measures towards protection of our biodiversity. We need more media people, government advisors and public philosophers with strong scientific backgrounds and knowledge about the biodiversity so that proper actions can be taken.
The Issue Postscript of the issue Is Biodiversity Overprotected? concludes that in order to actually determine whether our biodiversity is indeed overprotected or not we need to first define the amount of protection, which is necessary. Our current knowledge is actually inadequate, as still we need to perform a lot of research. A debate on whether the excellent way of protecting our biodiversity is by protecting our natural habitat or by protecting the individual species is still going on. We also need to harbor the endangered species that share the same habitat. For the adequate and proper conservation of our biodiversity, we need to consider the market based funding system. For the conservation of our biodiversity, all the various services that the biodiversity provides to our humans race and also for the ecological health of our planet it is required to have proper financing on such a scale that is much more larger than that which is viable from philanthropic and public sources. It is necessary for us to find out new and improved mechanisms the use of which will enable the resource managers and owners to realize the various economic values that have been created by the excellent situation of our biodiversity. It had also been noticed that most of the conservation techniques not only have a number of economic benefits but also are quite inexpensive.
Conclusion
From reading Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues, expanded 11th edition and the issue of Is Biodiversity Overprotected? We realize that biodiversity is extremely crucial for the survival of the human race and that we need a number of great efforts if we want to preserve it for our future generations. If we lose even one particular species of plants or animals alike and they become forever extinct then this affects the whole ecosystem. A number of potential drugs, which can be used for curing various modern diseases, are sometimes lost forever. This is the very reason why humans need to protect the biodiversity and take special care of the other important life forms on the planet. It will be us, the people, who will have to incur most of the hard suffering if we do not do so.
The extinction of plant and animal species is a completely normal process that goes on continuously in the nature. It has been found that almost 99.9 % of all the different species that had once lived on the planet have now become extinct. However, since this process of continual extinction takes place in small steps, it generally does not always cause a lot of harm to the species that are left behind. If the process of extinction takes place in a gradual and natural manner then we will have a number of new species that will slowly replace the older ones through the process of mutation and sympatric or allopatric speciation. Loss of habitat, changes in our climate, powerful predators, diseases and various other elements cause the natural extinction of animal and plant life. (Boersema, 2008) Nevertheless, the state that we are in today and the things that are happening are entirely different. It is due to the deliberate action of some human, like the extremely greedy capitalists who only care about their bank accounts, that today our environment needs to be protected from the havoc caused to it.
References
Boersema, Jan J. & Lucas Reijnders; 2008; Principles of Environmental Sciences; New York: Springer
Easton, T. (2006). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial environmental issues. New York: McGraw Hill
Environmental issues started playing a significant role in business a few decades ago. At present, ‘green’ marketing can be regarded as “mainstream” (Ottman 2011, 3). Now people are ready to pay more for products which have little negative impact on the environment, or which are said to have little impact.
It is necessary to note that ‘green’ marketing has quite a few standards and regulations. However, ‘green’ businesses have certain peculiarities which make them differ from the conventional businesses. These peculiarities enable ‘green’ companies to successfully compete with conventional businesses.
Major peculiarities of the ‘green’ marketing are its focus on sustainability, progress, and responsibility. Thus, ‘green’ products are also characterized by these values and differ from conventional products to certain extent.
The Difference Between ‘Green’ and Conventional Businesses
First, it is possible to define ‘green’ marketing as the way to do business without causing a lot of harm to the planet and environment (Cronin et al. 2011, 159).
It is necessary to define the difference between the two types of businesses to understand major peculiarities of ‘green’ products. ‘Green’ marketing is different from the conventional form of marketing as environmental issues are brought to the fore.
‘Green’ businesses stress that their products have little negative impact on environment (Ottman 2011, 12). These companies often emphasize their involvement in innovative programs and incentives aimed at addressing certain environmental issues.
Development, innovations and research aimed at creating new environmentally friendly products are brought to the fore. It is also important to note that people consuming ‘green’ products are seen as responsible individuals. In other words, it is considered to be generally accepted and even expected to buy ‘green’ products (Cronin et al. 2011, 159).
These are values promoted by ‘green’ companies. These values differ from those associated with conventional marketing. ‘Green’ businesses focus on their being eco-friendly.
There is one more significant difference between the two forms of marketing. Conventional businesses are regulated by the government and there are a variety of norms to comply with. At the same time, green companies have almost no regulations to comply with.
More so, there are hardly some standards in this sphere (Ottman 2011, 161). This adds certain confusion and even violations as some companies only proclaim their being sustainable and eco-friendly (Cronin et al. 2011, 159). The lack of control is another difference between ‘green’ and conventional marketing.
However, there are some similarities between the two forms of marketing. Contemporary ‘green’ companies also try to meet customers’ expectations (Ottman, Stafford, and Hartman 2006, 24). Now it is not enough to claim that the product is ‘green’.
Customers want it to be efficient and easy to use. This peculiarity makes ‘green’ marketing similar to conventional businesses that strive to meet consumers’ expectations. At the same time, this similarity often becomes a certain difference as some ‘green’ companies fail to understand the importance of meeting customer’s expectations.
Key Ingredients to Successful Marketing
One of the most conspicuous examples of ‘green’ products is Toyota Prius. This car became very popular in the early 2000s. This product has all the necessary ingredients to successfully market it.
In the first place, it is a really ‘green’ product as it gives off reduced amount of harmful gases as this a gas-electric hybrid (Ottman, Stafford, and Hartman 2006, 25). Therefore, this product meets people’s expectations as for minimum harmful impact on the environment.
Consumers may enjoy comfort of a car and, at the same time, they may feel they are making difference. The product is also associated with innovation and development. The marketing strategy used to promote Prius has focused on innovative approach to the car production.
Producers as well as consumers state that “the dazzling digital dashboard… and other car operations provides an entertaining driving experience” (Ottman, Stafford, and Hartman 2006, 26). Of course, this contributes to creation of a positive image of a product which is associated with innovative technology and progress.
Furthermore, this product also meets customer’s expectations as it is efficient and modern. It fulfils its primary tasks providing customers with enjoyable driving experience at a good price. Maintenance of these cars is not very expensive which contributes to the product’s popularity.
Finally, Prius gained popularity as many celebrities bought them and promoted these cars. Some top celebrities created certain image of a responsible driver and car buyer.
Admittedly, it has been fashionable to be ‘green’ since the 1990s and now many models (as celebrities are models for many now) emphasize their being ‘green’. New generations tend to strive for sustainability and eco-friendly innovations.
Conclusion
On balance, it is necessary to note that ‘green’ marketing is the way to sell products without causing a lot of harm to environment. ‘Green’ marketing differs from conventional forms of marketing as the former focuses on innovation, sustainability, ‘greenness’ and development of certain public opinion.
‘Green’ products have certain peculiarities. They are ‘green’, efficient, innovative and fashionable. These values are of vital importance for any ‘green’ product.
Reference List
Cronin, J. Joseph, Jeffery S. Smith, Mark R. Gleim, Edward Ramirez, and Jennifer Dawn Martinez. 2011. “Green Marketing Strategies: An Examination of Stakeholders and the Opportunities They Present.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 39 (1): 158-174.
Ottman, Jacquelyn A. 2011. The New Rules of Green Marketing: Strategies, Tools, and Inspiration for Sustainable Branding. Sheffield: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Ottman, Jacquelyn A., Edwin R. Stafford, and Cathy L. Hartman. 2006. “Avoiding Green Marketing Myopia.” Environment 48 (5): 22-36.
Environmental concerns have taken the centre stage in economic debates since the late 1960. In many cases, the economic debates focus on productive and exhaustible resources. Moreover, the current debates touch on natural resources, and try to determine the economic benefits of the environment and impacts of its overuse, pollution, and degradation.
Environment, quality of life, and economic activities are interdependent. To lead a quality life and to engage in productive economic activities, we need to have a sustainable environment. One of the economic activities that depend on the environment is tourism. Natural resources like lakes, mountains, beaches, rivers, and cities are the main sources of tourism attraction.
Any exhaustion of these assets might slow down the development of tourism business. Tourism exerts pressure to natural and synthetic resources and poses a threat to the environment. Cooper et al. posit, “In view of the fact that tourists have to visit the place of production in order to consume the output, it is inevitable that tourism activity is associated with environmental impacts” (1998, p. 149).
Apart from exerting pressure on the natural environment, tourism also exerts pressure on the cultural environment leading to ruin of cultural practices and values of the communities living in the developing countries.
Because of scarce financial and knowledge resources, developing countries are unable to meet the required environmental standards. Given the modern level of environmental concerns, tourism in the developing world is unsustainable. This paper will focus on some of the environmental issues that make tourism in developing countries unsustainable.
Sustainable tourism
The world Tourism Organization (WTO) describes sustainable tourism as “Tourism which leads to management of all resources in such a way that economic, social and aesthetic needs can be filled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems” (2002, p. 7).
Since natural resources make up the main source of tourist attraction, states should factor in sustainability when developing their tourism industries. In addition, as many residents and tourists become aware of the importance of sustainable tourism, they are forcing the government and tourism firms to engage in activities that guarantee sustainability. Currently, countries and tourism firms are adopting the idea of ‘viable tourism’ to enhance sustainability.
The main snag that is affecting tourism in developing countries is environmental depletion. Government and tourism firms are working hard to see that they come up with environmentally friendly tourism activities (Williams & Shaw 2003).
Today, developing countries have established environmental regulations that the tourism industry ought to follow. Nevertheless, complexity and fragmentation of the tourism industry make it hard for countries to enforce the regulations.
How environmental concerns affect tourism
Indisputably, tourism is a leading source of revenue and employment, particularly in the developing countries. Nevertheless, tourism is a business that depends on the frailest cultural and natural environments. Any innocent and trivial human action might cause problems to the existing environmental resources. This challenges sustainable tourism in the majority of the developing countries.
Philippines are one of the developing states that depend on tourism (Alampay 2007). The country considers tourism as one of its crucial economic weapons. Nevertheless, the tourism industry, together with the Philippines’ tourist markets has become more conscious of the depressing environmental costs that result from tourism development.
This has made it hard for the country to achieve sustainable tourism since it requires adopting novel development techniques, which would yield environmentally sensitive tourism products. Such techniques are extremely expensive for a developing country like Philippines.
Williams and Shaw (2003) allege that the growth of tourism in the developing countries has led to the countries experiencing immense environmental problems. For these countries to attain sustainable tourism, they should address the environmental concerns facing them. Tourism has resulted in depletion of numerous natural resources, environmental pollution, and has endangered a number of natural resources.
Efforts by the developing countries to address these challenges bear no substantial results since the countries lack adequate financial capital and technological expertise (Williams & Shaw 2003). It becomes hard for the countries to attain sustainable tourism as tourists stop visiting the countries gradually as resources are depleted.
Because of the environmental challenges that tourism poses to the majority of countries across the globe, countries came together to formulate policies that would help to mitigate poor exploitation of natural resources.
Presently, numerous international conventions and protocols that aim to help in environmental conservation are in place. In 1992, countries assembled in Rio Brazil and came up with guidelines that all countries ought to follow to attain sustainable tourism and environmental conservation (Wong 2000).
Currently, institutions bestowed with the responsibility of conserving the environment, like United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) call for all countries to be conscious of the environment when developing their tourism industries. In many developing countries, tourism development is highly polarised leading to environmental challenges.
The countries are unable to improve the quality of life for the visiting tourists as well as the local people. This threatens the sustainability of the tourism industry (Williams & Shaw 2003). Besides the depletion of natural resources, tourism imposes pressure on resources like water, food, and energy. Moreover, it contributes to littering of the environment with solid waste.
In countries like South Africa, tourism has triggered deforestation as investors construct tourism facilities. This has led to UNEP commanding the South African government to stop further depletion of environment in the name of tourism development. With the current emphasis on environmental conservation, it would be extremely hard for South Africa to attain sustainable tourism.
In South Africa, the tourism industry is already posing a serious threat to water resources in the coastal region as well as leading to pollution of the natural beaches. The pollution is posing a threat to marine life and as well as to the community, that lives around the ocean. The cost of maintaining these beaches is high relative to revenues obtained from the tourism industry.
Consequently, as South Africa is under pressure to conserve the environment, it would be hard for the country to strike a balance between environmental conservation and sustainable tourism (Cooper et al. 1998). The same tourists that contribute to environmental degradation consider environmental factors when identifying the place to visit. South Africa struggles to maintain its natural beaches, which suffer from pollution.
Failure to maintain the beaches would lead to the country losing many tourists. Unfortunately, the same tourists that are particularly concerned about the environment are responsible for beach pollution.
The country faces challenges in striking a balance between tourism and environmental conservation along the coast. If this trend continues, it will be hard for the South African government and private investors to sustain tourism activities at the coastal areas (Brierton 2003).
In a majority of the developing countries, tourism industry is facing a serious threat due to climatic changes. Currently, global warming is high in the majority of the developing countries. Areas that were once tourist attraction sites, now suffer from perennial floods and diseases. Many people opt to tour certain countries hoping to enjoy a comfortable environment and beautiful sceneries (Hashimoto 1999).
Nevertheless, the situation is changing in the majority of the developing countries. Environmental concerns are leading to some countries slowing down their endeavour to develop the tourism industry.
For instance, in Maldives Island, environmental challenges are frustrating the effort to achieve sustainable tourism. Tourism activities have contributed to increase in sea level within the island. In return, it has become hard to sustain tourism industry in Maldives Island.
Hall (2008) and Scott, McBoyle and Schwartzentruber (2008) allege that developing countries in Africa, South America and the Caribbean do not understand the precise effects of environmental concerns on the tourism industry. Scott et al. Posit, “Tourists have the greatest capacity to adapt to the impacts of environmental changes, with relative freedom to avoid destinations impacted by environmental changes” (2008, p. 106).
Personal safety, climate, travel cost, and natural environment are some of the factors that tourists consider when deciding which country to visit. One of the challenges that developing countries encounter is the inability to predict and deal with environmental changes (Hall 2008). Tourism industry in Kenya suffers from unpredictable weather changes, which pose a threat to tourists.
As individuals and institutions wishing to invest in the tourism industry continue to emphasize on environmental conservation, developing countries like Kenya, which do not have the capacity to deal with natural catastrophes that affect the environment are unlikely to attain sustainable tourism.
Since the majority of the developing countries lack long-term strategies for addressing environmental changes, majority of the investors are likely to direct their investments to developed countries.
Majority of the developing countries depends on natural resources and cultural values as their main sources of tourist attraction. As tourists visit certain regions, these resources become scarce (Middleton & Hawkins 2004). Moreover, they neutralize cultural values depriving the region its sole source of tourist attraction.
Paradoxically, when natural resources and local culture begin to die away, tourists feel robbed of their genuine experiences. Majority of the developing countries encourage mass arrival of tourists because it leads to increase in revenue. However, they do not understand that the influx leads to degradation of the cultural environment, which eventually renders some regions unattractive.
As more tourists continue visiting African countries like South Africa and Kenya, many of the local communities continue adopting the western culture and abandoning their cultures, which act as the main sources of tourist attraction (Mihalic 2000).
Hence, with time, it would be hard for developing countries like Kenya to continue witnessing large number of tourists who visit the country to share in its cultural environment. This underlines the reason why the Kenyan government encourages communities like the Maasai to uphold their cultures (Akama 2007).
Conclusion
Tourism industry is one of the industries that support economic development in many developing countries. The countries invest heavily in the industry. However, increase in environmental concerns is frustrating the effort by developing countries to attain sustainable tourism. Majority of the tourist activities contributes to depletion of natural resources and cultural environment.
Today, developing countries are under immense pressure to lower their rate of environmental pollution. These environmental concerns put the developing countries in a dilemma of conserving the environment and sacrificing the tourism industry or doing the opposite.
Currently, the world countries have come up with regulations that outline the measures that both the developed and developing countries ought to take to conserve the environment. These measures prohibit the developing countries from engaging in activities that contribute to environmental pollution. Consequently, developing countries are unable to attain sustainable tourism, as they are unable to satisfy all the environmental standards.
Recommendations
Tourism development contributes to environmental degradation, thus altering natural resources that act as the prime tourist attraction sites. Developing countries need to strike a balance between environmental conservation and tourism. In light of the current need to attain a balance between environmental conservation and tourism growth in the developing countries, the countries should ecolabel the tourism products.
Ecolabeling refers to portraying tourism products and firms in a way that encourages tourists to be environmental conscious in all their actions. Besides, through ecolabeling, tourism companies educate tourists concerning the effects of their actions to the environment, in so doing making them adopt environmentally friendly actions.
Developing countries may implement ecolabeling in tourism firms such as resorts, hotels and marinas to promote sustainable tourism. The countries can assign ecolabels to tourism enterprises they find to have limited effects on the environment. This would give the companies the responsibility of furnishing tourists with information concerning environmental policies they ought to observe when in their countries.
This would help the tourists to make informed decisions when selecting the tourism products and services to use when in a country. Moreover, ecolabels would discourage tourists from relating with tourism firms that are not environmentally friendly. Hence, ecolabeling would help developing countries to conserve their environment and at the same time attain sustainable tourism.
Reference List
Akama, J 2007, ‘Marginalization of the Maasai in Kenya’, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 26 no. 1, pp. 716–718.
Alampay, R 2007, Sustainable tourism challenges for the Philippines. Web.
Brierton, U 2003, ‘Tourism and the environment’, Contours, vol. 5 no. 1, pp. 18–19.
Cooper, C, Fletcher, J, Gilbert, D & Wanhill, S 1998, Tourism Principles & Practice, Longman, London.
Hall, C 2008, ‘Tourism and climate change: Knowledge gaps and issues’, Tourism Recreation Research, vol. 33 no. 1, pp. 339-350.
Hashimoto, A 1999, ‘Comparative evolutionary trends in environmental policy: Reflections on tourism development’, International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 1 no. 1, pp. 195–216.
Middleton, V & Hawkins, R 2004, Sustainable tourism: A marketing perspective, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Mihalic, T 2000, ‘Environmental management of a tourist destination: A factor of tourism competitiveness’, Tourism Management, vol. 21 no. 1, pp. 65–78.
Scott, D, McBoyle, G & Schwartzentruber, M 2008, ‘Climate change and the distribution of climatic resources for tourism in North America’, Climate Research, vol. 27 no. 2, pp. 105-117.
Williams, A & Shaw, G 2003, Tourism, and Economic Development, Belhaven Press, London.
Wong, P 2000, Tourism vs. environment: The case for coastal areas, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
World Tourism Organization 2002, Contributions of the World Tourism Organization to the World Summit on Sustainable Development, World Trade Organization, Johannesburg.
Rachel Louise Carson born in 1907 is a renowned editor and professor of aquatic biology. She is known for her book The Silent Spring, in which she criticizes farmers for using environmentally hazardous chemicals in the name of better production. Published in 1962, her article attracted enormous public indignation that prompted President John F. Kennedy to order a federal investigation into the issue. Her article The Obligation to Endure is included in this publication. According to Carson (1962), man has failed to realize the setbacks of his own actions. This is largely agreeable considering the present conditions of the environment. Therefore, it is also right to argue that the environment should not dictate how people should respond to everyday occurrences.
According to Carson (1962), the environment affects man’s surrounding. She further argues that today and in the recent past, people are contributing a lot to distorting a balance existing between the environment and their surrounding. In her article, Carson gives a clear distinction between the naturally occurring chemicals and those emitted because of humans’ activity through the bombardment of atoms. From her argument, it is clear that people are not only ignorant of the substances released to the atmosphere, but do not also give other forms of life the time to adapt to these changes in the atmosphere. She writes, “… new chemicals to which the bodies of men and animals are required somehow to adapt each year, chemicals totally outside the limits of biologic experience” (Carson, 1962, par. 5).
When Carson says that people use non-selective methods to eliminate the bad and the good, what she implies is that we learn painfully as we strive to modify even the human germ plasm. She alludes to the 1920’s Eugenics that championed for a method of selective breeding. As we read Carson’s piece, we devastatingly learn that as far as pesticides and insecticides are concerned, man has failed to come up with a sustainable means of dealing with these problems. In this article, Carson appeals to her readers’ emotions through many instances. For example, she says, “Among them are many that are used in man’s war against nature” (Carson, 1962, par. 6).
Carson speaks with passion, and if asked to give an opinion on her choice to study conservation biology, I would gladly say she was writing to write about ecology. Her theme is logical and based on her research and findings and gives a description of the present state of the ecology with numerous well-grounded evidence. To some extent, Carson speaks with anger, and according to her, man has attempted to stay in control. She argues that if people learned to leave things in the way nature intended them to be, we would cease to be tormented by these environmental issues. She blames everyone for contributing to this environmental menace because we “tolerate a diet of weak poison” (Carson, 1962, par. 22).
Carson sounds so sure of her findings and facts. However, it would be inappropriate to conclude that her arguments are free of flaws. On the contrary, she should reconsider her view that “the chemical war is never won” (Carson, 1962, par. 8). This is entirely wrong because taking into account the recent innovations, there has been a range of technological advances in an attempt to reduce the negative impacts that chemicals have on the environment. Carson employs a persuasive tone and poses questions as she explains ways in which friendly agriculture can thrive. For instance, Carson does not assume that her readers know about what she is talking about; she breaks things down clearly. Her mode of argument is persuasive and effectively convincing. This is evident because she made President John F. Kennedy direct an investigation to ascertain her claims (Carson, 1962).
Suffice it to say that human beings are always in conflict with their own environment, without which, however, they will not be able to survive. In her article, she calls this process “man’s war against nature” (Carson, 1962, par. 6). Through this, we learn that we appear to be our own best enemies. Her article is insightful and full of sound reasons that people should learn to see beyond their quest to control the environment. In my opinion, Carson does well in attracting the readers’ attention and stirring their imagination as she offers them to envision how things ought to be in the environment. Her basis of the argument is clear and presents unprecedented knowledge on how our own actions are destructive. Carson is factual and analytical in her argument as well as reflective in some way to ensure that she has summoned enough support to her ideology. She organizes her argument in a logical form and displays a great deal of creativity throughout her article. The importance of the article is demonstrated by the interest it attracted in 1962. Finally, Carson’s choice of words is excellent and remarkably effective in passing the message by making the reader adopt her ideology.
Reference
Carson, R. (1962). The obligation to endure. In R. Carson, Silent spring (pp. 5-15). New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Environmental datasets display real facts as they show the state of various parts of nature in a particular period. A comparison of such indicators allows scientists to note trends and changes that point to environmental problems and also the pace of their development or decrease. The date set on the level of nitrogen dioxide in the air is one of the most frequently used information and its analysis can show determine the change in air pollution, its sources, and the rate of global warming.
Various regional and global organizations, as well as individual countries, collect information on the level of nitrogen dioxide in the air to determine the level of danger posed by such kinds of air pollution. One can find publicly available data and tables for different countries and years in which they were recorded; for example, the European Environmental Agency (2020) offers tables in which data are also sorted by type of pollutant. Nitrogen dioxide is the result of the burning of fossil fuels for the extraction of energy in power plants or the use of transport (“Nitrogen Dioxide,” 2020, para.1). The danger of such pollution is a direct harmful effect on the human body, agriculture, as well as the heating of the earth due to its inability to transfer heat back into space (“Reductions,” 2020, para.8). For this reason, scientists analyze data on nitrogen dioxide in the air to control it and reduce its detrimental impact. Consequently, scientists can compare data for several years or months, as well as external factors, to note their effect on the environment.
Moreover, the relations between changes in the level of nitrogen dioxide and the aggravation or solution of environmental problems are two-way. The first way is explicit in the fact of discovering the connection between air pollution and the acceleration of global warming, which threatens humanity with the melting of glaciers, cataclysms, and other terrible consequences. Understanding the trends of increasing air pollution and climate change factors helped scientists see the connection between these events and the world community started to act against these changes. Another example is the recent sharp reduction in the amount of nitrogen dioxide in the air due to the pandemic of coronavirus and quarantine in most countries of the world. NASA notes that reducing the operation of power plants and factories, as well as the use of cars, has reduced air pollution in the United States by an average of 30% (“Reductions,” 2020, para.2). The Guardian also provides examples of improving air quality around the world, such as Delhi, Beijing or São Paulo, which usually have the highest pollution indices (Ellis-Petersen et al., 2020). Therefore, although the sources of air pollution are already known to science, an analysis of this dataset demonstrates the high efficiency of rejecting fossil fuels to solve environmental problems.
In conclusion, a dataset on air pollution and nitrogen dioxide levels, in particular, can be used to understand such issues as climate change and people’s health problems. In addition, tracking changes and comparing them with external factors makes it possible to determine the causes of pollution and the most effective ways to eliminate them. Consequently, although analysis of this dataset itself demonstrates an improvement or worsening of the situation, one has to associate it with other facts and processes to get at accurate conclusions.
In the past few years, increased contamination of the atmospheric environment by the heavy metals such as Cadmium, Nickel, and Chromium has been detected. This dangerous contamination comes from such sources connected with the urbanization as industrialization, vehicular traffic, and use of pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture. To the surprise of many people, other channels of hazardous chemicals are tobacco smoking and the beauty industry that makes use of a variety of heavy metals in its products.
Exposures to Cadmium, Nickel, and Chromium cause such adverse health effects as cardiovascular disorders, increased incidence of cancer, chronic respiratory problems, malfunction of the excretory system, and affect mental health. Moreover, such chemicals are declared genotoxic on the basis of recent research studies. In connection with the above-mentioned facts, the question the preventive medicine is facing is whether there exists a solution to change urban routines to eliminate exposures to extra health risks.
Air Quality and Associated Health Risks
According to the article published by Tsamalis (2014) in the recent issue of Life Science Weekly journal, air contamination problem in both developed and the third world countries is getting more complicated. The scientists express concerns regarding the growing rates of hazardous contaminants such as Cadmium, Nickel, and Chromium in the air (Tsamalis, 2014). They state that the essence of the problem is the modern lifestyle connected with intense production, consumptive attitudes, and the desire to have glamorous appearance ignited by the beauty industry. The paradox of contemporary society is that being quite positive in their nature, such initiatives laid to the environmental crisis (Tsamalis, 2014).
As an outcome of this crisis, people’s quality of life is constantly worsening due to the health risks associated with the environmental problems. Individuals exposed to the ambient air pollutants such as Cadmium, Nickel, and Chromium may develop cancer, cardiovascular disorders, genotoxic lesions, malfunction of the excretory system, chronic respiratory diseases, and mental disorders of various degrees of complexity ranging from depression to schizophrenia (Tsamalis, 2014). Other health endpoints resulting from exposures to air pollutants are allergenic reactions, neurological disorders, hypertension, humoral immune response impairment, spontaneous abortion, chromosomal aberrations, and congenital structural malformations, low birth weight, and birth defects, liver and kidney damage, and inflammatory processes in joints (Tsamalis, 2014).
Critical Analysis
Tsamalis’ article is of high significance in connection with the current situation in the healthcare system, as well as the problems that emerge in the economics due to the increased levels of morbidity and mortality associated with the environmental pollution. Despite the fact that the growing number of scientists and other authorized specialists express concerns regarding the environmental problems connected with the contamination by the heavy metals, people’s daily routines continue to be closely linked with the use of hazardous chemicals in household and industry (Abelsohn & Stieb, 2011).
The facts provided by Tsamalis (2014) suggest that time has come to alter the practices of chemical pollutants implementation in everyday life and elaborate strategies for reducing harm caused to the environment by the heavy metals use.
Possible Solution and Related Issues
Since hazardous pollutants such as Cadmium, Nickel, and Chromium have gross implications for the environment and the human health, it is necessary to reconsider traditional practices of daily life requiring the use of these chemicals. In every area of their implementation, the question concerning practical strategies of transition to the use of natural harmless substances should be answered.
References
Abelsohn, A., & Stieb, D. (2011). Health effects of outdoor air pollution: approach to counseling patients using the Air Quality Health Index. Canadian Family Physician Médecin De Famille Canadien, 57(8), 881.
Tsamalis, C. (2014). New atmospheric science study results reported. Life Science Weekly, 26 (1), 5-11.