Category: Pollution

Introduction

Human beings have taken a lot of time to realize the need for ocean conservation to the extent that the ocean has succumbed to ecological challenges that have affected their lives in a variety of ways. Covering vast areas of the earth’s surface, the world oceans have a vital role in influencing both the terrestrial and otherworldly climates.

The limited accessibility of the oceans due to their vastness has left human beings with inadequate knowledge about their uniqueness. As a result, people undertake marine activities with less concern about the consequences of their actions. Industrialization, tourism, fishing, and shipping, among other human activities, have led to detrimental effects such as pollution, acidification, and overfishing.

These effects have threatened ocean life and created general ocean imbalance. All over the world, governments, private institutions, and non-governmental organizations have to advocate the protection of the ocean against destructive human practices that gradually deprive the ocean of its ambient nature. This essay explores pollution and overfishing as global issues that have led to devastation and depletion of ocean resources. It proves that pollution and overfishing are a threat to world oceans. It also suggests possible ocean management strategies to curb such a crisis.

Ocean Pollution

Ocean pollution has become a debatable issue that has led to the promotion of sound ocean management by both governmental and non-governmental organizations around the world. Human society produces massive amounts of unwanted materials that find their way into the oceans once they are carelessly handled. Industrialization, tourism, agricultural activities, and shipping, among other activities, have significantly contributed to ocean pollution (McKibben 207). Industrialization is one of the major sources of ocean pollutants.

The author attests that inconsiderate discarding of plastic materials, industrial effluents, and solid wastes has considerably added to the contamination ocean. Use of chemicals for farming activities has led to contamination of rivers that eventually convey agronomic nutrients and untreated effluents to the oceans. These nutrients promote the growth of algae in the ocean. Algae produce algal toxins that kill fish due to intoxication (Johnson and White 60; Jenssen 198).

Furthermore, uncontrolled usage of landfills and careless dumping of industrial waste along riverbanks increases the rate of ocean pollution, a situation that increases the amount of marine debris. Tourist activities lead to increased disposal of plastic materials and other wastes on beaches. The action of tides and waves washes these wastes into the ocean, hence elevating the number of foreign materials. The overall effect of pollution leads to the poisoning of the ocean’s biodiversity.

Furthermore, Wafar, Venkataraman, Ingole, Khan, and LokaBharathi reveal that increased production of chemical-based products and components that are available in electronic goods (viz. computers, televisions, and radios), rubber shoe soles, synthetic flooring materials, clothing, and paper among other goods (6). The authors reveal that Europe alone produces about 10-percent out of an approximated number of 100,000 chemicals worldwide. Researchers claim that 3-percent of the chemicals produced in Europe are potential toxins if exposed to the environment (Wafar et al. 7).

According to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, the chemicals released to the oceans through improper disposal may change their chemical composition to form increasingly lethal substances that intoxicate flora and fauna (Roberts 27). The author reveals that inconsiderate disposal of chemical-based elements exposes the ocean to persistent organic pollutants (POPs). These pollutants are toxic and non-degradable (Roberts, 28). They clog onto the tissues and organs, thus leading to intoxication and deaths of sea animals and plants.

Moreover, ship accidents cause oil spills that have severe economic and ecological implications. The marine ecosystem is self-regulating and constantly fluctuating by its complexity. Any alien influence such as oil spills that can lead to ecosystem imbalance leads to death, reduced reproduction, and migration of fish. Oil changes the chemical composition of the ambient ecosystems, a situation that results in smothering of the oceans’ biodiversity. Also, oils consist of toxic substances that poison ocean animals and plants. Deaths of animals and plants provide a suitable medium for the growth of algae.

Overfishing

The ocean is the habitat of hundreds of fish species, most of which comprise human food. However, Hutchings, Côté, Dodson, Fleming, Jennings, Mantua, Peterman, Riddell, and Weaver reveal that the fisheries industry has succumbed to unsustainability due to illegal and unregulated fishing (225). Brunch reveals that the ocean loses over 85 million tons of fish to fishing to supply human society with rich protein meat (2). There is lessened control of overfishing activities because of inadequate incentives to facilitate ecosystem monitoring and surveillance.

Additionally, the author emphasizes that unwillingness to accept short-range expenses blinds the concerned management bodies from seeing the long-standing benefits that come with effective fish ecosystem management. Overfishing is highly disruptive to the ecosystems’ food chain (Branch 3). A research carried by the State of World Fisheries and aquaculture (SOFIA) indicated that 86-percent of the ocean population is either overexploited or recuperating from overexploitation (Hutchings et al. 226).

The authors predict that the exploitation percentage will rise to about 90-percent if unsustainable fishing methods continue in the next two decades. A separate study by Beaugrand, Rombouts, and Kirby in 2007 to determine the level of fish depletion revealed that 28-percent of the world’s commercial fisheries have collapsed because of overfishing and habitat contamination (441).

Whales and Whaling

Whales are social marine animals that exhibit a variety of social and communication behaviors that depend on the whale species. Whaling is a marine activity that involves hunting of whales for meat, oils, and blubber, whether for domestic or commercial purposes. Seemingly, commercialization of whaling that has led to killings of thousands of whales per year has become an international debate over the whaling practices (Blok 43). Close to four decades ago, the then few numbers of whales nearly reached extinction.

This situation led to the establishment of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) that banned whale hunting for business purposes (Wesolowski 102). Despite the ban of whaling, some countries such as Japan, Norway, and Iceland still practice marine activity. According to Blok, these countries have continued to commercialize whaling regardless of the lessening demand for whale products (51).

The author reveals that the three countries terminate the lives of over two-thousand whales annually. Wesolowski links the continuation of illegal commercialization of whaling products to the special authorization to kill whales for scientific purposes. This form of licensing has created loopholes that have led the killing of increasingly higher numbers of whales.

Possible Strategies for Future Ocean Management

Pollution has become a scary crisis for ocean management that demands immediate resolution. The devastating effects that come with the disposal of contaminants in the ocean have significantly put the life of marine biodiversity at great risk of poisoning, death, and even extinction (McKibben 258). The international conventions should implement policies that govern producer-responsibility for using plastic packaging materials.

Regional and international governmental and non-governmental agencies should foster advocacy for eradication of non-degradable packaging materials, especially dangerous plastics that can react with other ocean contaminants to produce toxins. Although numerous non-governmental organizations have addressed the issue of pollution and derived various methods of reducing ocean contamination, there is a need for empowerment of world communities, especially the ones that depend on marine activities for economic purposes in an attempt to change their attitudes towards ocean use (McKibben 341)

Furthermore, the rate of depletion of ocean resources has compelled governmental and non-governmental organizations to advocate better ocean management strategies. They have made major attempts to address the issue and raise awareness on the importance of effective ocean management practices to save the ocean biodiversity that forms a rich source of food for the human society.

However, ocean political matters have greatly affected the implementation of globally accepted marine management laws. The need for sound management has become inevitable. Therefore, proper management strategies should aim at balancing a socio-economic, ecological, and scientific interest in the use of ocean resources. Marine activities should take into account objective aspects such as controlled fishing practices and ecosystem sustainability (Sesini 12).

Also, regional and international government agencies should work together with non-governmental organizations to establish conventional regulations and procedures for sustainable marine practices. Beaugrand, Rombouts, and Kirby reveal that some countries in Europe have embraced strict regulations and fishing techniques that align with Europe’s obligation for protection and preservation of the marine habitats (445). Although not all countries abide by the standards for sustainable marine activities, the authors reveal an increasing adherence to international agreements on the protection and preservation of marine environments.

For instance, the London Convention controls the dumping of industrial effluents and other wastes in rivers and oceans. Wafar et al. suggest three important areas that demand more focus than ever to ensure ocean sustainability (9). The authors explain that the combination of a well-structured risk management reform, establishment of marine protected areas, and certification of marine incentives will develop into sustainable marine practices. Also, the conventions should define clear utilization of market strategies to improve ecological and economic sustainability (McKibben 337).

Conclusion

The overall health of the various oceans is at risk due to the persistent and uncontrolled human activities that have led to the depletion of resources from day-to-day. The size of plastic trash that enters the ocean heightens every year due to increased production in the industrial sites and packaging of fast goods, especially food materials.

Ocean acidification and increasing marine debris have also challenged the ocean environment. Researchers have suggested that further elevation of these forms of pollution will lead to increased destruction of ocean life by approximately 10 percent in the next decade. In reality, such an increase will tremendously affect the socio-economic sectors of many countries around the globe, owing to the elevated reliance on ocean resources. Overfishing has claimed huge numbers of fish from the ocean.

This situation has endangered some of the fish species since fish harvesting has exceeded their reproduction rates. Therefore, the development of a sustainable ocean ecosystem remains a crucial step that governmental and non-governmental agencies should prioritize with a view of advocating the protection and preservation of marine resources. There is an escalating need for formulation and implementation of dependable regional and international policies to control overfishing and ocean pollution.

Works Cited

Beaugrand, Grégory, Isabelle Rombouts, and Richard Kirby. “Towards an understanding of the pattern of biodiversity in the oceans.” Global Ecology & Biogeography 22.4(2013): 440-49. Print.

Blok, Anders. “Contesting Global Norms: Politics of Identity in Japanese Pro-Whaling Countermobilization.” Global Environmental Politics 8.2(2008): 39-66. Print.

Branch, Trevor. “Citation Patterns of a Controversial and High-Impact Paper: Worm et al. (2006) ‘Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services’.” PLoS ONE 8.2 (2013):1-6. Print.

Hutchings, Jeffrey, Isabelle Côté, Julian Dodson, Ian Fleming, Mantua Jennings, …and Andrew Weaver. “Climate change, fisheries, and aquaculture: Trends and Consequences for Canadian Marine Biodiversity.” Environmental Reviews 20.4(2012): 220-311. Print.

Jenssen, Bjørn. “Marine pollution: the future challenge is to link human and wildlife studies.” Environ Health Perspect 111.4(2003): 198-199. Print.

Johnson, Ashanti, and Natasha White. “Ocean acidification: The other Climate Change Issue: Carbon dioxide from the atmosphere reacts with coastal water to increase the acidity of the ocean, a trend that threatens many marine ecosystems.” American Scientist 102.1(2014): 60. Print.

McKibben, Bill. American Earth: Environmental Writing Since Thoreau (Library of America). United States of America. Library of America, 2008. Print.

Roberts, Callum. “The Sorrow Beneath The Sea.” Newsweek 159.21(2012): 26-31. Print.

Sesini, Marzia. The Garbage Patch In The Oceans: The Problem And Possible Solutions, 2011. Web.

Wafar, Mohideen, Krishnamurthy Venkataraman, Baban Ingole, Syed Khan, and Ponnapakkam LokaBharathi. “State of Knowledge of Coastal and Marine Biodiversity of Indian Ocean Countries.” PLoS ONE 6.1(2011): 1-12. Print.

Wesolowski, Adam. “Taking it off the Table: A Critical View of Culture in the Whaling Debate.” Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 26.1(2013): 99-116. Print.

Indoor air pollution refers to the introduction of toxic substances mainly from the use of domestic fuels into our families. Indoor air pollution has become a major global challenge more so in the sub-Saharan African countries where the cost of alternative fuels has ever been on the increase. Indoor pollution is also associated with poor sanitation in the environment. In highly industrialized countries like Japan the scenario is even complicated as most individuals are likely to suffer from related ailments like cancer, etc. indoor pollution is interestingly becoming a major area in research as different world agencies on health are drawing their attention to it. (Indoor and outdoor air pollution, 2009)

Indoor, pollution causes life-threatening ailments including lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, and other lower respiratory infections. It’s the responsibility of the world health organization to ensure that the world at large is informed on the latest development concerning these ailments. Indoor pollution and related conditions are a big burden to the already suffering world according to the reports of the world health organization that it’s the 8th most important risk factor and is perceived to contribute to 2.7% of the world’s burden of disease. (Indoor and outdoor air pollution, 2009)

Countries like Guatemala and Nepal should give priority to adopting the use of improved stoves, kerosene, and gas. These forms of fuel are not only environmentally friendly but are also cost-effective. The current global economic trend requires careful cost-benefit analysis so that one is not financially confused. Their government should also be on the forefront for championing the importance of sanitation and the dangers of a polluted environment. This should be adequately communicated to every citizen at all times. This should be done in conjunction with the world health organization as they are a ware that the energy system in most third world countries is inadequate so there should be an alternative that will be advantageous to both the poor and the rich. (Environmental protection agency, 2009)

The people of Guatemala are actually poor. Poverty has become one of the biggest global challenges to our economies. In poor countries there are so many humanitarian organizations going round to help improve the living conditions of the local individuals. These are mainly non-governmental organizations that are charitable that specializes in giving donations to the less fortunate. It would be more convenient to use these organizations to champion this idea of low cost sanitation.

Their responsibility will be to explain to the individuals the associated benefits and dangers of poor sanitation and to persuade them to adopt this idea in their daily endeavors in life. The only thing that may appear to be a stumbling block for the people of Nepal to invest into their low cost of sanitation is whether they can be able to get sufficient resource and the public attitude. These are people who are already with little income. Otherwise it would be very important to use other agencies to reach them. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989)

Conclusion

Indoor pollution is a big threat to the human health. Even though life has become so difficult especially in the third world countries, attention should be paid to the severally available alternatives for fuels. We are a ware that the major cause of indoor pollution is mainly our domestic methods of cooking. With the increasing cost of life the use of charcoal, coal and other related sources of fuel will remain common in the arena of many people. (Environmental protection agency, 2009)

List of references

Environmental protection agency, (2009), indoor air pollution. Web.

Indoor and outdoor air pollution, (2009). Web.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (1989), Office of Air and Radiation. Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality, Volume II: Assessment and Control of Indoor Air Pollution, pp. I, 4-14. EPA 400-1-89-001C.

Introduction

Automobiles play an integral role in the development of society. They are the primary means through which transportation within a continent is achieved. Fossil fuels serve as the primary source of fuel for automobiles. Therefore, these cars produce emissions that include greenhouse gases. As a result of this, vehicle emissions are considered to be one of the primary sources of air pollution in the world today. Air pollution has several significant adverse effects on the environment.

Polluted air contains nitrogen oxides and other toxic substances that dissolve in the atmosphere to return to the Earth in the form of acid rain, which is detrimental to the ecosystem. When it falls on water bodies, it causes changes in the aquatic ecosystem. Automobile emissions also contribute to climate change, which is a phenomenon with adverse environmental outcomes.

While climate change is a natural phenomenon, it has been accelerated over the past century as a result of human’s industrial activity. The excessive use of fossil fuels has led to the accumulation of greenhouse gases, and this has contributed to global warming. Some of the detrimental environmental effects of global warming include a rise in sea levels leading to the destruction of coastal habitats through flooding, the devastation of flora and fauna, and the spread of diseases.

Claims

Considering the significant adverse environmental impacts on air pollution, we have to seek solutions to the vehicle emission problem currently facing the country. Several alternative ways can be used to reduce significantly or eliminate automobile emissions. To begin with, the government could invest in light rail and high-speed trains to provide an alternative and more environmentally-friendly means of transportation.

Increased use of these alternatives would reduce the usage of automobiles, therefore decreasing the harmful vehicle emissions. The federal government could also provide better support for the development and use of hybrid cars by US citizens. Hybrid cars are a viable alternative to vehicles with conventional engines. These cars have engines that work using electrical motors, and thus the gasoline consumption may be reduced.

This leads to the emission of the minimal possible levels of CO2, therefore minimizing air pollution dramatically. Finally, the local government can encourage the use of non-automotive means of transportation, such as bicycles. Such a move can be promoted by the construction of bicycle lanes in cities all over the country.

The roads would encourage people traveling for short distances to the use of bicycles, which do not cause any pollution. This would lead to the elimination of automobile emissions that would have been produced if individuals had to use personal cars or taxis to travel short distances.

Brief Background

Transportation has always been the key to the economic and social development of society. Through advances in transportation, trade and commerce are promoted as people and goods can move to the desired destination promptly.

The relationship between transportation and development can be seen from the fact that historically, advances in transport technology follow the changes in human civilization. In modern society, the transportation infrastructure of a country is a marker of the social and economic health of the country. While developed countries have expansive and impressive transportation networks, developing countries suffer from poor transport infrastructure.

In the US, all states possess modern road systems. In addition to this, US citizens enjoy a high income per capita due to the economic development in the country. Citizens are, therefore, able to afford personal vehicles, and the country has the most significant percentage of passenger vehicles relative to the population of the country.

As of 2009, the U.S. Department of Transportation recorded that there were over 246 million passenger vehicles in the country (US Census). This figure represents an increase of over 58 million from the number of motor vehicles in 1990. The number of cars is expected to increase even further as the cost of acquiring a vehicle in the US decreases, and the population of the US increases. It can, therefore, be projected that the auto-emissions currently experienced in the US will increase over the coming decades.

Reasons for Proposing Change

As noted above, the transportation sector is integral to the development of society. However, the rapid increase in the number of fossil fuel-powered automobiles in our country is unsustainable. As the number of vehicles on the road increases, the level of air pollution also increases. The adverse effects of air pollution caused by cars are evident in many states. The Environmental Protection Agency reveals that marine life in the country was adversely affected by air pollution.

Water bodies have been contaminated as air pollutants are transferred through precipitation to the water bodies. Due to the contamination, up to 40 states have issued advisories after observing significant pollution in specific water bodies in the respective countries. In addition to damaging water bodies, the Environmental Protection Agency warns that the ground-level ozone created by the toxic air pollutants released by vehicles is damaging to plants and trees.

The Environmental Protection Agency documents that in recognition of the adverse effects that vehicle emissions had on the environment, the California State government imposed regulations aimed at reducing automobile emissions in the 1960s. These regulations have been progressively tightened over the decade to reduce the emissions from vehicles even further. Due to these efforts, the region enjoys a relatively lower level of vehicular pollution as compared to other states that have an equally high density of cars.

The negative effect of automobile emissions, already evident in many states, can be expected to increase as the number of vehicles in the country rises. The changes proposed in this paper can ensure that automobile emissions are reduced drastically by decreasing the number of cars on the road. The proposal also states that vehicles that have minimal tailpipe emissions should be utilized, therefore reducing CO2 emissions.

Opposing Arguments and Counter Arguments

An argument made against the light rail and high-speed trains is that they still require the use of fossil fuels to run. Using these transportation alternatives would therefore even contribute, although indirectly, to the increase in air pollution in the country. This argument is correct since, in as much as these trains use electricity, it is still generated by the use of fossil fuels. Approximately the US produces 68% of the electricity from fossil fuels, with coal being the primary source used in power plants.

Sweet reveals, “Burning coal produces more than half the country’s electricity” (par. 3). Due to this, coal is responsible for 33% of overall carbon emissions in the country. Opponents of the use of light rail and high-speed trains as alternatives to automobiles argue that these measures would reduce automobile emissions, but without any benefit to the environment since air pollution would still occur through electricity production. This argument is correct in stating that coal is currently the primary producer of the country’s electricity.

However, the case wrongfully says that the electricity used to run trains is obtained from coal plants. It ignores the fact that the US has over the past decade showed significant interest in developing renewable energy sources (Sweet par.5). Due to the realization that coal contributes to climate change, successive US administrations have increased their investments in technologies to develop alternative sources of energy, such as wind and solar power.

In addition to this, nuclear power plants, which have zero carbon emissions, are used extensively to produce electricity in the US. McKinney and Schoch state, “the US has more than 100 nuclear power plants, and it generates 19.9% of its electricity from nuclear power” (216). There is, therefore, a high likelihood that the electricity used to run light rail and high-speed trains will be obtained from sources that do not cause air pollution.

In disapproval of hybrid engines, their opponents have asserted that that was an immature technology, and advancements were still to be made to those systems. Darrel and Anderson confirm that most opponents of hybrid engines stated that it was an unproven technology that could not be trusted to replace standard engines (83). In addition to this, hybrid vehicles are costly, making them unattractive to many consumers. As such, the widespread use of these vehicles is unlikely to be achieved.

The supposed benefit gained from hybrid engines in terms of air pollution reduction will, therefore, be minimal since a large-scale adoption of the technology would be needed to make a significant change in automobile emissions. These critical comments leveled against hybrid engines are legitimate since they are an immature technology compared to fossil-powered engines that have been in use over the many decades.

However, it would be wrong to refer to them as an “unproven technology” since significant manufacturers, such as Honda and Toyota, have made advances in the technology in over ten years (Darrel and Anderson 84). This argument that hybrid technology is unproven also makes a wrong cause and effect assumption.

The fact that hybrid engines are a young technology does not mean that they will not contribute to the reduction of vehicle emissions. Research shows that hybrid engines are more efficient than internal combustion engines, and their environmental impact is reduced due to their lower carbon emissions (McKinney and Schoch 237).

A major criticism leveled against bicycle lanes is that they would not lead to emission reduction since people cannot be expected to use bicycles to travel over significant distances. While bikes might be ideal for short distances, critics argue that they cannot be used for long distance travel. In addition to this, opponents maintain that most cities in the US already suffered from traffic congestion. Instead of constructing bicycle lanes, it would be more beneficial for local authorities to expand the existing roads to ease congestion.

Therefore, while bicycle use does not lead to air pollution, critics argue that this is not a feasible alternative to vehicle use in the US. However, the significance of bicycles as travel devices, especially in cities, cannot be overstated. Research has shown that most of the pollution in the cities occurs as the cars are idling in traffic jams. The USA Today notes that bicycle lanes bring “bring economic as well as environmental benefits to communities” (par.1).

Pollution also increases when people use vehicles to travel for short distances that could easily be covered on foot or by bicycle. By constructing bicycle lanes, the local government would encourage people to use bikes and therefore avoid causing the pollution that occurs when cars are stuck in traffic or as they move for short distances.

The USA Today reports that bicycle lanes lead to an increase in the number of cyclists since they “get the people who are interested in cycling but are concerned about their safety” (par. 17). The argument that a better use for the bicycle lanes would be the expansion of existing roads is inconsistent with the reality that the usage of bicycles would reduce the number of vehicles on the road. This would, therefore, reduce air pollution by eliminating auto-emissions among bicycle users.

Conclusion

The paper is set out to argue that the air pollution caused by automobile emissions is detrimental to the environment, and as such, alternative ways to significantly reduce or eliminate such emissions should be implemented. It starts by highlighting the importance of automobiles in the growth and development of society. The paper then notes that emissions are an essential source of air pollution. It highlighted the significant adverse environmental impacts that vehicle emissions cause.

While these impacts have been there since the invention of vehicles, they have become more pronounced as the number of cars in the country has increased markedly. The paper has proposed solutions to reduce or eliminate automobile emissions.

These solutions that include developing light rail and high-speed trains, investment in hybrid cars, and construction of bicycle lanes are feasible and promise great benefits. All the citizens who are eager to contribute to the protection of our environment should petition the government to implement these changes to reduce air pollution in the US.

Works Cited

Darrel, Curtis and Judy Anderson. Electric and hybrid cars: a history. New York: McFarland, 2010. Print.

Environmental Protection Agency. Air Quality Planning and Standards: Taking Toxics Out of the Air. 2012. Web.

McKinney, Michael and Robert Schoch. Environmental Science: Systems and Solutions. Boston: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2007. Print.

Sweet, William. Better Planet: Nuke Power is Earth’s Friend: It’s time to replace coal power with wind and, yes, nuclear. 2007. Web.

US Census Bureau. Motor Vehicle Registrations: 1990 to 2009. 2013. Web.

USA Today. “More protected lanes for bicyclists pop up in cities.” The USA Today 2013. Web.

Summary

A department dealing with the effects of atmospheric pollutants in the vicinity of an industrial complex has established a data table of measurements of a purity index Y on a scale of 0 (extremely bad ) to 1000 ( absolutely pure) and the dependence of this on component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, …, X₆. The aim of the department is to establish which of the component variables is contributing most to local atmospheric pollution.

This report analyzed and discussed the association of the purity index Y with component pollutant variables and developed a model to forecast the purity index. The analysis suggested that the component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, X₄, X₅, and X₆ are significantly related to purity index Y (p <.05). However, only two-component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅ are most likely to contribute significantly to atmospheric pollution (purity index Y). The equation for the best regression (chosen) model was given by Y = 0.185 + 1.111X₁ + 7.598X₅

Further, for the chosen model, all the underlying assumptions of the regression analysis (multicollinearity, non-normality, nonconstant variance, and autocorrelation) are valid.

Introduction

A department dealing with the effects of atmospheric pollutants in the vicinity of an industrial complex has established a data table of measurements of a purity index Y. The purity index Y is measured on a scale of 0 to 1000, with 0 being extremely bad and 1000 being absolutely pure and the dependence of this on component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, …, X₆. The aim of the department is to establish which of the component variables is contributing most to local atmospheric pollution.

This report will analyze and discuss the association of the purity index Y with component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, …, X₆. Further, this report will develop a model for forecasting the purity index Y based on component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, …, X₆. For this, sample data for a period of 50 days is obtained. The test is a ‘blind’ one in the sense that none of the pollutants has been identified by name, because of its association with the source and the possibility at this stage of unwanted litigation.

Correlation and Scatterplot Analysis

Figure 1 to 6 shows the scatterplots of purity index Y against component pollutant variables X₁, X₂… X₆.

There appears a strong linear relationship between Y and X₁, Y and X₂, and Y and X₅. In addition, there appears a moderately strong linear relationship between Y and X₆. Furthermore, there appears weak or no linear relationship between Y and X₃ and Y and X₄. Table 2 shows the correlation matrix (using MegaStat, an Excel Add-in) for purity index Y and component pollutant variables X₁, X₂… X₆.

Table 1: Correlation Matrix

As shown in table 1, the correlation of Y is significant for X₁, X₂, X₄, X₅, and X₆. Therefore, excluding component pollutant variable X₃ from first multiple regression analysis based on correlation and scatterplot analysis.

Multiple Regression Model

Model with Five Independent Variables (Excluding X₃)

Table 2

Table 2 shows the regression model with five component pollutant variables. Although, the regression model is significant (F = 77.64, p <.001), the p-value for coefficient of component pollutant variables X₂, X₄, and X₆ are greater than 0.05. The p-value for coefficient of X₆ (0.462) is higher as compared to coefficient of other component pollutant variables X₂ (0.188) and X₄ (0.3868), thus, excluding component pollutant variable X₆ from further multiple regression analysis.

Model with Four Independent Variables (Excluding X3 and X6)

Table 3

Table 3 shows the regression model with four component pollutant variables. Although, the regression model is significant (F = 97.90, p <.001), the p-value for coefficient of component pollutant variables X₂ and X₄ are greater than 0.05. The p-value for coefficient of X₄ (0.443) is higher as compared to coefficient of component pollutant variable X₂ (0.265), thus, excluding component pollutant variable X₄ from further multiple regression analysis.

Model with Four Independent Variables (Excluding X3, X4 and X6)

Table 4

Table 4 shows the regression model with three component pollutant variables. Although, the regression model is significant (F = 131.35, p <.001), the p-value for coefficient of component pollutant variable X₂ (0.287) is greater than 0.05, thus, excluding component pollutant variable X₂ from further multiple regression analysis.

Model with Two Independent Variables X1 and X5

Table 5

Table 5 shows the regression model with two component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅. The regression model is significant (F = 195.77, p <.001). The p-value for coefficient of component variables X₁ and X₅ is significant that indicates that both component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅ significantly predicts purity index Y in regression model.

Table 6 shows the stepwise regression (using MegaStat, an Excel Add-in) taking n number of variables (best for n). As shown in table 6, the best multiple regression model is given by component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅, as p-value for model is highest.

Table 6: Multiple regression model with different number of independent variables

Adjusted R² is a parameter for deciding number of independent variables in multiple regression model. Figure 7 show the Adjusted R² versus Number of Independent Variables. As shown in figure 7, there is not much increase in Adjusted R² after two independent variables X₁, and X₅. The Adjusted R² value is approximately same (0.888) for more than 2 independent variables in multiple regression model. Therefore, the best regression model is given by only taking two independent variables X₁, and X_5.

Chosen Multiple Regression Model

The equation for the best regression (chosen) is given by Y = 0.185 + 1.111X₁ + 7.598X₅

Regression slope coefficient of 1.111 of X₁ indicates that for each point increase in X₁, purity index Y increase by about 1.111 on average given fixed component pollutant variable X₅.

The regression slope coefficient of 7.598 of X₂ indicates that for each point increase in X₂, purity index Y increase by about 7.598 on average given fixed component pollutant variable X₁.

Component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅ explain about 89.3% variation in purity index Y. The other 10.7% variation in purity index Y remains unexplained may be due to other factors.

T-tests on Individual Coefficients

The null and alternate hypotheses are:

The selected level of significance is 0.05 and the selected test is t-test for Zero Slope.

The decision rule will reject H₀ if p-value ≤ 0.5. Otherwise, do not reject H₀.

Component pollutant variable X₁ significantly predicts purity index Y, t(47) = 10.35, p <.001.

Component pollutant variable X₅ significantly predicts purity index Y, t(47) = 7.17, p <.001.

F – test on All coefficients

The null and alternate hypotheses are:

The selected level of significance is 0.05 and the selected test is F-test.

The decision rule will reject H₀ if p-value ≤ 0.5. Otherwise, do not reject H₀.

The regression model is significant, R² =.893, F(2, 47) = 195.77, p <.001.

Assumptions of Regression Model

Multicollinearity

Klein’s Rule suggests that we should worry about the stability of the regression coefficient estimates only when a pairwise predictor correlation exceeds the multiple correlation coefficient R (i.e., the square root of R²). The value of the correlation coefficient between X₁ and X₅ is 0.605. The value of Multiple R for the final regression model with X₁ and X₅ is 0.945 and far exceeds 0.605, which suggests that the confidence intervals and t-tests may not be affected.

Another approach for checking multicollinearity is the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). Figure 2 shows the interpretation of the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). As a Rule of Thumb, we should not worry about multicollinearity, if VIF for the explanatory variable is less than 10.

Table 7: Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) using MegaStat

As shown in table 7, the VIF’s for both X1 and X5 is 1.576; thus, there is no need for concern.

Non-Normal Errors

Figure 9 shows the normal probability plot of residuals. As shown in figure 9, the residual plot is approximately linear, thus, the residuals seem to be consistent with the hypothesis of normality.

Nonconstant Variance (Heteroscedasticity)

Figure 10 and 11 show the plots of residuals by X₁ and residuals by X₅.

As shown in figure 10 and 11 the data points are scattered, and there is no pattern in the residuals as we move from left to right, thus, the residuals seem to be consistent with the hypothesis of homoscedasticity (constant variance).

Autocorrelation

Autocorrelation exists when the residuals are correlated with each other. With time-series data, one needs to be aware of the possibility of autocorrelation, a pattern of nonindependent errors that violate the regression assumption that each error is independent of its predecessor. The most common test for autocorrelation is the Durbin-Watson test. The DW statistic lies between 0 and 4. For no autocorrelation, the DW statistic will be near 2. In this case, DW = 2.33, which is near 2, thus errors are non-autocorrelated. However, for cross-sectional data, the DW statistic is usually ignored.

Figure 12 shows the residual by observation number. As shown in figure 12, the sign of a residual cannot be predicted from the sign of the preceding one this means that there is no autocorrelation.

Thus, for the chosen model, all the underlying assumptions of the regression analysis are valid.

Pollutant Variables (X) to Contribute Atmospheric Pollution (Purity Index Y)

As shown in table 1: correlation matrix, the component pollutant variables X₁, X₂, X₄, X₅, and X₆ are significantly related to purity index Y (p <.05). Thus, they all are individually contributing significantly to atmospheric pollution. However, looking at the multiple regression model analysis, the only two-component pollutant variables X₁ and X₅ are most likely to contribute significantly to atmospheric pollution (purity index Y).

The contemporary world is known for and proud of its rapid technological development and advancement of science. However, the fast-progressing modernization carries a long list of negative impacts in addition to various benefits. One of the main disadvantages of the speedy technological progress is the pollution of the environment. Regardless of its obvious effects, the pollution had been majorly ignored by the humankind for centuries. Today, it is one of the most frequently discussed global concerns. However, in spite of all the world’s efforts to improve the state of the environment, the damage is done faster than it is addressed.

As a result, the environmental issues on our planet continue to persist. Among all other industries, aviation tends to create negative environmental impacts in a variety of spheres as it pollutes soil, and water aggravates the greenhouse effect due to emissions and also generates noise pollution. This paper attempts to provide a detailed and reliable report concerning the environmental impacts of aviation and different types of pollution that occur because of the use of more powerful aircraft engines, the rapid growth of air travel, greenhouse gas emission, noise pollution, land exploration to build new airports, aircraft waste, and graveyards. The costs and benefits are compared and it is concluded that currently, the efforts to minimize the damage are insufficient and outweighed by the adverse effects.

Rapid Growth of Air Travel

Air travel is known as the fastest and a rather safe way to transport passengers. The main problem it faces currently is its high price. The industry is actively working on this problem as the goal is to maximize the number of people able and willing to afford air travel. According to the data released by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) (2014), the number of people using airborne modes of transportation is anticipated to demonstrate a steady growth of about 4% a year. As a result, as stated by IATA (2014), by 2034 the number of aircraft passengers is likely to exceed 7 billion. For the comparison, the number of passengers who preferred air travel in 2014 estimated 3.3 billion people (IATA, 2014). That way, the overall quantity of aircraft passengers is expected to double within the next two decades.

The growth of air travel is happening all around the world; however, some countries show the most rapid tendencies for development. For instance, IATA (2014) projects that such states as Brazil, India, China, Indonesia, and the USA will become the leaders in air travel trends by 2034. Each of these countries is likely to have several hundred thousands of new passengers within the new two decades. Besides, the rapid growth of the popularity of air travel is forecasted to occur in Africa and the Middle East.

Even though these tendencies are positive in terms of employment, connectivity, and job creation, one must not forget how dangerous the increased activity of aircraft will turn out for the environment. The negative environmental consequences of the growing use of air travel (both current and future) are recognized. As a result, in response to the environmental challenges, the air travel industry has three main goals to follow in order to minimize the damage it causes – the industry agreed to improve the fuel efficiency at least by 1.5% annually till 2020, to cap the net emissions due to the carbon-neutral growth, and, finally, to reduce the net emissions significantly by the year of 2050 (in contrast to those of 2005) (IATA, 2014).

More Powerful Aircraft Engines

The engines of aircraft function similarly to the engines of land-based vehicles. They require fuel to work properly, and as a result, planes pollute the atmosphere just like automobiles. The first airplanes appeared relatively recently – about a hundred years ago invented and promoted by the Wright brothers, and immediately started to gain popularity among the population of the earth (Green, 2003). Consequently, the number of airplanes produced to transport cargos and people grew very quickly, and so did their power and size.

The core function of the aircraft engine is to provide thrust that moves the vehicle forward. The development of aircraft engines happened very fast and in several decades after the invention of the first airplanes, the scientists began to work on the engines allowing the machines to cruise at sonic speed. The first and second world wars served as the catalysts that facilitated the development of aircraft engines as the military power of airplanes is huge. At the same time, the pollution and disruption the airplanes cause to in the atmosphere are obvious as one can easily notice the distinct trail behind a moving plane.

The harm produced by the aircraft engines is discussed in the Kyoto Protocol that obliges the complying countries to work on the reduction of the emissions of various gases released by the engines. As reported by Green (2003), the aircraft engines initially used to release “a mixture mainly of soot and unburned hydrocarbons but containing also carbon monoxide and a mixture of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) collectively termed NOx” (p. 284). However, in the middle of the 1990s, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) developed a set of standards that required the aircraft engine manufacturers to improve combustion efficiency by means of combustion chambers minimizing the amount of unburnt hydrocarbons, soot, and carbon monoxide released by the engines.

Emission of the engines is measured based on several phases of their activity such as taking off, moving, landing, and generating a takeoff thrust, and is determined by the pressure ratio of the engine (Green, 2003). Today, the environmental impact and the level of pollution of the aircraft engines are researched and addressed with the help of computer simulations designed to recreate the work of various engines without actually using them and generating more pollution. This approach is not only environmentally friendly but also cost-effective because using the computers is cheaper than fueling and launching real engines.

Greenhouse Gas Emission

Compared to many other industries, aviation can be called relatively small. At the same time, the negative environmental impact it produces is extremely powerful. David Suzuki Foundation (2014) noted that if all the human activities causing climate change on the planet are counted as 100%, the environmental effects of aviation would comprise 4 to 9% of it. Regardless of all the reduction practices and policies, the environmental impact of aviation continues to increase. For instance, the last 25 years demonstrated an 83% growth of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (David Suzuki Foundation, 2014).

As it was mentioned earlier, all means of transportation (air, maritime, road, and rail) tend to discharge gases and particles that cause the greenhouse effect. However, air transportation is the leading mode in terms of the amount of emissions. The formula of the harmful emissions is simple and does not differ from those of the other types of transport: while moving, an airplane engine burns jet fuel; at the same time, carbon released during the reaction binds with oxygen in the air and forms CO2 (David Suzuki Foundation, 2014). Also, the other substances the burnt fuel releases are soot, sulfate, vapor, and nitrous oxides.

That way, compared to the road, rail, and maritime transport, aircraft produces the largest amounts of emissions and also has the worst environmental impact par passenger kilometer (meaning that none of the advantages this kind of transport provides can outweigh the environmental damage it produces). Moreover, apart from all the standard negative effects generated by aviation, it has a special characteristic that makes it stand out among the other kinds of vehicles not only based on the amount of emissions. The peculiarity of aircraft is that the emissions it generates are released in the upper layers of the atmosphere. These emissions are responsible for “a series of chemical reactions and atmospheric effects that have a net warming effect” (David Suzuki Foundation, 2014, para. 5).

Another significant feature of aircraft in terms of its environmental impact is the contrail that is the long lines seen in the skies behind the moving planes. Contrails consist of drops of water that turn into ice under the low temperatures of high altitudes (David Suzuki Foundation, 2014). As the contrails may stay in place for hours and occupy quite a widespread area, they are harmful because of their capacity to create a net and trap warm air preventing it from leaving the atmosphere and this way contributing to global warming. Besides, the researchers found that contrails left by the aircraft at night as especially harmful as those created during the day may reflect the sunlight and relieving some of the heat (David Suzuki Foundation, 2014).

Noise Pollution

The noise started to be recognized as one of the primary problems caused by aviation long before the environmental pollution. It is possible that this tendency was caused by the fact that noise pollution is an immediate effect, while the emissions, greenhouse effect, and global warming started to become visible after decades had passed. Noise pollution does not produce any actual destructive impact on the environment, and its effects do not last long. However, the main harmful aspects of noise have social and psychological characters. The individuals who live close to the airports often suffer from a variety of issues caused by noise pollution; among them, there are problems with communication, sleep disturbance, nervousness, learning and perception issues, and some other psycho-physiological problems (Eurocontrol, n. d.).

Noise pollution as well as its impacts on humans have been studied for decades and are not taken lightly. There exists an International Noise Model that estimates and simulates the levels of noise caused by various types of aircraft (Eurocontrol, n. d.). This Model helps the city planners to visualize the noise impact and determine which areas could be unsuitable or harmful for the inhabitants due to the airports located nearby. The level of noise in the communities suffering from noise pollution is measured using an international standard scale in A-weighted decibels – the units that indicate the impact of noise on people (Eurocontrol, n. d.).

Besides, noise pollution is estimated using such measurements as “perceived noise” and “effective perceived noise” also reflected in decibels. These scales differentiate between types of noise according to its various frequencies and duration (Eurocontrol, n. d.). The scientists do not have an agreement as to which of these two scales is more appropriate since both are used equally by different researchers. Also, there is the third scale called Lden that is widely used by the European Community. It indicates the day-evening-night level of noise in A-weighted decibels.

Noise produced by aircraft is extremely loud. For example, a sound of a person speaking in a normal voice equal 60 to 70 dB (A), whereas the sound of a busy street is approximately 78 to 85 dB (A), a chainsaw makes a noise of about 120 dB (A), and a taking off airplane is as loud as 140 dB (A) if the person who perceives it stands about 75 feet away from it (Eurocontrol, n. d.).

For the management of aircraft noise, all the commercial airlines are to follow the rules developed by the ICAO. These standards outline the norms and regulations as to the design and use of aircraft based on its types. The rules were first introduced in 1971 and have been gradually becoming stricter as the years pass. Currently, the options for noise mitigation include the careful use of land to plan the noise areas away from the inhabited districts, the reduction of engine noise at source, and operational restrictions (Eurocontrol, n. d.). These points are the main bases for the noise reduction policies. However, there are some other procedures employed to minimize the noise pollution; they are the limiting of operation at night, cutting the unnecessary use auxiliary engines, planning the air routes so that they do not overfly the areas with schools and hospitals, noise level monitoring, to name a few (Eurocontrol, n. d.).

The Benefits of Aviation

Along with all the disadvantages and negative impacts, aviation is responsible for a wide range of benefits that serve as a powerful force that moves humanity to greater progress, safer travel, a higher level of convenience, faster communication and transportation. One could say that the practical use of air travel and all the advantages it carries for the humanity on various levels could outweigh the damage it produces and that the outcomes such as the environmental impacts could be considered as the necessary sacrifice for the sake of convenience and progress.

Fast Technological Progress

In reality, aviation is one of the fastest progressing industries in the whole world. Such tendency occurred due to the nature of air travel that differs from that of the ground vehicles as the airplanes cannot be refueled during a journey and, as a result, are to carry a large amount of the required fuel inside (ATAG, n. d.). Consequently, the aircraft developers and manufacturers are faced with an ongoing challenge to ensure a life-long improvement of the airborne vehicles in order to optimize such aspects of air travel as speed, costs, and safety. In other words, the fact that the airplanes are to carry all of the fuel along during the trips creates a great range of difficulties for the industry because

1. the fuel is very costly (it comprises about 30% of the operating expenditures of an air vehicle) and therefore, the amount of it an airplane consumes makes a direct impact on the pricing of the air travel;
2. the fuel is heavy, and it tends to increase the overall weight of an airplane which, in turn, impacts the efficiency of the vehicle and the speed of air travel;
3. finally, the more fuel is used by the plane, the more CO2 it produces to harm the environment (ATAG, n. d.).

That way, the constant technological progress in the industry is dictated by multiple causes, and due to that, the airborne vehicles become better, lighter, safer, faster, and more efficient by the year. The financial stimuli to make aviation a more efficient and productive industry go hand in hand with the environmental concerns that arose as soon as the industry leaders realized that airborne vehicles, airports, and engines harm the world around polluting soil, water, and air.

Ongoing Work on the Environmental Safety of Air Vehicles

The manufacturers of aircraft and engineers are involved in daily work on the improvement of the air vehicles. Most importantly, this work has been fruitful, and its results continue to impress the scientists in terms of rapid progress.

It is important to notice that a little over a hundred years ago the mere idea of air travel was considered an unrealistic fantasy. Today, the aviation has come a long way in technological development and capabilities. As soon as the issue of air pollution and emissions became known as one of the most harmful outcomes of air travel, the industry focused on the decoupling of this impact. As a result, these days, while the air traffic growth worldwide estimates by 5% annually, the increase in the emission production is only 3% (ATAG, n. d.). Each new generation of aircraft offers more and more benefits in terms of environmental safety and more efficient fuel combustion.

Besides, the aerodynamic efficiency is another way to address the problem of the environmental safety of aircraft. The outer appearances of the airplanes are regularly modified for the improvement in their aerodynamic capabilities. For example, the new types of aircraft wings equipped with a special wingtip device allow the vehicles to consume less fuel (ATAG, n. d.). All in all, the aircraft manufactured within the last decade has an impressive efficiency. For instance, Boeing 787 and Airbus 380 require about 3 liters of fuel per 100 passenger kilometers, which makes them on average, more efficient than group-based vehicles such as compact cars (ATAG, n. d.). This benefit looks even more amazing if the speed of the two types of vehicles is compared.

Costs Are Still Greater Than Benefits

Without a doubt, the effort of the aircraft manufacturers and scientists who work on the improvement of the airborne vehicles and their engines is starting to pay off. The aircraft developers have been successful in the reduction of emissions and the increase of aerodynamic capacities of the airplanes helping to reduce the amount of fuel they consume. However, the range of adverse effects of the environmental pollution caused by the development of aviation as an industry is much wider than the number of areas where the scientists are attempting to minimize the damage.

Apart from the engines with inefficient fuel combustion that contributes to the development of the greenhouse effect and the noise pollution, there are such harmful environmental impacts of aviation as the retired airplanes and aircraft waste. For decades, ever since the airplanes began to become a significant aspect of the life of our society, the remains of aircraft, as well as the machines that are no longer in use, have been stored in the so-called “graveyards”. Being too large to be utilized in any other way such as burning or burying, aircraft is doomed to end its days in the middle of deserts such as Mojave left to decay (Mouritz, 2012).

Another significant negative impact is caused by the land exploration for the construction of the new airports. For instance, in his book called “Exploring Environmental Issues: An Integrated Approach” David Kemp (2004) discusses the cases in Australia and Japan where the land exploration for the new airports faced a serious social issue of opposition from the public and the environmentalists as well as a practical problem of lack of land. The exploration in Sydney took over a part of Botany Bay, a home to multiple ecosystems and several Aboriginal peoples. As for the campaign in Osaka, it resulted in reclaiming some territory from the sea and building an airport on a specially created artificial island (Kemp, 2004).

Conclusion

The environmental impacts of aviation are multiple and different. This paper discussed some of them and reported that all aspects of air travel are as dangerous for the environment as they are beneficial for the people and economies. Unfortunately, the damage produced by this industry has been overlooked for decades. Today, when the consequences are visible, the environmentalists and the aerospace industries cooperate to minimize the level of harm in the future as the popularity of air travel grows rapidly and so does its negative environmental impact. However, the damage produced by aviation affects many more areas than the scientists can address today, so regardless of their effort the danger remains and persists.

References

ATAG. (n. d.). Technology. Web.

David Suzuki Foundation. (2014). Air travel and climate change. Web.

Eurocontrol. (n. d.). Environmental issues for aviation. Web.

Green, J. E. (2003). Civil aviation and the environmental challenge. The Aeronautical Journal, 281-299.

IATA. (2014). New IATA Passenger Forecast Reveals Fast-Growing Markets of the Future. Web.

Kemp, D. D. (2004). Exploring Environmental Issues: An Integrated Approach. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.

Mouritz, A. P. (2012). Introduction to aerospace materials. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

Introduction

It is important to note that nutrient pollution is a major environmental problem that brings a substantial degree of imbalance to an ecosystem. The objective of the given analysis is to focus on specific nutrient pollution within lake ecosystems. The topic will focus on nitrogen pollution and its causal link with cyanobacterium or algae explosion in lakes. Human activity, such as policies, facilitates nitrogen pollution of lakes, where toxic algae strains grow excessively by releasing harmful chemicals and damaging the ecosystem.

Literature Review

One of the most problematic aspects of nitrogen pollution as a form of nutrient pollution in lakes is the algae explosion. The vast majority of algae organisms are prokaryotic ones, which specifically belong to cyanobacteria microorganisms. The explosion results in coverage of a water surface with the bacteria, and it reduces the oxygen content of the water and penetration level of light. Thus, aquatic life in the affected lakes becomes endangered due to the lack of oxygen and light for other organisms to grow. A study suggests that “as most N pollution regimes in P-rich lakes will favor toxic cyanobacterial dominance, restricting future N pollution will help curb further cyanobacterial dominance in lakes” (Bogard et al. 3219). In addition, such a change impacts “both directly and by constraining the capacity for future P loading and climate warming to drive cyanobacterial growth” (Bogard et al. 3219). In other words, nitrogen pollution favors the growth of toxic strains of cyanobacteria, which harm the lake ecosystems.

It should be noted that toxic forms of algae release chemicals as a byproduct of nitrogen utilization, which diminishes the lake ecosystem’s stability. Another study reports that toxic strains of such organisms tend to release cylindrospermopsin or CYN (Yang et al. 1041). It is also stated that nitrogen “deficiency promoted the intracellular accumulation and simultaneously restrained the extracellular release of CYN” (Yang et al. 1041). Thus, the lack of nitrogen was linked with the lower release of CYN into the lake environment because cyanobacteria preferred to store them inside their cells due to the deficiency of the pollutant. However, an abundance of nitrogen allowed the algae to adapt their cellular mechanisms to utilize the supply of the pollutant, which increased the release of toxic CYN. One should be aware that low nitrogen levels do not eliminate these toxic strains, and therefore “only N input control would be insufficient to avoid C. raciborskii bloom” (Yang et al. 1049). Additional measures need to be undertaken alongside nitrogen pollution reduction.

On the basis of the information provided above, it is critical to understand that nitrogen pollution is mostly due to human activities. It is stated that “two-thirds of agricultural policies (ranging from broad sectoral programs to nitrogen-specific measures) incentivize nitrogen use or manage its commerce, demonstrating the primacy of food production over environmental concerns” (Kanter et al.956). In other words, many commercial policies and incentives contribute to nitrogen pollution heavily. Thus, policy-based countermeasures need to be implemented in order to combat lake pollution with nutrients. The information is related to course contents on environmental pollution and ecosystem integrity.

Conclusion

In conclusion, nitrogen pollution contributes to lake ecosystem destruction since toxic algae strains release their harmful byproducts, and the primary cause is linked to human activity. CYN is among these toxic chemicals, which are usually stored in the cells of algae but released when there is nitrogen abundance. Specific policies need to be incorporated among large commercial enterprises to limit their wasteful impact on the lakes.

Works Cited

Bogard, Matthew J., et al. “Unabated Nitrogen Pollution Favors Growth of Toxic Cyanobacteria over Chlorophytes in Most Hypereutrophic Lakes.” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 54, no. 6, 2020, pp. 3219-3227.

Kanter, David R., et al. “Gaps and Opportunities in Nitrogen Pollution Policies Around the World.” Nature Sustainability, vol. 3, 2020, pp. 956-963.

Yang, Yiming, et al. “Toxicity-Associated Changes in The Invasive Cyanobacterium Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii in Response to Nitrogen Fluctuations.” Environmental Pollution, vol. 237, 2018, pp. 1041-1049.

According to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, there are six principal air pollutants, the excess of which critically affects the health, lifestyle, and welfare of the population. They are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particle pollution, and sulfur dioxide. Increasing the level of each of them will most likely have critical consequences, and should be regulated by governmental services. Still, to my mind, the priority should be given to the regulation of particle pollution as the most dangerous issue.

Particle pollution or “Particulate matter,” PM, is an effect caused by contamination of air by the particles of different origin. They might be dust, small droplets of nitric and sulfuric acids, coal and metal particles, organic chemicals, etc. The particles are subdivided into two groups. The size of “inhalable coarse particles” lies within the range of 2.5 and 10 micrometers (“The United States Environmental Protection Agency: Particulate Matter” par. 3). “Fine particles” are 2.5 micrometers and smaller (“The United States Environmental Protection Agency: Particulate Matter” par. 4). The particles are majorly concentrated along the roadways and in the areas of dusty industries. Forest fires, being a significant issue recently all over the U.S., are a substantial source of PM (Langmann et al. 109). Gas emissions from cars, industries, and power plants also contribute to particle pollution.

The level of particle pollution is regulated both by primary and secondary standards, meaning that high levels of PM will affect both sensitive categories of people and the welfare such as animals, crops, and buildings. The health dangers lay within lungs and heart disease that might cause death, as well as asthma, heart attacks, respiratory symptoms, etc. In general, 500,000 deaths occur due to particle pollution annually (Nel, 804). The damage to welfare and environment can be described as contamination of water bodies with acids, affecting the nutrient balance of soils and coastal waters, destroying forests and crops. Acid rains “resulted by sulfur oxides transformation into acids, especially sulfuric acid, besides causing leaf burns, contribute to the acidity increase of naturally acid soils and to lowering the buffering capacity of base saturated top soils” (Lacatusu, Cimpeanu and Lungu 818) are also the result of particle pollution. PM can also cause discomfort and danger, conducting a reduction of visibility.

The factor that demonstrates the extreme danger and the priority of dealing with an issue of particle pollutions is that its standard was reviewed in 2012 the latest date if compare to revisions of other major pollutants (“The United States Environmental Protection Agency: National Ambient Air Quality Standards” par.3). The general recommendations to reduce particle pollution on the household level include not to burn leaves, use the energy sources thoughtfully, avoid using fireplaces and dust-producing devices. These measures are high, but some more effective means should be provided on the state level. They might be introducing the policy of power plants emission reduction by providing more environmental-friendly technologies. This also refers to encouraging using a vehicle with low rates of dangerous emissions. The practice of short-term air pollution forecasts and the regulation of the industrial and household emissions in the area, based on those forecasts (Berlyand 12), seems to be a good idea. The policy of forest fires prevention also should be improved.

Particle pollution is one of the major issues affecting the environment all over the United States. As is, it occurs due to industrial problems and natural catastrophes and might result in drastic consequences for the population’s health and welfare; the environmental policy should be reviewed to reduce the rates of pollution.

Works Cited

Berlyand, M. E. Prediction and regulation of air pollution. Vol. 14. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. Print.

Lacatusu, Radu, Carmen Cimpeanu, Mihaela Lungu. “Soil pollution by acid rains and heavy metals in Zlatna region, Romania.” Sustaining the Global Farm, Purdue University (2001): 817-820. Print.

Langmann, Bärbel, Bryan Duncan, Christiane Textor, Jörg Trentmann, Guido R. vander Werf. “Vegetation fire emissions and their impact on air pollution and climate.” Atmospheric Environment 43.1 (2009): 107-116. Print.

Nel, André. “Air pollution-related illness: effects of particles.” Science 308.5723 (2005): 804-806. Print.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency: National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 2015. Web.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency: Particulate Matter (PM) 2015. Web.

Of all the elements of everyday reality, air is, probably, taken for granted most often, which is most outrageous, given the fact how incredibly dependent the humankind is on air. That said, the recent survey conducted in the New York City to specify the issues related to air and its current state is of great importance for the residents of New York. Once learning the basic problems that the residents of New York have at present, the latter will be able to handle them in the most efficient way possible.

There have been a number of reasons that led to starting the CAS, yet three of them stand out most. The first and the most crucial one was the concern for the New Yorkers’ health. As the reports say, the state of health of some of the New York residents has grown increasingly worse, mostly due to the air pollution and the diseases that it has triggered. Another reason concerned the negative effect of air pollution on the environment. Finally, air pollution leads to ozone layer destruction, which creates even more problems and, hence, serves as the third reason for the survey.

Speaking of the research methodology, one must mention such methods as checking the disease registries, conducting surveys and gathering statistical data. However, there have been a number of obstacles on the way of the researchers. The first major problem concerned the scope; it was practically impossible to embrace the entire population of the NYC. The second obstacle involved the motivation – it was necessary to come up with something that would encourage people to take part in the research. While the first obstacle was clearly the key study limitation, the second one was solved in a rather simple manner, i.e., by stressing the importance of the study on the environment and, therefore, on people’s health.

According to the research results, air pollution is one of the key reasons of health deterioration. However, by monitoring air pollution, one can detect the key sources of contamination and, therefore, put a stop to the pollution process. As the research shows, oil-burning boilers are the key source of air pollution in the city. Therefore, the research shows that air pollution has a tangible effect on the New Yorkers’ health, yet can still be dealt with. Choosing a different way of oil processing, the residents of New York will be able to make their city a safer place. In addition, building and traffic can also be considered major sources of pollution, which means that building process and the use of Hybrid cars vs. diesel ones should be reconsidered.

That said, it is clear that New York City could use a bit more environmental awareness to improve the state of health of the New York residents. According to the latest reports, the air pollution problem still remains a great dilemma for the state, mainly because of the lack of trees and plants, as well as the growing number of cars and the expanding industries with their deplorable effects on the environment. However, increasing environmental awareness among the New York residents and encouraging them to use the goods and facilities that do not harm the environment and are not among the most dangerous air pollutants, one can expect a considerable improvement.

Environmental sustainability has become one of the most important considerations even as the world moves to develop and avail more goods and services for consumers for better living. The impact of industrial pollution has taken toll on the environment threatening not only the ecosystems existing in different parts of the world but also the very livelihoods of millions of people across the globe.

The main cause of the rapid environmental degradation is attributed to the greed and short term goals sought by industrial players. Consequently, market failures have surfaced requiring the intervention of authorities in a bid to enhance a more long-term approach to development by adopting environmentally sustainable development.

Interventions by authorities often tend to introduce impediments to free trade which is sighted as the most important in solving the developmental problems of the world. Consequently advocates for free trade are very vocal in opposing any interventions put in place to address environmental concerns as they hinder free trade.

Free trade basically entails minimal interventions by governments especially in international trade. Environmental concerns cause hindrances in trade as authorities move in to trade in goods whose production processes are considered as causing pollution.

What explanations are offered by free trade advocates that free trade are the most effective way to deal with environmental problem?

These advocates have different explanations as to why the most effective way of dealing with environmental concerns. The most important is the argument that a free market is known to produce efficient welfare-enhancing resource utilization. However this can only be possible if the determination of prices of goods services as well as resources take to full consideration of social costs. Since this is not often possible in free markets, advocates of free trade argue that when industries realize that the resources they use are getting depleted then they will initiate self imposed regulations to contribute to the restoration of the environment. They argue that industries will at some point feel threatened enough to take voluntary measures towards reversing the effects of they have had on the environment over years of production. They argue that free trade gives firms with competitive advantage in one region to produce goods and services at a lower cost and sell them in markets at lower prices. Consequently any action which would compromise this competitive advantage would trigger changes in behavior of the firms towards more responsibility. On the same front, with the modern day awareness of environmental concerns, firms with environmentally degrading production processes will be shunned by customers. They expect that such action from consumers would initiate a behavioral change adequate for environmental sustainability. Clearly, the applicability of such arguments is question. This is because in many cases, the resultant environmental degradation may not in any way affect the ability of the firms involved to produce. When a chemical processing plant releases toxic waste in rivers killing fish, the link to the inputs required for the factory to run is minimal. In addition, awareness on the environmental issues is high but a lot remains unknown among citizens for adequate boycott of the producer’s goods.

Under what conditions should we expect markets to perform optimally?

Optimal performance of the markets requires that the production be done at the lowest possible costs. It requires that the production processes be efficient enough to ensure that goods and services are produced at the lowest cost. The implication here is that prices are minimized resulting in a large if not entire population being able to access the goods and services. As a result, the living standards among the citizens are improved. Therefore the production is at a high level while prices are low.

What is predominant form of market failure that we encounter in environmental economics and what do economists generally recommend to correct for this market failure?

In this optimal performance lies market failures in the case of goods whose production causes damage to the environment. The most predominant form of market failure encountered in environmental economics is the presence of negative externalities. Externalities are costs or benefits accruing to parties other than those conducting the production process. Environmental economics is faced predominantly with the challenge of handling the negative externalities originating from both production as well as consumption of goods and services (Basic Economics, 2010).

Correcting this market failure requires that the social cost of production be considered in the pricing mechanism. Social cost entails the extra cost borne by the environment around which production and which is not often included in the books of accounts. Any costs incurred by government or any other party other than the firm producing in restoring the environment well fits in this category. Consequently, for firms to produce pollutants in a controlled manner, the cost of its goods and services should be high enough to cater for the injury caused to the environment as well as ensure that the quantities produced are lowered a result of which is sustainability. The attainment of these higher costs is through compulsory inclusion of the social costs of production in determination of the price of the goods. A graphical representation shows that inclusion of the social costs of production shifts the supply curve upwards. The result is a reduction in the quantity of goods produced. This lower level of production is the optimum level of production as it takes to full consideration all the costs. Notably it is a much more sustainable level of production. Social cost element incurred by the firm is used in either reversing the effects caused by the already reduced production activities or compensating the affected parties. This includes activities such as flood prevention, water harvesting and carbon sequestration (Stranlund, and Kathy, 2010).

Generally free trade leads to competitive pressures among producers which in turn push down the standards of the environment. There is less willingness for producers to be concerned about the environment as in most cases, this leads to increased costs as shown above. Having free trade would require a very high level of discipline among regulators across the trading partners in maintaining equal environmental standards. Since this is difficult to achieve, free trade would bring along what economists call “a regulator race to the bottom”. This means that regulators from the individual trading partners would reduce the standards set for environmental degradation in order to become more competitive (Arguedas, 2010).

Since choices concerning the treatment of an environmental asset are inevitable, a criterion for judging the desirability of various options are essential.

Name, define and explain thoroughly, with the help of an appropriate diagram, the normative criterion to judge efficiency of resource allocations at a point in time, when choices in various time period are independent.

The treatment of an environmental asset forms the basis of Environmental economics. An environmental asset is basically a resource facing degradation as a result of industrial activities. Choices to be made here are in mainly in regard to the utilization of the resource. A choice to uncontrollably utilize the resource means that the future availability of the resource is in jeopardy. However, a controlled use of the resource ensures both today’s as well as future generation benefits from the resource. It amounts to utilization of resources for posterity.

Name, define and explain thoroughly, with the help of an appropriate diagram, the normative criterion to judge efficiency of resource allocation when the benefits and costs occur with certainty, but at different points in time.

Resource allocation is definitely a delicate balancing act. When allocation is to be done at a point in time using the normative criterion, the decision is subjective. The allocation has to be made in line with the estimates of pollutants to be produced and the ability of the environment to endure the degradation. Careful assessment of the environmental effect has to be conducted. When the allocation is done at different points in time, then there is more flexibility and there is a possibility for consideration of the past experience informing the future.

Distinguish between efficient or optimal level of pollutants and the cost effective allocation of pollutants, stating, and explaining clearly, the criterion for each. Do the authorities typically choose one approach over the other for policy purpose? Why?

Environmental economists agree that it is not feasible to claim that the world should be totally free of pollution. In fact they well understand that attaining a level of zero pollution means no development. Industries have to produce goods and services using the resources available hence in the process causing depletion of the resources or resulting in some level of degradation of the environment. In the analysis and determination of the levels of pollution acceptable for sustainability, there are three important concepts requiring through understanding. They are efficient level of pollutants, optimal level of pollutants and cost effective allocation of pollutants (Externalities, 2010).

Efficient level of pollutants refers to the level of pollutants produced when the industry is operating at its most efficient level. The most efficient level however only includes the private costs hence excluding the social cost. At this efficient level, there is complete disregard of the environment factor. The optimal level of pollutants on the other hand is produced when the environment factor is introduced to the production equation. At his level of production, the social cost is included in the cost of production. Consequently, the efficient level of production is higher than the optimal level of production. Bearing in mind the fact that more production means more pollution, the efficient level of pollutants is thus naturally higher than the optimal level of pollutants. Environmental economists are of the opinion that the optimal level of pollutants is what will ensure sustainability of production and hence sustainable development.

Cost effective allocation of pollutants can be attained at the point where the marginal cost of reducing pollution equates with the marginal benefit of the conducting the clean-up. Therefore, polluting industries should only pay for as much as is required to restore the environment to the status it was prior to the pollution. This in turn means that the effect on the environment is largely minimized but at the same time, the industries are not unfairly charged.

It is true that authorities typically choose to allow either the efficient level of pollutants or the optimal level of pollutants. When they allow firms to produce as much as they wish, this amounts to allowing for the efficient level of pollutants. On the other hand when they impose tax or other restrictions towards production then there is a deliberate movement towards the optimal level of production.

Explain how the use the following work to control environmental problems and explain fully the advantage and disadvantage for each policy approach:

• Uniform Emission standard,
• Emission Charges,
• Transferable Emission Permits.

There exist different standards imposed on polluters to control the level of pollution. The simplest is the Uniform Emission Standard. This entails setting equal limits on emissions resulting from production of particular products. It is fairly simple and easy to understand as it involves authorities determining the allowable level of pollution from certain industries hence putting up a legal framework to guard against exceeding the said level. This is however in full consideration of the production requirements such that the proposed regulations do not stifle production. The standard has been employed in many parts of the world and even across nations. An example is the US Clean water Act. It determines the limits of water pollution regardless of location of industry. The main advantage of this standard is simplicity in application and enforcement. There is high certainty of the allowable levels of pollution across all parties concerned.

The main disadvantage of this standard is that the implementation level demands perpetual policing to ensure compliance. Authorities have to ensure that the firms adhere to the set standards at all times hence requiring resources to always be deployed for effectiveness. In addition, experts argue that not having a uniform limit across different firms may result in some form of bias. This is mainly because different firms will incur differing costs in complying with the standards. It would only be fair that firms faced with higher compliance costs face less demand while those with less marginal compliance costs have more restrictions. This is a more equitable way of allocation. However in most cases politics get in the way of such proposals as questions of favoritism emerge (Nava, Yosef and Shmuel, 2010).

The second policy approach is Emission charges. Emission charges entail taxes charged on specific pollutants and emissions. The charged is imposed on a per unit bases. An authority may decide to charge for each liter of specific effluent discharged in a natural water source or on carbon emissions produced by industries to the atmosphere. This standard is very specific and seen as a direct punishment for pollution. It is mainly imposed on the pollutants known to have the highest effect on the environment. Application requires monitoring but where costs of monitoring may be high, assessment of averages may be used based on presumptions. Where the polluter may be able to adequately prove that they did not surpass presumed levels, then they may be entitled to rebates. This helps reverse monitoring role to firms themselves. It is a very effective tool to pollution control.

The final is the Transferable Emission Permits approach. This approach requires authorities to identify the desired amounts of pollution which in most cases is lower than that which firms are willing to produce. On determining this pollution level, the government then develops permits for issuance to firms. If the government desires 100 tons of pollutants, then it could develop ten permits, each allowing for ten tones. The ten permits may then be issued to ten firms.

Firms are then free to buy permits from each other. If firm A realizes that it cannot meet the ten tones permitted, it can sell part of the permit to allow firm B to produce more. At the final analysis, the firms may have produced different levels of pollutants but the total cannot exceed the government’s target. The main advantage of this method is that it allows for flexibility among firms while at the same time achieving set targets.

Work Cited

Arguedas, L. EconPapers: A Note on the Complementarily of Uniform Emission. 2009. Web.

Basic Economics. Market Failures and Externalities. 2010. Web.

Externalities, Tutor2u.2010. Web.

J and Kathy D. Endogenous Monitoring and Enforcement of a Transferable Emissions Permit System. 2010.

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Volume 38, Issue 3, Nava Kahana, Yosef Mealem and Shmuel Nitzan. A complete implementation of the efficient allocation of pollution Economics Letters. November 2008. 2010. Stranlund.

It is a common scientific belief that life started in the oceans. The ocean is also the largest habitants and home to a large number of organisms. Over the years, the ocean has been exposed to a lot of pollution. Marine pollution denotes the introduction of harmful materials or chemicals in our oceans which may disrupt the marine ecosystem, cause other harmful effects to marine life or change the chemical properties of the water. This pollution may be from natural processes or as a result of human activities. Marine pollution from natural process mainly involves the deposition of materials in the ocean during volcanic activities.

Marine pollution has however been attributed to human activities. During the beginning of the industrial revolution, most people believed that since the oceans comprised a very large area, they had unlimited ability to disperse and dilute pollutants thus it was impossible for marine pollution to occur (Garrison, 2009). This belief led man to use the ocean as a dump site. Nuclear materials, chemicals, and other man made waste all found their way to the ocean. By the time people started noticing, a lot of pollution had occurred and a problem had started developing.

Marine pollution due to human activities mainly occurs in the form of direct discharge into the ocean, atmospheric pollution and runoff due to rain (Ahnert & Borowski, 2000). Direct discharge occurs when harmful materials are directly introduced (dumped) into the ocean. Oil spills, dumping of radioactive waste and sewage into the ocean are but some of the few ways direct discharge occurs. Oil spills have become one of the modern means of direct pollution.

The 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill and the recent Deep Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in the largest oil spills in U.S. history (Robertson, 2010). Oil spills not only introduced chemicals into the ocean but also formed a layer restricting the flow of oxygen into the ocean thereby killing a lot of marine wildlife. Dumping of sewage into the oceans occurs all over the world slowly changing the PH of the oceans as well as changing the chemical composition of the water.

Surface runoff has also been one of the major routes of marine pollution. Materials collected from land are introduced into rivers during rainy seasons and find their way into our oceans. Fertilizers, plastic debris and waste from paved roads are just but examples introduced into the oceans through surface runoff (Garrison, 2009). Fertilizers introduce chemicals such as nitrogen that result in algae blooms responsible for low oxygen content in the oceans.

Plastic debris is non-biodegradable and can last for a very long time in the ocean. The final means of marine pollution is through atmospheric pollution. Air pollution caused by introduction of chemicals into the atmosphere results in acid rain thereby adding chemicals into the ocean thus changing the chemical composition of the ocean (Ahnert & Borowski, 2000).

Marine pollution has become one of the major concerns in the modern world. Man has realized that the oceans are a precious resource and it is our responsibility to maintain this resource as well as to ensure sustainability. Marine pollution can be solved through the institution of international laws banning deposition of harmful materials into the ocean (Grigg & Kiwala, 1970). Another means of curbing this pollution is by stopping agricultural activities on river banks and restricting deep sea mining and oil extraction.

The steps taken to control air pollution is a positive step in the right direction but more has to be done to stop air pollution such as reducing carbon waste from automobiles, and seeking alternative energy sources and reducing the use of fossil fuels. The oceans are the source of life and they may be the reason life ends on earth. It is our responsibility to ensure that we rectify what we have caused and protect our precious resource.

Reference

Ahnert, A., & Borowski, C. (2000). Environmental risk assessment of anthropogenic activity in the deep sea. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress & Recovery, 7(4), 299. Web.

Garrison, T. (2009). Essentials of Oceanography (5^th ed.) Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning. Web.

Grigg, W. and Kiwala, R. (1970). Some ecological effects of discharged wastes on marine life. California Department of Fish and Game, vol 56: 145-155. Web.

Robertson, C. (2010). Estimates Suggest Spill Is Biggest in U.S. History. The New York Times. Web.