Blog #12: We must suffer short-term economic pain to make our seas sustainable

If we continue on depleting the oceans, then the human population will not be able to survive. A report from the Independent Panel on the State of our Oceans says that the declining vitality of the oceans is becoming our biggest problem. Even though we are getting better at catching fish, it is becoming harder to find the fish because we consume so much fish. We have also disturbed the sea bed and destroyed habitats that help the productivity of the oceans. We have also poured chemicals and pesticides into the oceans. The ocean temperature has risen because of us, which has also disturbed the productivity to replenish itself. In order to survive, we have to use the oceans sustainably and nurse it back to health by setting aside marine sanctuaries where no human activity is allowed. At least one quarter of the ocean needs to be protected to ensure our survival.

Lots of people live near the oceans and use them for recreation, getting food, finding necessary goods, etc. Setting aside one quarter of the oceans for marine sanctuaries would displace lots of people. These people would have to pick up their lives and start over somewhere else. Many people might not be able to do this because they do not have the resources to do so. For example, if we were to set aside the area were Somalia, all those people would not be able to move because they do not have the resources to do so. Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world and displacing all those people would also disrupt their government. They don’t have the resources to support a lot of their people much less support the movement of a lot of people to make room for an aquatic sanctuary. Since a lot of people in Somalia are suffering from poverty, they wouldn’t be able to relocate their lives.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/15/seas-sustainable

Blog #11: A rising population is not the problem – growing inequality is

Finding solutions for climate change is getting harder as the gap between the rich and poor gets larger. Inequality is the problem for finding solutions, not the increasing population. The richest billion people in world count for about half of the world’s emissions while the poorest half of the world count for about 7% of the world’s emissions. Rich people consume more than poor people because they can afford it. This can result in over consumption of goods and resources. Solving problems such as climate change is easier in societies that are more equal because inequality results in status competitions which results in over consumption. People try to buy more things to show that they are of a higher status. Less developed countries have a higher birth rate than more developed countries, but because the less developed countries cannot afford to consume as much as the more developed countries they don’t emit as much emissions.

If the gap between the rich and the poor decreases then there will not be as much competition to show who has a higher status. People will not consume as much with a smaller gap which will result in less emissions. We have to use energy to produce these things that people consume and because people consume so much we have to use more and more energy. This all contributes to the emissions which contribute to climate change. One reason less developed countries do not contribute as many emissions is because they do not have the industry that develops all the products people in more developed countries consume. Even thought they have the highest fertility rates, they still cannot afford these products. Most families in these countries cannot afford education and some cannot afford to support their families. This is why a lot of people in less developed countries are suffering from poverty.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/01/rising-population-growing-inequality

Blog #10: UN: failure to reduce environmental risks will set back human development

Many countries are on the right road towards human development. Countries such as Bangladesh and India have been working towards clean drinking water. Those efforts could be worthless if people do not reduce the environmental risks. Both Bangladesh and India are prone to rising sea levels, flooding, and tsunamis. The human development index (HDI) combines measures of health, education, and income to measure how much human development a country is having. Norway, Australia, and the Netherlands are at the top of the list with the highest HDI while The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Niger, and Burundi have the lowest HDI rating. The HDI for the least developed countries, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Niger, and Burundi, has risen by 84% over the past 40 years. But by 2050 those trends could come to a halt if the environmental risks are not dealt with. The poorest countries could be at most risk for climate change which would cause many other problems, like poverty, malnutrition, and ecological damage. If we switch to renewable energy then that cause be a solution for dealing with environmental risks and could advance sustainability and human development.

The population is already 7 billion. The Earth may not be able to hold much more if we keep living the way we do by not addressing environmental risks. With ocean levels rising, areas of the world experiencing worse drought conditions, flooding, etc. countries are have to deal with these problems in way that is not good for human development. Lots of people think that human development is progress so if they want to see progress then they should realize how many people are in poverty, experiencing malnutrition, and economic disaster because of the environmental risks that we have created. Using nonrenewable resources is not the way to change the environment because they are limited resources and will run out eventually. We have already started to use some renewable resources, but if we do not switch over soon then human development will come to a halt. That will cause many people to go into poverty because they do not know how to live without energy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/02/environment-human-un

Blog #9: Why current population growth is costing us the Earth

Estimates say that by 2050 world population will reach 9 billion. Every hour 10,000 people are being added to the population. Since 1800 the population has been affecting climate change, food, water, energy, pollution, and our impact on the planet. There already is not enough food, water, and energy to go around. If the population does reach 9 billion then there will be many more problems that we have to deal with. We need energy to grow food and right now we are using cheap oil. Oil has already reached its peak which is causing the prices to increase. This means that food prices will also increase. As the population grows the resources to sustain life are shrinking.

The more people there are the harder it will be to deal with the problems associated with the growing population. There is already not enough food for everyone which is causing food riots. Natural resources such as oil, coal, and natural gas are not only bad for the environment but we rely on them so much to fit our energy needs. These resources are limited and if we keep using them at the current rate then they are going to run out much more quickly than we thought. With the growing population we are going to need more resources to fit our energy needs. Because of the lack of energy to grow food more people are starving and being forced into poverty. As the population grows more people will be starving and in poverty. The rich can afford the higher prices on food and other necessities. So it does not bother them that prices are increasing, but to the poor it does matter. They do not have the money or the resources to afford food, contraceptives, and birth control to control their birth rates. The population is growing mostly in the less developed countries because of their lack of resources. Population Matters is an organization the campaigns to stabilize the global population. They try to increase the resources for family planning in the less developed countries.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/23/why-population-growth-costs-the-earth-roger

Blog #8: GM crops promote superweeds, food insecurity and pesticides, say NGOs

The growth of “superweeds” has increased with the increased use of pesticides in many countries. The cause of this is the use of genetic engineered crops and seeds. They were supposed to increase to crop yield, but instead they have “vastly increased the use of chemicals and the growth of ‘superweeds,’” said a report by 20 food and conservation groups in India, south-east Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This “miracle crop” was first used in the United States and has now spread to 29 other countries. They manufacturers of GMOs promised that these crops would help with food hunger, climate change, and soil erosion. They have not lived up to their promises. In fact, the report said that world hunger has never been so high. The use of synthetic chemicals to kill the pests has increased despite the claim that GMOs would decrease the use of synthetic chemicals. For example, in China, insect resistant Bt cotton has increased the use of pesticides even though Bt cotton was supposed to decrease the use of pesticides. Bt, known as Basillus thuringiensis, is a term used for a bacteria in the soil that is used to combat insects and pests.

The use of genetically engineered crops has increases food hunger around the world because of the increased use of pesticides. The “superweeds” have increases because they have become immune to the pesticides and are killing the crops. With the weeds killing the crops, there is less food for people which is making them go hungry. Monsanto, Syngenta, and Dupont are the major GM companies and control about 70% of the global seed sales. These companies are making small farmers lose their farms because the companies are raising the prices of the seeds, have patents on them, and have control of what the farmers are growing. Monsanto has increases the levels of indebtedness of farmers because they are forcing the farmers to buy their more expensive seeds. Around 250,000 farmers in India have committed suicide in the past 15 years. It is thought that these companies are behind it because of the prices of their seeds. With the increased food hunger by these crops, many people are moving into poverty because they cannot afford to buy seeds to grow food.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/19/gm-crops-insecurity-superweeds-pesticides

Blog #7: Food crises compromising fight against world hunger, warns UN report

The food crisis has undermined efforts to help people who suffer from world food hunger. With the prices of food increasing and the amount of food being produced decreasing, world food hunger is increasing despite efforts to help decrease the amount of people suffering. A UN report on world hunger, written by the World Food Program, The UN Food and Agricultural Organization, and the International Fund for Organizational Development, said that the food crisis is making “poor farmers, consumers, and countries more vulnerable to poverty and food insecurity.” The report also said that investments in agriculture need respect all people and those being affected by land grabs, and they need to respect local communities and promote food security and sustainability while contributing to mitigation and adaptation to climate change. In 2009 the food crisis caused riots in over 30 countries worldwide.

Organizations like the World Food Program, Food for the Hungry, soup kitchens, etc. are trying to fight world food hunger by giving out food to those in need, but their efforts are being undermined by the food crisis. As the population grows the less food there will be to go around. Natural disasters have destroyed food harvests and forcing farmers to lose their jobs because they couldn’t make enough money for another harvest. Large corporations are also forcing small farmers to lose their farms because the corporations are selling cheaper products and food to big box marts and grocery stores that would have gotten their products and food from the small farmers. These small farmers are being forced into poverty because they cannot afford to support themselves and their families after being closed down by the large corporations. If these large corporations respect the small farmers and their communities by letting them keep their farms and sell goods and food then the poverty rate would decrease.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2011/oct/10/food-crises-fight-world-hunger

Blog #6: Poverty-stricken families join a lengthening queue for food handouts

FareShare, an organization based out of the UK, first had a motive to help the environment by liberating waste. They would find other uses for food other than just throwing it away. Now, with such a large demand for food, they send the food to halfway houses, homeless shelters, and soup kitchens to be cooked for people who are suffering from food poverty. Food poverty has risen in the UK because food prices are going up and more people can’t afford to pay for food anymore as their benefits decrease. They are afraid it is going to get even worse. They supplied around 48 tons of food three years ago. Now they supply around 98 tons of food because of the rising demand for food. There are around thirteen million people in living in poverty in the UK. A lot of those people are malnourished, some are young people who can’t find jobs, and there are some who do have jobs but can’t afford to feed their families.

What started out as an environmental organization, trying to decrease the amount of food waste, has turned into an organization helping to feed those in need. As the food and supermarket prices in the UK rise more people are having to rely on halfway houses and soup kitchens to feed their families. Food prices are rising because in 2010 severe weather and natural disasters destroyed food supplies in some of the world’s largest food exporting countries, and as the population grows we will have to find ways to support food demands. Estimates say that the global population will reach 9 billion by the middle of the century. The food crisis has become global with food riots in Haiti, the Philippines, and Egypt because they can’t afford the basic food items. The UN’s Food and Agricultural Organization said that the food crisis has put seventy-five million people into poverty and cannot feed their families. The UK says that food prices will continue to rise.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/01/families-queue-for-food-handouts

Blog #5: Brazilian judge orders construction of Amazon dam to stop

Work on a dam in the Brazilian Amazon has stopped because there it might damage fish stocks on the Xingu River. This dam would be the third largest in the world when it is built, if it is built. The dam is supposed fill energy needs to Brazil and would bring benefits to Altamira and ten other towns. Political leaders have said that the dam will bring development to the region. There is an environmental activist movement called the anti-dam Xingu Para Sempre movement focused on preventing this dam from being built. They say that the dam will bring chaos to the towns around the site. It will force the people looking for jobs who arrived by boat into poverty. A document from the Altamira town hall says that the dam has brought insecurity and social chaos, and has also increased poverty. The town hall is asking for work on the dam to stop.

Dams can be both good and bad, but in this case it is a bad thing. Dams take up a lot of land and usually force people out of their homes and work. A dam that was supposed to bring development, energy, and many benefits to the area has increased poverty and brought social chaos to the region as well as harm the environment. If the dam continues to be built then it may force more people into poverty and creating an even bigger social problem. People in poverty don’t have the means to find food, shelter, and support their families. The men may be forced out of their jobs and the women in these families may find work in a factory with very low wages which may not be enough for the family. The men may not find work because the factories want women because they don’t complain, are very docile, and follow the rules. In this case the men are just a burden to the family and may leave the family which would leave the mother having to work and do everything at home.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/29/brazilian-judge-monte-bello-dam

Blog #4: Oxfam warns of spiralling land grab in developing countries

Oxfam, a nongovernmental organization based in the United Kingdom helping others to overcome poverty, says that there are conflicts over food, human abuse, and human rights abuse in developing countries because of the governments taking people’s land, known as land grabbing. The governments are taking their land because of pressure from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to “put farmland on the international market to increase economic development and improve the balance of payments.” People who own the lands are being told false promises or are evicted off the land. Many of these people and families are already poor and forcing them to give up their land is making them homeless. Most of the land grabs are because of governments wanting to grow sugar cane and oil palm for biofuels. The World Bank claims that these people are consulted about giving up their land. They are saying that people should invest in the land to bring themselves out of poverty, but the rush for land is making their lives worse than they already were.

Land grabbing is taking place in many countries in Africa and some in Latin America. The drought has caused many harvests to go bad and people to go without food. This problem has lead to food riots and the land grabbing to try to produce food and biofuels. Land grabbing is actually making people worse off than they already were. Oxfam recognizes this as a social issue and is trying to help the people affected by it. People and families rely on the lands to grow food to make a living and the governments are forcing them off the land making them to become homeless and impoverished. Many of these people have families and they can’t support them anymore. Investor’s short term investments in the land may make them turn towards less sustainable ways of growing food and in the long run there won’t be enough food for everyone if they keep on this path.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/sep/22/oxfam-land-grab-developing-countries

Blog #3: Kenya puts its faith in fish farming

The soil in Kenya is very poor and not good for farming because of a severe drought. The Kenyan government is pushing small farmers to turn to fish farming to earn money. The drought has also stalled the efforts of earning money through fish farming. The ponds are drying up and killing the fish. Farmers have to harvest the fish earlier and earlier because otherwise the harvest would be lost. The fish are smaller than desired because of having to harvest them earlier. The desired size, which makes the most money, is 250 grams, but they are less than 100 grams. The drought is causing more than 12 million people to turn to emergency food. Farmers do not want to rely on fish farming because it does not have much profit for them right now. All the fish in Lake Victoria are all gone because they have been harvested. People are having ponds dug in their back yards in hopes of having successful harvests to make enough money to support themselves and their families.

This is a social problem because thousands of Kenyans are not making enough money to support their families and themselves causing them to go into poverty. If they had successful harvests then they could send their kids to school, buy food, and buy materials needed for more harvests. The government and a non-governmental organization recognize this as a social problem and is trying to help solve the problem. Farm-Africa, a non-governmental organization based in the UK, was founded in 1985 to help farmers, pastoralists, and forest communities in eastern Africa. They are funding a 2 year project to help small-scale fish farmers. They are going to supply fish farmers with the supplies for farming, training, and link them to markets. Solving the problem would help boost the Kenyan economy and bring people out of poverty.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2011/sep/01/kenya-small-scale-fish-farming

Blog #2: Japan disaster: Fukushima residents return to visit their homes

Residents who lived within a 12-mile radius of the Fukushima nuclear plant are permitted a brief visit to their homes to gather personal belongings and to possibly see their homes for the last time. Takashige Kowata, a resident within the 12-mile radius, saw a broken window on his home and realized it had been broken into. "I can't believe that someone is capable of stealing from the victims of a disaster,” said Kowata. According to the government the area around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster will be uninhabitable for years and maybe even decades. There has been an estimated level 508.1 milliseiverts, a way of measuring the radiation, which is more than 500 times the yearly amount allowed. This level is capable of increasing cancer risks, according to a government report. Decontamination could take a really long time and may not even work. There are about 200 residents still missing in the area. Search teams are still looking for them. According to Kowata, this disaster was man-made because the government and Tokyo Electric Power said that this type of disaster could not happen and tried to cover up trouble.

This disaster has destroyed people homes and their lives. They most likely will never be able to go back to the area where they lived. This disaster has become a social problem because of how many lives it has destroyed. People may get compensation from the company for what they have lost, but it may take a while for the compensation to get to the people. Naoto Kan, former prime minister of Japan, said he had feared Japan would collapse because of the disaster. He also said that this disaster could be worse than Chernobyl. If that happens then all the people of Japan would lose what they have known their whole lives.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/08/japan-nuclear-disaster-fukushima-homes

US support for Pakistan dam could help stem flow of bad blood

The United States is considering helping Pakistan, financially, to build a $12 billion dam as an attempt to repair the relationship with Pakistan. The relationship between the two countries went downhill when the United States raided Pakistan which killed Osama Bin Laden and humiliated Pakistan’s military. The United States would be in a long-term relationship with Pakistan and would show Pakistan that United States is willing to cooperate with them. The dam would produce green energy and could reduce flooding because it would hold so much water. Because the dam would be located on the Indus River in the Kashmir region, India may object to the United States helping Pakistan financially. Some U.S. Congress officials may also object because of Bin Laden being found in Pakistan.

The United States support of the dam could help mend their relationship with Pakistan causing the people all over the world to be affected by it. Maybe the terrorism would stop between the two countries as another attempt help mend their relationship. Since countries all over the world are interrelated, the mending of the relationship between the United States and Pakistan would demonstrate to other countries that they can improve their relationships too. The fact that the dam would produce green, cheap energy not only would help reduce the toxic chemicals in the air, which cause people to have serious health problems, it would also provide energy to the poorer people of Pakistan because it is cheap. Since the dam would hold a lot of water and could potentially reduce flooding, people’s lives would be better because floods can do serious damage to their homes and may force them to become homeless.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/29/us-pakistan-dam-funding