Alberta Tar Sands Project

The Alberta Tar Sands Project is said to be the largest oil reserve in the world. In this reserve the oil is not liquid but is extracted from sand, which takes a lot of water to do. Also, to gain access to the sand the land has be destroyed, already 5000 hectares have been destroyed. (http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/)  By the end of the extraction the water used is very polluted and it cannot be used. They estimate in ten years, "they will have cleared an area the size of Florida." (http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/)

Birds that come in contact with the polluted water die, which to me is a sign that development like this must stop. This development is damaging the land and the animals that live on it, and at the same time is causing potentially irreversible climate change. I believe it should be stopped and instead put the funding that goes towards the oil extract towards emerging renewable resource technology. Alberta is experiencing acid rain and some say they can even smell oil in the air, I see no reason that this development should be continued.

Jason Clay

Jason Clay is a vice president for the World Wildlife Foundation working with large corporations in hope they can produce more with less. He grew up on a farm that survived off less then a dollar a day and he decided he`d achieve an education to help small farmers and people in poverty. Clay says that the most important thing is to change the way we think. Right now, with our 6 billion population we are living as if we have 1.3 planets. Clay mentions that the average American consumes 43% more then the average African, and the average cat has a larger environmental foot print then the average African. Scientist expect that by 2050 we will have a population of 9 billion who consumes twice as much as we do today, and with our limited resources change must occur. Not only is population growth important, but our lifestyle is as well; how much we consume and waste. `Sustainability must become a precompetitive issues, we need groups to work together that never have,` for example coke and Pepsi.(http://www.ted.com/talks/jason_clay_how_big_brands_can_save_biodiversity.html )

Clay says there are 15 products in great demand; palm oil, cotton, biofuels, sugarcane, pulp and paper, saw wood, dairy, beef
soy, fish oil and meat, farmed salmon, farmed shrimp, tuna, tropical shrimp and white fish. And of these 15 products, he took the top 100 producers, and is trying to work with all the companies to produce sustainable products. Since the top 100 producers are supplying sustainable products it is important for consumers to purchase these products to not only support sustainability but to not support those who choose to produce unsustainable products.

I found clay to be a very productive and powerful speaker -  although he lacked emotion and a sense of humor he spoke seriously and productively. He was to the point with a very motivational plan in progress.

Who is to blame for Environmental Degradation? What are the Consequences? How can we Stop it?

According to Lynn White Jr, Christianity is to blame for environmental degradation. He says this because in the bible man is not made a part of nature, but he is made in God's image. (21, Easton) The view in the bible is very anthropocentric, a human centered view on life, where God insists "man exploit nature for his proper ends." (21, Easton) An anthropocentric view on the world, is not only selfish but is the path to irreversible environmental degradation and a future of discomfort. A biocentric point of view is one I believe to be most beneficial to humans and the environment, where all life is important. In a biocentric point of view it recognizes the relationship between man and nature, and how what affects nature affects man. In biocentrism, because man and nature are directly correlated, man would be so careful to protect and respect nature because he knows in turn, it will affect him in the same way.

Garrett Hardin speaks of  the tragedy of the commons as a dilemma which every person sees our world as limitless which it indeed has a limit. Hardin continues to say that there is no technical solution to this tragedy, where a technical solution is defined as, "one that requires a change only in the techniques of the natural sciences, demanding little or nothing in the way of change in humans values or ideas of morality." Hardin continues to say that pollution is "fouling our own nest," and in order to live sustainable we must change our values and morals and the `freedom to breed is intolerable.` (25, Easton)

Robert Young and Orrin Pilkey discuss how the federal government should stop directing funds to beach preservation and restoration and instead the US should move away from developing the ocean front. Many engineering efforts to protect coastal beaches and infrastructure are counter productive. Young and Pilkey believe that it is unsafe for people to live on the ocean front, therefore the government should not support this. They believe that if it is so important to the community, the community should be responsible to come up with the money.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that over the past 50 years, humans have managed to change ecosystems more than any other time. This is justified by the growing demands for resources like food and water. (49, Easton) With such high demands we are leading towards permanent damage that will be irreversible. Here are some facts that the assessment provided that are quite shocking...

• 20% of the worlds coral reef were lost, 20% were degraded
• H20 withdraws from rivers and lakes doubled since 1960
• Reactive nitrogen has increased by 2 and phosphorus by 3
• C02 increased by 32% from the combustion of fossil fuels (50, Easton)

Amory Lovins discusses the advantages of the use of renewable resources and more efficient methods of energy use. Lovins recommends fluorescent lamps, which use 75-80% less electricity then incandescent bulbs and last 10 to 13 times longer.  He also recommends window coatings that reflect heat, instead of running your furnace at a higher temperature, and also any other product like a fridge or TV that is labeled energy efficient. (66, Easton) Lovins believes that if one chooses this lifestyle where they make more energy efficient decisions will `hold out the promise of a fairer richer and safer world.` (69, Easton)

Christopher Flavin and Seth Dunn discuss how a new energy system is necessary for the 21st century. Energy is something that needs to be valued and used sparingly. Before Homo sapiens relied on only renewable energy, but in the 17th century a transition took place where humans became dependent upon coal and burning fossil fuels. To continue like this means we will continue to damage our environment and we will eventually run out of nonrenewable resources. Saying this, it becomes obvious a change is necessary. Flavin and Dunn believe that with the help of science break through, and improvement in wind and light as an energy source, we can strive towards a more environmentally friendly life. But, not only do we need to change our energy sources, we need to change our lifestyles and the high standards that come with it.
Greenhouse gases are mostly from carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture. Greenhouse gases have caused the years 1995-2006 to be the 12 warmest years to be recorded. Water vapor has increased since the 1980's because warmer air can hold more vapor. The oceans have increased temperatures which causes the sea level to rise. Mountain glaciers and snow cover have declined which also causes the sea level to rise.  (129, Easton) Greenhouse gases have also cause a rise in arctic temperatures, changes in precipitation, ocean salinity, wind patterns and extreme weather occurrences. (130, Easton) If we continue to emit greenhouse gases at this rate or higher the changes we will see will be much more drastic then previously experienced. Our earth will continue to warm and sea levels will rise even if greenhouse gases are kept at a constant rate because they will remain in the atmosphere.

Riding Mountain Challenge

   My dad and I cycling through Riding Mountain

Just this past month my dad and I participated in the Riding Mountain National Park bike tour challenge. This is a charitable bike ride for MS, that goes through the park located just outside of Dauphin. I was quite excited as I heard the ride is scenic and I would be seeing lots of wildlife along the way. Well, we departed Dauphin that morning, and set sail for Clear lake.

85 km later...

We arrived in Clear lake, without seeing one moose, bear or even a deer! Now, don't get me wrong, the ride was gorgeous. The entire road was surrounded by trees and little bodies of crystal clear water, but where were the animals? According to Riding Mountain National Parks Management Plan, they hope to maintain intact habitats and natural processes while raising awareness and understanding amongst young Canadians. (11, Riding Mountain Management Plan)  How can this all be done while a long, wide road goes all the way through the park enabling cars and semis to ride right through it? My hypothesis is that all this traffic must scare the animals away and disrupting them from there natural habitat which the park strives to preserve. How can we preserve the land and their habitat if it is on public display? In order to maintain these "intact habitats" they must remain undisturbed. But how will Canadians learn and understand about intact habitats and natural processes if they are never subjected to them? This poses the question; is it possible for parks to meet its dual mandate of access and protection? I would say yes, but with limitations. I don't believe national parks can remain a tourist attraction but they should be viewed as an opportunity for research and observation.  I believe the amount of visitors should be limited and they should travel in groups, opposed to having a small number of people coming in many different ways of transportation. As you can see in the picture of my dad and I, there is a wide road that goes through the entire park, and because the park is so hilly, asphalt must be relayed every year. With all this construction and maintenance to the road it seems very unbelievable that this land is being preserved and a comfortable environment for wildlife. If less vehicles travelled through the park, road maintenance would not be as necessary and frequent.


 Wapsuk, another national park in Canada, is one of the largest polar bear protecting areas in the world. Will visitors to Wapsuk cause a similar situation that I observed in Riding Mountain? I do believe if we follow the same idea as to limited visitors and smart transportation to the park, the polar bears and other wildlife will remain safe and comfortable. Since Wapsuk is located in the North of Manitoba, right along Hudson Bay, I believe the amount of tourists compared to Riding Mountain would be significantly less, therefore it is much easier for Wapsuk to protect and enable access to the park. Regardless of location, both parks remain a very important piece to Canadians past and future, and they must be treated with respect and care.


Wapusk                                                                Riding Mountain

Works Cited
Canada, Government . "Parks Canada - Riding Mountain National Park - Riding Mountain National Park of Canada." Parcs Canada | Parks Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/mb/riding/index.aspx.

Canada, Government . "Parks Canada - Wapusk National Park." Parcs Canada | Parks Canada. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/mb/wapusk/index.aspx.

Clesias. "The Most Destructive Project on Earth: Alberta's Tar Sands | Use Celsias.com - reduce global °Celsius." Use Celsias.com - reduce global °Celsius. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2010. http://www.celsias.com/article/the-most-destructive-project-on-earth-albertas-tar/.

Easton, Thomas A. Classic Edition Sources: Environmental Studies (Classic Edition Sources). 3 ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Mcgraw-hill/dushkin, 2008. Print.

An Inspiring Story

John Francis, an American Environmentalist, has refrained from using motorized vehicles and has walked and sailed the world for the past 22 years. After seeing two oil tankers collide and spill gallons of oil beneath the golden gates, Francis decided he must give up driving and riding in motorized vehicles, he also decided to give up speaking and he listened for 17 years. During these 17 years Francis went to school and earned a Ph.d. Through his 22 years of travelling and 17 years of not speaking Francis learned that communication is vital to saving our environment. He also realized he must come out of his long silence to share his message; "we have to leave behind the security of what we have become and go to the place of who we are becoming. " (John Francis) Francis makes the parallel that we are the environment and how we treat each other is how we should treat the environment. Change must be made in order to achieve a sustainable environment. He stresses that we must come out of our comfort zones of who we have become and respect our environment, and respect ourselves.

While thinking about Francis's idea, I began to think about whether the media does really do a good job at covering current issues. Well, considering I had never heard of Francis before this video, I would say no. But, I also don't watch the news or read as often as I should. But, as for media coverage I do see, I believe although it is relevant, they focus too much on small details and don't look at the issue as a whole. The media lacks logic in there way of presenting current issues. Instead of introducing the issues and ways to fix it, they scare audiences and make them feel helpless. When the oil spill occurred in the gulf, fingers were pointed as to who was to blame and not much action was taken.

There is a pro-environment group where people believe that the all environmental issues are vital and changes must begin now. And, opposing pro-environment are the people who believe the current environmental issues are exaggerated and it is not that important to our future as the media makes it out to be. Well, I believe that the media exaggerates everything, for example, in my criminology class we were learning about crime statistics and in one particular case murder rates dropped 5%, meanwhile the murder media coverage increased by 20%. Although, I believe that humans should be pro-environment regardless of the media as Francis says we are the environment. Whether global warming is actually happening, and whether our ozone layer is seriously and quickly deteriorating, we should still practice environmentally friendly ways and try to come away from the destructive and wasteful people we have become. We should aim towards a goal which will allow us and the future generations a lifestyle which is not only sustainable but provides quality to all.

This sustainable life is difficult to achieve because we have become so comfortable in our ways, but that does not make it impossible. Humans have evolved  from nomads to highly sophisticated and technologically advanced individuals who generation after generation achieve and accomplish what once was thought impossible. To me this is inspiration and belief that a sustainable future is more then possible. With the growing disconnect from the environment, our goal only seems to be further away. People have lost touch with the environment, and over beautiful natural habitats we have built offices and homes and buildings among buildings. With this growing disconnect we move further away from our goal, and this to me creates a danger. Where has our love for our earth gone? We have become too focused on materialistic things to stop and think that we must protect our environment to protect ourselves. If our way of life continues this way, we will certainly not only look past our Earth's beauty but damage our environment in ways such as deforestation and habitat destruction, and we will lose soil fertility. As our population increase we will over hunt, emit more greenhouse gases, and be short energy. (215, Easton)  So I say get outside and help our earth, and in turn it will help us!

Dear 2010 - From 2500

Today I had a very rude awakening to how inconsiderate and foolish our species was only some centuries ago. To vent a little I am directing a letter to the people of 2010. Here I go...

Dear 2010,

Not too long ago, I was allowed to drive into a McDonalds drive through in a gas fueled car and order a hamburger with extra cheese, extra pickles and you know, the works. Just today, I stood inside a McDonalds for the first time, of course I could not get the delicious burger I have read about. Since the Sustainable Act in the year 2482 took place, all restaurants were shut down, supermarkets as they were once known were drastically changed and our economy took a big leap forward, although some might say in reverse. I certainly do.

As we now have farms breeding animals in controlled environments, my family and I are limited to the meat and poultry we eat throughout the month. We are rationed with not only meat, but fruits and vegetables too. We live in a small home, and we can only use so much heat in the winter and next to no air conditioning in the summer. As for transportation, you don't see any cars around. We do have electric powered cars, but only police, paramedics and government employed are allowed to operate one. There is public transportation, but most people use there bikes or walk.

 My older sister, who is now 25 and married would like to have a child, but since 2484, one must be granted permission from the government to have a child. She's on an insanely long wait list. How is this fair? Our government, following the sustainable act, is attempting to level off the population at a number that is sustainable economically, socially and environmentally.

Now, let's rewind a few years, well a little more, and look at how you lucky guys got to live, and how, even though you had great warning you chose my inconvenient  fate. Philosopher, George Santayana once said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." (213, Easton)  From this idea, Jared Diamond, a world renown professor wrote a novel on how a society can choose to fail or succeed. Diamond discussed that similar to Mayan civilizations and others societies such as the Anasazis and Cahokia which failed due to lack of resourse, over population and other forms of ecocide, the people after the millennium will experience a similar collapse unless, the decisions made 'today' are designed to benefit 'tomorrow'. (213-214, Easton)

Now, 2010, you might say that the Aztecs and other civilizations failed due to lack of technology, but infact technology is a big factor which contributed to the sustainable act. The Ehrlich Professors of your time, said that due to the population explosion, or in other words, the increase of consumption, the damage on the environment increased. This is because different technologies trying to support this increase were on high demand, causing more pollution and other waste. (184, Easton) In a way the Ehrlichs presumed the control of reproduction in the future, when the two discussed a 'optimum population size..." (185, Easton) It also brings me to shame how, even though encouraged to do so, the public health officials of your time, ignored the request to look into possible health problems of environmental contaminants, such as DES. (162, Easton)

Humans and animals share the world, so it seems to me, only obvious that what affects animals and their environment must affect humans and our environment. (162, Easton). Theo Colborn, a professor in Florida, discussed the affect of a chemical DES, "a synthetic hormone drug," or estrogen, which was used to increase growth in cattle. DES caused abnormalities such as cancer and tumors mainly in women and children. (163, Easton) This situation proved obvious that humans were in "jeopardy" and were "affected" by chemicals released into the environment. (163, Easton) As Colborn says, "the tragedy is that we ignored the warning." (164, Easton.)

 As these numerous warnings against environmental damage and over population were made and continuously ignored, my generation was destined to a life with little freedom and little quality.
Cheers 2010.

Arielle Lofchick -7645343

Work's Cited
Easton, Thomas A. Classic Edition Sources: Environmental Studies (Classic Edition Sources). 3 ed. Dubuque, Iowa: Mcgraw-hill/dushkin, 2008. Print.


TED. "John Francis walks the Earth | Video on TED.com." TED: Ideas worth spreading. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2010. <http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/john_francis_walks_the_earth.html>.