As we have explored and discussed in
class, human behavior has negatively impacted our planet. Is it too late for the Earth to forgive us
for the ways we have treated it? In one paragraph:
●
share
textual evidence from an online article of your careful choice that proves how
human behavior has negatively impacted our planet,
●
discuss
how the damages caused by the human behavior you share can be reversed, or why
you think it's too late, and
● at the end, paste the url of the
website from which you gathered
evidence.
If humans keep putting oil in the ocean the fish will die out. Then when fish die out then the animals that eat fish will die out too. All the Coral reefs that are in the ocean die or get unhealthy then fish wouldn’t have any place to live. The way to stop this is to make sure the oil doesn’t get near coral reefs or fish and if the oil does spill we need to clean it up fast so it doesn’t spread and harm everything in the ocean or a lake/river.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.itopf.com/knowledge-resources/documents-guides/environmental-effects/
We can stop putting oil in the ocean or a lake/river, like we can get our oil checked to see if there won't be a spill. Before we throw away our oil we should check where it goes, instead of just throwing it away. If we just throw it all the fish and other animals could die.
DeleteAbby, I think your solution is a good idea but how would that work? How can oil get into water without going near fish ? Fish are constantly moving. I don't think putting oil in the water can be reversed. The water is already infected and is oil spreading. It's going to be very hard to get oil out of huge bodies of water.
Deletejocelyn123 I agree with you. But even if you do check the oil to see where it goes their is still a chance that it could end up in a lake/river/ocean somehow.
DeleteThere are about 7 billion parasites in the world roaming around every inch of earth. In the next 150 years, this number could even grow up to 296 billion if we don’t do something about it! What are these parasites you ask? Well they go by humans. Humans have negatively affected the world in many ways, and lots of these have led to the overpopulation of humans. Due to technological advances, the infant death rate has decreased from 165 in 1000 to 7 in 1000 in just a hundred years! With all of our new technology the amount of births each year is greatly succeeding the deaths, leading to a population growth of 76 million a year! Overpopulation can cause starvation, disease, depletion of natural resources, desertification, environmental damage and more. But is it too late to stop? Well unfortunately I think it might. The proposed solutions to overpopulation are education and tax benefits right now, but neither of them are likely to work. Many people in poor countries simply can’t have access to education because they live in hard to reach places. The government could propose tax benefits to households with only one or two children, but by the time the government notices it’ll probably be too late. At this point we can only forestall the inevitable. https://www.mphonline.org/overpopulation-public-health/, https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-effects-solutions-of-overpopulation.php
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you about that the government could propose tax benefits to different households and that it might be too late to stop. And in poor countries maybe teachers from anywhere could volunteer to teach the kids that need education.And there can be a foundation where people join together to make houses or schools for the kids.
DeleteI agree with you, I think the government proposing tax benefits should have been done much earlier. Overpopulation has already gotten to be a really big problem and it's going to be hard to stop. Therefore, I don't think this problem can be reversed.
DeleteJaniya, without awareness from the government it's definitely too late to stop. I don't think that a foundation would help this problem. That's almost supporting more people where we want the opposite. The foundation would solve a different problem, but overpopulation is something else entirely.
DeleteMichaela, thanks for agreeing with me! I think that even though it's highly likely it's too late there's still a miniscule chance the problem can be solved. But that ties in directly with communication, which can be hard to deliver.
Overfishing leaves a huge impact on ocean life, but what people don’t realize is how much it can affect human life and economy. As fish that are in high demand population goes down, so will the companies who sell those fish. The increase in fishing efforts is starting to push fish stocks to the point of collapse. There is also not many property rights in the ocean which opens up lots of “open access” for fishermen. The government has made fishing laws in the past, but fishermen were able to find a way around them. I don’t think there is a way to stop this anymore. The government has tried to stop it before, but the fishermen got right around. After that the government kind of gave up. The government doesn’t pay any any attention to overfishing now and I don’t believe that they will until the big effect on humans begins.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/overfishing
I think that overfishing will lead to an impact on ocean life. I think that you did discuss about overfishing but you mostly talked about how it mostly affected the human life not a lot about overfishing and how that affected on ocean life but over all I think you did a great job on it.
DeleteThe damaged humans are doing to ocean life is huge. Soon, the damage we caused will be aimed toward us. I don't think the damage of overfishing could be reversed. It would take a termoundes effort to get the fish population back to where it was. One solution to this problem could be that humans can try to start eating less seafood. This way, there wouldn't be a high demand for seafood and fish.
Deletezacklillie- I agree that there will be a big effect of ocean life, but as humans we are more worried about how it will affect us. Also the effect it has on the ocean will lead to a bigger effect on us.
Delete30birdscary- I also believe that the damage done to the ocean will come back on us. The effect on the ocean could end up being twice as bad on us. I don't agree with your solution though, because it is not really possible to just have people stop eating seafood unless a law is made against it which won't be happening.
Humans over the past century have greatly increased the amount of greenhouse gases. This is a result of many factors ranging from the boom in automobiles and somewhat new industrial farming tactics. But there are many factors to prove that this is really happening. First off the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has raised from 280 parts per million in the atmosphere to 400 parts per million in the past few decades. Many think this does not have prevalent danger but it most certainly does. One of these damming effects is the rise of sea levels due to rising temperatures and melting global ice caps. This will result in unprecedented levels of change to the earth and to the creature that inhabit it. This might seem grim but luckily I believe that we are not to far gone. But to real reverse that effects of greenhouse gases we need to start now with these things. It can be reversed by switching to renewable energy, lowering our carbon footprint, reduce general waste of food and water. That’s how we are hurting our planet, and how we are going to return it to its pre industrial glory.
ReplyDeleteSource: https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
Matt, this was well put together, and well thought out. Your research was well put and direct, making the problem clear. But what wasn't clear was your reasoning on how we change reverse our carbon footprint. I know of solutions like electric powered automobiles and switching to solar could reduce a major greenhouse gas output.
DeleteMatt, I do agree with you. I think this problem can be reversed. I do think greenhouse gases have a huge impact on the plant if we keep on emitting more carbon into the air, but it's not to late to solve this problem. We can be more cautious of our carbon footprint. Doing this, we can slowly erase our carbon footprint.
DeleteThank you both luke and 30birdscary for your added solutions. Luke i think your proposed solution of changing to solar energy is very good and will work. I also think electric automobiles will work but they do have there down sides compared to gas powered cars. 30birdscary, I do think that your solution will work but it is far to vague. This is because you dont state how you are going to lower our carbon footprint. Thank you both for your response and I believe that both are very valid.
DeleteThroughout several years technology has been evolving immensely. This technology has been very beneficial to us humans, but very harmful to the environment. One way technology has harmed the environment is our transportation polluting the air. People used to use horses and camels to get around. Though it took longer to get from place to place, it was much less harmful to the environment. Now humans use cars, planes and boats to transport themselves. These systems are bad because they pollute the air. I don’t believe this problem could be reversed. Reason being is technology is developing rapidly. If humans are as careless in the future as they are now with technology, there will be more bad environmental impacts. When people are done with their technology (old, used, doesn’t work) they tend to just throw it away without any concerns on how it impacts our environment. When technology is disposed into the environment, toxins get released into the environment. If this continues, the environment’s conditions will only get worse.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mindcontroversy.com/effects-of-technology-in-environment/
DeleteI would agree with you. I don't think anyone would go back without cars, planes and boats. People spend a lot of money on these transportation vehicles, but it's much easier and quicker to get around. I feel that some or most of the people in our society do not care if the technology their using is affecting our planet.
DeleteI disagree with you because since technology is now developed more no one will go back. People also don't think about it this way either. Most people just think that it means nothing to our environment and they think nothing is going to happen in the long run.
DeleteThepetfam101, I also thought that this problem could not be reversed, so you would actually agree with me about this problem not being able to be reversed.
DeleteEve, thanks for agreeing with me. You make a good point about people using a lot of technology to get around.
We heavily rely on plastic, and our use of it is practically inevitable. However, marine plastic pollution is negatively impacting our earth. If you think this doesn’t really concern humans at the moment, think again. These fish that are affected by plastic may end up at markets and restaurants. After a fishing voyage at the Pacific Gyre, 35% of the 672 fish caught had ingested plastic, and they absorb many pollutants into their bodies. These gyres continue to increase as the number of marine debris increases. In fact, the total number of plastic debris has increased by 100 times since the 1990s, and the number of plastic pieces on the ocean’s surface now outnumbers the amount of plankton. While it’s practically impossible to get rid of all the plastic in the oceans, there are ways we can prevent it from increasingly worsening. One example of this is to better educate the public and make everyone aware of the permanent damage we are causing to the environment. When taught about this issue, more people will be willing to help. https://cleanwater.org/problem-marine-plastic-pollution
ReplyDeleteI see what you are trying to say. I doubt by educating everyone, it still would not matter because there will be a majority of people who are still doing this.
DeleteGood job Ellen! I agree and I think that there are ways that we can lessen the issue of marine plastic pollution. I agree with your idea of spreading the news about the issue, and I also think that if people become more aware they will be more willing to help. Another solution may be to develop more eco-friendly technology devices that will help clean up the oceans and rid them of plastic.
DeleteGreat job! As you said, the problem of plastic pollution in our oceans is irreversible. Since plastics can take thousands of years to break down, plastics tend to linger on and on in the water. These plastics can become more and more concentrated in higher trophic levels through biomagnification, which will affect the organism at the top of the food chain: humans. The plastic already in the Pacific Gyre and the other four main gyres around the world is hard to remove, as gyres take up a large amount of area in the oceans and we have been polluting for many years already. Another possible solution to reverting the worsening disruption of aquatic ecosystems is to further subsidize the switch to non-plastic alternatives to plastics. This way, people will have a reason to not use plastic and use something else. This includes solutions like placing a tax on plastic bags. New York City already has implemented a solution such as this. Overall, good work!
DeleteWe view industrial farming as this great thing—we get our food from it, it makes a lot of money for its owners, and much more. But it has a dark side, and many costs, including some that are non-monetary. Lots of pesticides and herbicides are often used, resulting in some getting into water and going downstream. Then people relying on that downstream water to drink will also drink the chemicals. The farms lose biodiversity, and also encourage junk food production because of the crops that they produce. But can we fix the problem? Or is it too late? I think we still have a chance to fix it. Scientists have developed alternatives to these methods of industrial farming, and most of the problems are in-the-moment problems. What that means is that if we remove the cause, then the effect will be gone too. For example, if we stop getting herbicides into rivers, people downstream won’t have to drink the herbicides in question anymore. So in conclusion, it’s not too late to fix the major problem that we don’t know exists.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our-failing-food-system/industrial-agriculture/hidden-costs-of-industrial.html#
sorry for the accidental extra space.
DeleteGreat work, Noah! I believe that the current damage to your problem is currently irreversible. The pesticides in organisms already will remain in the organisms. Biomagnification will continue to exacerbate the problems already caused by the use of pesticides. Biodiversity loss is hard to reverse as well, since many varieties within a species and species diversity have all been impacted as a result of human industrial agriculture. The junk food problem you briefly described is difficult to rectify, as changing the attitude of society toward a product is generally very difficult. A different solution I propose is to develop many different similar varieties of insect-resistant crops that would deter insects that may cause problems for the crop and plant all of these homogeneously in a crop field. Overall, interesting problem!
DeleteGreat work, Noah! I don't know if I agree with you with you think we can fix the problem because the pesticides in organisms already will remain in the organisms. But I think the junk food problem can be fix because when people buy junk food is changing the attitude of society toward a product is generally very difficult. But if people do not buy junk food they can change the attitude of the society with buying healthy food instead. But great work Noah
DeleteMichael, you make some good points here. The issue you bring up about junk food could still be rectified by making less of it, which will cause a positive feedback loop helping to remedy problems. Your solution, however, is one that I don't think that I can agree with because I believe we should introduce the pests natural predators as opposed to genetically modifying plants. But that was a good point you made at the beginning about biomagnification.
DeleteWater pollution negatively impacts us and our environment. Without realizing we make or produce things that can cause problems to our environment like, using fertilizers, using plastics, domestic sewage ( waste from industries ). The most common two we do most is domestic sewage and using fertilizers. Industries create almost everything from shoes to sugar or even oil and industries get rid of the waste it produces. These wastes get dumped right into water which causes water pollution along with a lot of other things. Contaminated water is bad for us and marine animals in many ways. 10% of our population depends on food and vegetables that are grown in contaminated water, and fish will basically eat anything they think is food which includes garbage/waste meaning we are hurting fish and ourselves in the process. This waste ends up in things we eat. When we eat this food who knows what types of diseases we are picking up from it. Once waste is in open water or oceans there's nothing we could really do about it, but if we could do something before the waste contacts and spreads through water maybe that would keep our environment safe. We should think more about how our actions will affect our environment, then maybe we could keep problems out of the way.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.alliedacademies.org/articles/water-pollution-and-human-health-7925.html
I agree with you that people should think more about their actions and how they affect the environment but I don't really think that will do much so I would say put cops patrolling some places to minimize it.I don't think we can reverse it if it gets out to the ocean like you said but can reverse some of it if we act now.
DeleteGreat work! The problems in using fertilizers and sewage is probably hard to clean up. Eutrophication has already occurred, which is killing off any aerobic organisms due to the use of oxygen by the algae promoted by the fertilizers and sewage. The death of organisms obviously cannot be reversed, as those organisms are already dead. Water contaminated by sewage and fertilizers could also enter the water supply. This problem is easier to fix than the effects of eutrophication. Waste water can simply be diverted away from key aquifers and lakes where water is collected. Another solution that is possible is that people should use waste we produce for energy through technologies such as biomass reactors. Overall, good job!
DeleteJames, I agree with you. What you said about the cops patrolling places that's a good idea. I'm not sure if that solution would work because there's so many places where people could litter and there aren't enough cops to be there when it happens, but good thinking. I think another solution could be creating laws or putting up signs to keep people from being careless and thoughtless.
DeleteHumans are destroying the planet slowly through deforestation. Deforestation is the removing of trees to make way for human use of the land. This is one of the largest global land issues in the world. Of the 49 million square km of land used for croplands, most of the land is deforested land. There is 1.3 million square km of land deforested per decade, and sometimes the land isn't even used and cannot recover. Deforestation negatively affects the Earth because carbon dioxide that is not being used is being released and that alters the global climate negatively. The damage caused by deforestation can be reversed if we just stopped cutting down trees and planted them instead. However, I personally don’t think that humans will be able to work together to actually reverse these changes. Humans naturally don't like to follow orders and instead will want to take charge with their own ideas that others will not agree on.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.britannica.com/science/deforestation
I think that deforestation is a big deal. It really needs to be taken more seriously, but like you said people don't like to listen to orders. I agree with the fact that people don't like to listen others. People can also take a stand though to use other things besides trees for what they need. They don't have to rely on trees for what they need.
DeleteI think that deforestation is a big deal. People need to take deforestation seriously. I totally agree with you about deforestation if people stop cutting down trees and plant them instead. I agree with you on how some people might not be able to work together but then other people might be able to work together. I think there is another solution humans can stop cutting trees down and cut down tress for paper they should plant trees instead it will save trees.
DeleteI do think that there are people in the world that want to help stop deforestation. The problem is the industries. Big companies that specifically use wood in their products will not want to stop cutting trees down because that will destroy their company. This will also lead to the loss of many peoples jobs.
DeleteAny creature, even the tiniest and the rarely seen species of this planet came from different forms and branches of life. A grasshopper can somehow be related to a snake and a cat might be a close relative of a shark. This means that if the creature that might have related these animals together was absent from the chain, these species might have not been related at all. Life in the world today has been less diverse than the past years in history. It seems that the only living things that are overpopulating the Earth are humans. One cause of this is abusing the freedom of hunting or fishing. There are many civilians who hunt or fish for a living. However, a lot of these people use very dangerous methods to harm these animals in order to obtain more money at a faster rate. Many fishermen use chemicals and grenades that will need no time to wait for more fish to come. These behaviors just show that humans are impatient and greedy to the remainder of the living things on Earth. Based on the behavior of people today, I do not think that there can be any solutions as suppose to bringing back the dead, but there can be ways to maintain and preserve the living things of today and let these species live up to many more generations.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/biodiversity/
Human behavior can be fixed because they need to stop harming animals.They can find other ways to make money.I agree with you Ayesha that there isn't really a solution. Except for people to stop,but if that is how they make money they most likely will not.
DeleteIreland, I agree with you that human behavior towards stopping to overhunt or overfishing will be a bit more complicated to do than to be said. I think that if we want to solve this solution, it will take the whole nation's economy to progress than normal so that there are more options for hunters and fishermen to earn money than being the cause of endangering species.
DeleteSuki, since the behavior of people will not change that easily towards the environment, we can start fishing or hunting for the male species than the female species. This way, there are still more species or organisms of these kinds are produced while others are caught. This way, there is equilibrium in the cycle of fishing/hunting and their uses for human life.
DeleteOne of the many ways in which we are crushing the environment is deforestation. Trees are being chopped down rapidly by farmers who want to clear space for crops and cattle, loggers who cut the wood needed for paper and wooden products, wildfires, overgrazing, and the clearing of space for human settlement. An article I read claimed that in 100 years, our rainforests could be destroyed if we continue to handle trees in the way that we currently do. Effects of deforestation are climate change, pollution, and the destruction of many plants and animals who live in and depend on the forests. The article I read stated that 80% of earth’s land animals live in forests, meaning that many creatures are affected by the demolition of our forests. However, there are ways to combat this problem which involve better management of our forests and stricter regulation of cutting down trees, such as eliminating clear-cutting and replacing the trees chopped down with new trees. With careful monitoring of our forests, we can restore the homes of many species and can improve our environment, leading to a better world.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/deforestation/
I think that the damage we are causing by deforestation can be reversed by limiting the amount of trees that we chop down. We do not need any more pollution but that is all we are getting from clearing up space for our own benefit and chopping down trees. If we limit how much of life we destroy these problem can be fixed.
DeleteI think it is a good solution. I agree with the solution also. Another solution would be to put fences around forests that have lots of trees that are still alive in it. You would then have to get permission from the people that guard the door to get into the forest.
DeleteGreat solution Mariana! We both agree that the problem of deforestation can be alleviated through better management of our forests, because trees are a renewable resource that will continue to grow if we maintain them well. I agree that this problem can be reduced by making laws to limit the amount of trees that can be chopped down, and I think that replacing cut trees with new trees will also help reduce pollution.
DeleteAir pollution is described as the release of pollutants into air that are detrimental to human and planet health as a whole. It’s mostly caused by energy use and production, which contribute to climate change, and in turn climate change worsens the air pollution. There are different types of air pollution, such as smog and soot, greenhouse gases, pollen and mold, and hazardous air pollutants. Most are caused by the combustion of fossil fuels and their emissions, and we end up with too much carbon dioxide and methane, other harmful chemicals that cause irritation as well as blood and liver issues, and tiny particles in the air that could lead to heart attacks and a premature death. The atmosphere has already been greatly affected by all these things, and I think it would be impossible to reverse all the changes. If action is taken on a worldwide scale, we can reduce the some of the harmful effects of climate change. The environment has already been irreversibly changed, and the best we can do is to try not to damage it any further. We should all do our part in cutting down on the fossil fuels being burned, and nature will be all the better for it.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nrdc.org/stories/air-pollution-everything-you-need-know
I think the damage caused by human behaviour in this poem can't be reversed because we've used too much of our fossil fuels but true, he can help prevent it from getting worse.
DeleteWe can't reverse air pollution but we can try to stop it. We can't just suck up the air pollution. But if we stop it from happening again. I do think that it is a problem we need to address.
DeleteYou have a god solution. But I don't agree with it because if you want people to stop messing with the environment you need to make sure that there is protection for every important environmental object that need to be protected and not used for other things. So you would then just make sure that everything is put in a place where it is guarded, fenced, and in a place that nobody would be able to get into when its not being protected
DeleteRyan, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by protecting important environmental objects. I also think that most important environmental objects that I can think of are things that have become necessary in our lives, and making sure there is no access to them seems absurd. Instead I believe there should be more awareness of how we use these natural resources, and we should be more careful about wasting them.
DeletePollution is greatly impacting our lives here on Earth. Pollution is coming from all of our disposals such as garbage and the metric tons of pollution pumped into the atmosphere. Around 2.4 billion people don't have access to clean water sources. The pollution is greatly affecting air, water, and soil; necessities of life. However if we damage these enough, they will take millions of years to replenish. In the US, air is being highly polluted by the 147 million metric tons produced each year. We've had severe cases in the past to wear our ozone layer was affected. In LA, 1950, there was so much bad smog that they thought we were under attack. People were being left injured as their eyes burned and left an odor of bleach. I think it is possible to potentially lower our rate of pollution. If we are able to lower our uses of factories and machines or even we recycle or throw out our garbage, we can make a huge impact. With this being possible it will be hard for a few reasons. We've gotten so used to working in factories and not caring about how we throw out garbage. If we are to lower these rates of pollution, it will take a long time but will have great impact. We just need to learn to be more careful with what we are doing.
ReplyDeletehttps://interestingengineering.com/10-ways-humans-impact-the-environment
I believe that this problem can be reversed. If enough people make an effort to recycle and know more about factories and how dangerous they are to our environment. Yes, this problem will be very hard to resolve but I think if we all do our bit then we can make it happen.
DeleteI think it's a great solution and could help
Sam, great job on this post! I really like your statistics and facts! I believe this problem that was caused by humans can be reversed by the solutions you suggested for example you said "lower our uses of factories and machines" and "recycle or throw out our garbage, we can make a huge impact." My suggestion for a solution to add to that would be to create ways to make recycling and throwing out less harmful and easier to the environment.
DeleteRachel, I agree with your suggested solution of making it less harmful to throw out garbage and recycling. The reason that might be challenging is because recycling is already not harmful. It would be hard to make it even less harmful. We just need to be more aware with how we dispose our items.
DeleteIn 1985, the scientific world was shocked by a groundbreaking discovery: the ozone was being depleted! Scientists found out that one of the biggest contributors to this was a chemical called chlorofluorocarbon (CFC). This chemical was found in many things at the time, as it was used as a refrigerant and was also used in aerosol spray cans. Scientists found out that these CFCs reacted with the ozone in our atmosphere. Just one atom of chlorine in the CFCs can react with up to a hundred thousand ozone molecules. The ozone layer helps filter out harmful UV B radiation from the sun. If it were depleted, there could be disastrous consequences. UV B radiation can cause cataracts and skin cancer in humans, and may even disrupt phytoplankton reproductive cycles, which may in turn affect the animals that eat phytoplankton. “Ozone Holes”, which are areas with very low concentrations of ozone in the atmosphere, are already present in areas like Antarctica, where low temperatures catalyze the conversion of CFCs to chlorine. However, this can be reversed. Scientists have found that the ozone is slowly repairing itself every since the banning of CFCs. Now we can only hope for the best for us and the ozone. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/ozone-depletion/
ReplyDeleteGeorge, I really like your choice for this piece. Not many talk about how our ozone layer thinning out! I think this problem can be reversed by banning of CFCs like you said and making it known to the public since not many people know about how important the ozone layer for us. If more people know they can stop using CFCs, so the ozone layer can repair itself.
DeleteGreat work, George! The problem of CFCs in the atmosphere causing the breakdown of ozone into diatomic oxygen is repairable over time. Given that we don't release any more CFCs into the atmosphere that break down ozone, ozone will disperse and continue to be produced by a reaction with photons from the sun and oxygen in the atmosphere. Although our current solutions - such as the ban of the use of chlorofluorocarbons - are effective in mitigating further damage, repairing the ozone layer may be accomplished through the release of ozone by aerospace vehicles into the atmosphere. Although this would be clearly very costly, the benefits of boosting the ozone layer will be well worth it since it could help prevent cancers and prevent the disruption of other biological systems. Good job overall, George!
DeleteThank you all! Of course, spreading awareness is very vital to any cause, but I think we can do better than that. Something like releasing ozone into the atmosphere with aerospace vehicles would be a very direct solution, but like Michael said, it would be very expensive. I think that we could distribute ozone in a more cost-effective way, such as releasing ozone from structures on the ground, and allowing it to reenter the atmosphere. Overall, I think that releasing ozone back into the environment would be the quickest and most direct way of restoring the ozone layer. Thank you all for your thought-provoking responses!
DeleteWater pollution, is caused by harmful chemicals getting into water. The fish in the polluted water can die out, which affects the food chain. Or we can eat these fish with chemicals in their bodies, or even drink the polluted water. The chemicals can cause acid rain, cause and spread disease, and more. Now who could possibly be the main cause to the harmful chemicals in the water, that ultimately negatively affect us? Humans of course. Polluted water causes about 1.4 million deaths in Africa and India alone. Most of the pollutants are products of human activity such as; crude oil, fertilizers, chlorinated solvents, antibiotics, petroleum, pesticides, PCBs, and plastic. Research has shown that 83 % of water samples are polluted with plastic. But luckily as time goes on, people are starting to find ways to deal with the harmful pollutants in our water. We can prevent further damage, by making sure people are aware of the damage they are causing, and help to properly contain the sources. Less harmful pesticides, contain spills, and design factories in a manner to prevent chemicals from reaching water. While we can't completely undo the damage done to our waters, with technology such as plastic patchers, and floating blooms, we can try to remove some pollutants from our water, a little at a time.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.erosionpollution.com/water-pollution-solutions.html
https://www.environmentalpollutioncenters.org/water/
I think that this can be reversed. I think this because if we are filling pesticides, PCB's, antibiotics and plastic, those are all reversible. All you have to do is take all of those and you could filter the water, then just not put those substances in the water. I really like this post, nice job.
DeleteI think that these actions can slowly be reversed. If more and more people realize the issue, more people will be aware of this issue. Also, the technology is becoming better and better. Using plastic patchers and floating blooms will help remove pollutants from the water. I agree with the solutions you posed. Everyone usually thinks of technology as being a bad thing, but what if we used technology in a good way? We could use technology to remove pollutants and prevent pesticides.
DeleteI agree, I thought that these actions could be slowly reversed, especially though use of technology. There are many amazing new technologies that are becoming cheaper, and more available everyday. I think that there will be many innovations to help take the plastic out of the water. But also people understanding, and being aware of how big this problem is,and how it affects them, can help slow down the progression of this problem as well.
DeleteThroughout the past decade things have been happening that we haven't noticed. Especially in the sky. The Ozone layer, which is a belt of natural gas that protects the earth and everything inside the earth's atmosphere from the sun’s harmful UV rays, is depleting and it’s our fault. One of the largest contributions to the depletion is Aerosol like hair sprays and Smoke from factories. One other large contribution is the chemicals bromine and chlorine. One Atom of that shreds down 100 thousand Ozone molecules. One way we can fix that is through lowering the emissions we produce such as Co2 from cars or other mechanical machinery that produces Co2.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/ozone-depleting-substances-and-climate-change/protecting-the-ozone-layer-while
Nice work Kurt!, I like your solution a lot and I think it will work very but I just think it would be hard to do because a lot of people drive cars and operate machinery and people do that for a living. One suggestion that I think will work is trying out different products that work like aerosol in hairspray but won't hurt the ozone layer. I just think that the cars stop because of how many people drive them and some of them do it for a living. Nice job Kurt!.
DeleteGood job Kurt! I don't think that we can necessarily reverse this issue, but I definitely think there are some ways that we can make this issue slowly disappear.I agree with your idea of lowering the emissions we produce. I also think that if we spread awareness about this issue, people will become more cautious.
DeleteGeorge, Thanks for the feedback! I think that your solution will definitely help by spreading information about the harmful effects and although we can't totally reverse it we can definitely lower the effects of depleting it.
DeleteHuman behavior has negatively impacted our planet. I don’t think it’s too late for the Earth to forgive us for our actions. For years humans have been releasing greenhouse gases into the air. These gases let in light and trap heat. They have caused global warming, an issue where Earth heats up and ice melts, and wildlife starts to die. If we didn’t have effects from these gases, Earth would be about 60 fahrenheit cooler! Humans have increased carbon dioxide levels by ⅓. I believe if humans were to reduce the use of greenhouse gases, global warming would slow down. If we burn less fossil fuels, a cause of greenhouse gases, that would help. Also, saving electricity would reduce the gases. If we turn off lights in our house when not in use, our environment would improve.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/global-warming-overview/
I'm with you 100% Hannah. I feel that many people don't inform themselves on important issues such as this one. I feel like this could be reversed easily. Just by turning your lights off when you don't need them on or burning less fuel we could really make a change.
DeleteI don't think we can completely turn this problem around, but I believe that we could definitely fix some of our actions so this issue doesn't roll into a bigger one. I agree with your idea of saving electricity. It would bring down the amount of unnecessary gas in this environment, which would help kill off the problem of global warming.
DeleteHannah, I agree with you on this. I don't think this can be fully reserved but it can help by using your solutions. A solution I suggest is that we should reduce our use of car transportation. This causes a release of fuel and if the car is old it may have a problem so it will affect the emission of it causing to have a awful smell. We should increase our travel by public transportation to save on the emissions from personal transportation.
DeleteRachel, I totally agree with your solution. Reducing electricity and reducing car transportation will definitely improve the release of greenhouse gases. With the two solutions, the environment will improve.
DeleteDeforestation in the world is a much bigger problem that most of us realize. 31% of land in the world is covered in forests but that will not last for long. There are many factors that play into deforestation and there are many causes to this problem. But the reality is that we are loosing 18.7 million acres a year. That is roughly 27 acres a minute. This is due to both human carelessness and natural factors. Logging is one of the biggest problems to the forests, this is caused by human carelessness. Logging is a business that is based on cutting down trees to use for timber. Most of the logging is illegal and happens worldwide. The majority of illegal logging happens in poor countries that are naive to outsiders logging in their forests. In order to fix this problem there needs to be stronger laws prohibiting illegal logging with higher penalties. Humans are taking advantage of the natural resources not realizing that they will not last forever. Without forests, carbon dioxide will become a big problem that will affect the climate. There will be an increase of greenhouse gases and a disruption in the water cycle. There will be soil erosion and many other effects. Some natural causes to deforestation is fires. Fires carry extremely quick in forests and are often hard to put out. This ends up with devastation and effects the environment around them. This problem is worldwide and will not stop until humans realize what they are doing to the world. There are many companies and programs trying to save the forests. This can involve protected areas like the Pine Bush and offsetting carbon emissions. Deforestation is a huge problem and in my opinion it will not stop until more people are aware and take charge of what is happening to our environment. Deforestation will have huge consequences in the future.
ReplyDeleteYes and no because humans can be more careful but you also can't help what mother nature does. I feel like there should be a law to how much space a building takes up or how much wood should be cut down. Also the poorer countries should get help from other countries so all of their land isn't gone because people need timber.
DeleteAmazing work! The effects of deforestation can be hard to repair. Many problems are caused by deforestation, such as biodiversity loss, cycle disruption, and limited resources, which you mainly described. Biodiversity loss is essentially irreversible since the organisms that help boost it are already dead. The disruption of the water cycle is hard to repair as those trees will have to be replanted and mature to their full size. The resources lost by logging can be replenished eventually when the new trees grow up. Another possible solution is to phase out the use of wood and wood-related products and use alternatives for energy, such as solar, wind, natural gas, and others. Although we won't be able to completely cut off our use of wood, we could drastically limit it to preserve what we have left. Overall, great work!
DeleteThanks for your comment Abby Groat! I agree with your comment and how a large part of deforestation is out of our control. I like your idea about the law and how the amount of wood cut should be limited. This solution many not work because their are many people cutting down trees illegally, but it would stop the people who are doing it legally.
DeleteI agree with you Michael Wong and how all of the negative effects come out of deforestation. Though resources can be restored they may not be able to save the ecosystem and the biodiversity in time to reverse the effects of deforestation.
Human behavior impacts our planet everyday. Oil spills are a very impactful topic that seriously affects our environment. But is it too late for us to be forgiven for our mistakes? I believe it's not too late. The 2014 Galveston oil spill was very harsh, leaving 50 birds oiled and 168,000 gallons of oil colliding with a ship near Texas city. But, immediately after, groups of people started working and cleaning up placing nearly 70,000 feet of oil absorbing boom. Another good thing is that it only takes a few weeks of bird’s waterproofing to be naturally replenished, so bird’s will not be permanently damaged. Oil spills are very dangerous to birds and their surroundings, but damage can be fixed and clean up is possible. We should start taking more aware and being more careful, which will help our environment in the long run.
ReplyDeletehttps://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140324-galveston-bay-birds-oil-spill-animals-science/
Monica I agree with you 100% I think that oil spills are bad for the planet and oils spills can bring up to tons of thousands of it and destroy ecosystems. To stop this we should consider trying a better method.
DeleteI agree; oil spills are big issues in today's society. I think that we could turn this issue around by spreading awareness. If more people know about this issue, then more people will attempt to make an effort to stop.
DeleteI agree with both of your solutions. Jordon, it is a good idea to start considering better methods. Chelsea, your idea of creating and spreading more awareness will definitely work and goes along with Jordon's idea of trying a new method. I think that this will help prevent oil spills in the future.
Deletehttp://www.culturechange.org/cms/content/view/376/68/
ReplyDeleteOverpopulation impacts our world in many negative ways. Attempting to accommodate all of these people that the earth does not have the capacity for, creates big problems. For example, humans are overusing natural resources to build cities, houses etc. These resources are homes to animals, which play a vital part in our ecosystem. Additionally increased carbon emissions has a negative effect on human health. Now more than ever the percentage of people with asthma is higher due to pollution. One way to reduce this is by educating younger people on the dangers of overpopulation. Younger generations are the ones the earth could use to reverse the change. Another way is to allow everyone globally have access to devices that prevent pregnancy. This will reduce the amount of unplanned pregnancy and reduce the stress on our resources.
I don't think that it will be easy to stop this because of the amount of people you are trying to stop. If you think about it most families have 3-4 kids maybe more maybe less but around there, and then if you add the amount of families in the world it is a huge number.
DeleteI mean I don't want to sound like a grinch but maybe lower the amount of kids a family can have in the future. I agree with you, you have a good solution I think if people follow it it would work.
Yeah, I also think the damage can be reversed if we try hard enough, and our current population is 7.6+ billion and that's a bunch of stress on our resources. So maybe if we teach young people about dangers of overpopulation, this world could last longer.
DeleteYes, I do agree with all of you. I think you Ty, have an interesting idea on limiting the amount of children we have. But do we want the government to have that much control? Maybe in the future if the situation is so horrendous, we may need to result to those.
DeleteHumans have negatively impacted our planet in various ways. One of the ways humans have negatively impacted our planet is through plastic. Plastic pollution effects so many animals on our planet. Plastic is versatile, inexpensive and flexible which are reasons why so many humans like using plastic. In 2013, 299 million tons of plastic was produced according to the organization, Coastal Care. But after humans have used the plastic for their needs, where does it all go? Plastic ends up in many beaches but also in many animals. The plastic ending up in beaches are often eaten by birds and other animals causing them to die. While the animals die the plastic remains intact within their body. Not only do birds die from plastic but according to Plastic Debris in the World’s Oceans, 267 animal species have died from plastic indigestion which could affect our environment even more. I believe it may be too late to reverse this pollution unless very major changes occur. I think it is too late because there is so much plastic which has already been created and plastic is still being made everyday. Many people would not want to give up plastic because it is used all the time in their companies or businesses.
ReplyDeletehttp://plastic-pollution.org/
I do think that this irritating subject can be reversed. It will take tons of careful planning what we must do is rethink plastic itself. Yes hundreds of people use it but maybe make it biodegradable because 90% of the people in the world are to lazy to walk that extra foot to the trash can.
DeleteGreat work! The effects of plastic pollution are irreversible. Plastic tends to take an extremely long time to biodegrade, which allows the plastic to remain in the water for long periods of time. This plastic can travel up the food chain through biomagnification, which will affect humans eventually as we eat aquatic organisms (fish!). I believe, though, that we can reverse the effects of plastic pollution. Water filtering efforts, plastic collection, and preventing waste from reaching the coast will aid in healing the Earth. Although this may be expensive, it is well worth it for protecting the biodiversity in our oceans, preserving the health of humans, and ensuring a prosperous future for our planet. Overall, good job!
DeleteTyler, I see where you are coming from but I still believe it is too late to reverse all the plastic pollution. We may be able to help decrease the future amounts of plastic we use but I don't think it can be reversed. I think your solution of using biodegradable plastic will help decrease the amount of plastic used in the future but I don't think it can reverse the effects that the plastic pollution has already caused.
DeleteFor most of our history, humanity has been obsessed with technology and the power it brings, so it is no surprise that the revolutionary technique of nuclear energy has been the apple of world superpowers' eyes for the past 70 years. However, in the haste to perfect this source of power, many accidents have occurred, and the environment has suffered for it. One of the most infamous of these events is the Chernobyl accident of 1986. On April 26, 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear plant in the Soviet city of Pripyat caught fire for ten days due to cut corners and negligence, releasing a nuclear cloud of iodine-131 and cesium-137 over 200,000 square kilometers over Europe. The radiation seeped into the environment, spreading irradiation and disease through the food chain, eventually reaching humans. As a result, thousands of cases of cancer (especially thyroid cancer and leukemia), cardiovascular diseases, and cataracts have popped up throughout the area. Over five million people remain in irradiated areas, and the affects of the disaster still plague them. However, the areas surrounding Pripyat have finally begun to show large improvement after thirty years, but sill remain to have the affects for decades to come, such as the mutant animals that have resided in the affected forests for generations. Pripyat itself remains uninhabitable, and is expected to stay that way for the next 180 years. While I do believe another fallout like this could be avoided, but it is only possible if today's nuclear countries can swallow their pride and come together to make sure nuclear power is only used responsibly. However, with the current state of world affairs, this scenario is unlikely.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.greenfacts.org/en/chernobyl/index.htm#2
Aiden, I think you applied great detail to your comment, and I think that this is irreversible, because I've done my own studying of Chernobyl and "The Elephant's Foot", the huge mass of radiating metal that'll kill you in a hour, and It's said that Chernobyl will become partially habitable in the next 200+ years. I don't think it's irreversible because radiation will continue to seep out from Nuclear Reactor #4 and from the Elephant's Foot and continue to poison the environment. I do think that if countries with any sort of nuclear power only uses it for powering things, the world could have some mends of the everlasting growth of pain it still has. Like for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they are still uninhabitable after 73 years. I do think your proposed solution could definitely work out in the end, if they would just accept the fact that anything they do could comeback with severe consequences. Some countries, however, have done the right thing, with the recent event in North Korea, where they stopped their nuclear missile program.
DeleteYour solution is good. I agree with your solution. Another solution would be to just stop making these nuclear plants that keep spreading through the world that are affecting every single human/person that inhales the nuclear poisonous liquid/gas/air.
DeleteTo both of you, I thank you for reading my post and taking the time to comment on it. Both of you agree that only way to stop this is by the international community agreeing to stopping or limiting nuclear power, but you both seem to believe that it can likely be done. While some countries, such as North Korea, have agreed to denuclearize, it is unlikely many will follow. With the ever increasing tensions between the world superpowers of the USA, Russia, and China as well as the conflicts in the Middle East, we probably won't see an end to careless use of nuclear power for a long time.
DeleteToxic chemicals from pesticides are found all over the earth, even in remote places such as southern Argentina and Antarctica. Man’s careless use of pesticides threatens to harm the ecosystem all across the earth. In the past, careless use of DDT killed large populations of birds including the American Bald Eagle. It became an endangered species and was almost extinct on the east coast of the USA. Restrictions of the use of DDT and programs to reestablish populations of Bald Eagles in the east resulted in the eagles’ healthy return. In this case, it wasn’t too late for man to correct the mistakes related to DDT use. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/546680
ReplyDeleteYeah, People shouldn't be using those things at all. Especially when it's a part of the animal food chain. But on the plus side, it is banned in many countries.
DeleteI think this can be reversed because, It is an easy fix people just need to use a certain amount of DDT that won't affect affect the birds or other animals but most importantly the bald eagle. I really do think your solution is really, really good and it is perfect because it isn't a big fix, it is just a little tweak that won't make people mad. This can checked every once in a while by the people who check farms and this will save a lot of animals. Nice work Kevin
ReplyDeleteNice idea George! I appreciate your opinion. Unfortunately your solution won't work. Any amount of DDT is harmful to the environment. The world really just needs to come up with an organic alternative to DDT that will still kill or repel insects but won't harm the ecosystem.
DeleteOne of the ways humans are negatively impact the world is overfishing. Overfishing has a chain effect. What I mean by chain effect, is that if fish die, then the animals that eat fish die, then the animal that eat animals that eat fish die, and so on. So, If we keep overfishing the way we do, the world wont get better, we will just keep thinking of ways to help the world\, and never do. Unfortunately, I think that we cannot reverse this, the fish are disappearing! I think that If we stop fishing overall, then we will get somewhere. But the greedy humans that we are, that not going to happen. The world is just going to get worse, and worse, and worse, and it wont stop as long as humans exist.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.seafoodwatch.org/ocean-issues/wild-seafood/overfishing