Sustainability
Sustainability entails the analysis of ecosystem functioning, diversity, and role in the balance of life. It is the consideration of how humanity can exploit the natural world for sustenance without affecting its ability to meet the needs of future generations (Enger & Smith, 2016). Sustainability is grounded in three pillars, namely, economic development, social development, and environmental protection.
Sustainable economic development is achieved when natural resources are exploited in a way that does not affect the quality of life in other places (Enger & Smith, 2016). Social development covers the protection of people’s health/wellbeing from the effects of pollution related to economic activities. In contrast, environmental protection involves the use of renewable energy sources to protect ecosystems and for a sustainable future. Therefore, sustainability initiatives such as Fair Trade are important in achieving economic and social development without putting much strain on the planet’s resources or ecosystems.
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem services encompass the benefits acquired from natural resources that are essential for the wellbeing/health and survival of humanity (Enger & Smith, 2016). Biomes such as lakes and high seas provide people with diverse services, including ecological, socio-cultural, and economic benefits. Some of the ecosystem services include food, water, raw materials, medicinal resources, climate regulation, and recreation, among others (Gomez-Baggethun & Barton, 2013).
Ecosystem service valuations use monetary/economic, social/cultural, and ecological values. The placement of economic value on ecosystem services uses the Total Economic Value (TEV) framework that divides the services into “use or non-use value” groups (Gomez-Baggethun & Barton, 2013). The use-values are grouped into three groups. The first category, direct use, consists of provisional services, e.g., fishing, and cultural services, e.g., tourism (Gomez-Baggethun & Barton, 2013). The second group is the indirect use, which covers regulation through climate services. The third group is the optional values that cover future applications of biomes. In contrast, non-use values are the altruistic or existence values derived from open access to biodiversity.
Biomes and Threats
Savanna
The Savanna biomes occur in the tropical areas of three continents – Africa, S. America, and Australia. They are characterized by large grasslands with sparsely distributed trees (Enger & Smith, 2016). The impact of human activities on the Savannas relates to agricultural practice that causes desertification. Intensive farming that depends on rainfall has affected the Savanna biodiversity. Further, in parts of Africa, the biome faces pressure from nomadic herding and ecotourism that cause overgrazing. A potential solution for this problem would entail controlled agricultural activities to preserve soil nutrients and biodiversity.
Mediterranean Shrublands
This biome is dominated by shrubs and occurs near oceans. According to Enger and Smith (2016), the major negative impact humans have had on this biome relates to the agricultural activities in these areas. The high population pressure in cities adjacent to this biome increases the demand for food. Extensive irrigation-based agriculture to supply food to the residents is a threat to the Mediterranean biodiversity. Because of the moderate climate, Mediterranean shrublands are vulnerable to agricultural activities. The main solution for reducing the human threat to this biome is curbing urbanization to reduce the pressure on biodiversity.
Tropical Rainforests
Tropical rainforests occur in the equatorial regions of Africa, Asia, and South America (Enger & Smith, 2016). They are characterized by a high species diversity and rainfall. The main threat to this biome comes from agriculture. Large tracts of the forest are often cleared to create arable land for farming. The tropical rainforests occur in low-income countries. The poor inhabitants practice slash-and-burn, which is harmful to biodiversity. Further, the drive to establish extensive cattle ranches have led to the cutting down of trees to create space. The suggested solution for this problem is creating demarcated forest reserves that are protected from logging or agriculture.
Population Control
It is unethical and inappropriate for developed nations to use persuasive or coercive efforts to have less-developed ones control their population growth. Although rapid population growth causes strain on the resources, it is evident that much of the world’s wealth is in the hands of a few developed countries. Therefore, fairness in resource distribution and efficiency can promote economic growth in less-developed nations. In addition, technology developments will create cheaper and sustainable ways for people to live.
Appropriate interventions for rapid population growth in less-developed countries would include aid towards health and fair trade practices to spur economic growth. Inappropriate interventions would include coerced family planning to control birth rates in developing countries.
Energy Consumption
The combined per-capita carbon emission of OECD countries is more than six times higher than that of developing nations and it is projected to grow even further (Enger & Smith, 2016). The higher emissions are connected to the high per-capita energy consumption in these countries. From a geopolitical perspective, developing countries would object to the attempts to have them lower their emissions because industrialized nations have a higher per-capita emission. The imbalance in carbon emissions will hamper efforts to address global warming. For industrialized countries, reducing carbon emissions would hurt the productivity and competitiveness of their goods. Therefore, they are unlikely to ratify climate change treaties.
Similarly, the less-developed countries will reject such a move due to its potential impact on their industrialization goals. The availability of low-cost fossil fuels led to accelerated economic growth during the Industrial Revolution in Europe and N. America (Enger & Smith, 2016). Therefore, rapidly expanding economies, e.g., Brazil, would want to grow their industries by exploiting affordable energy resources. Presently, renewable energy sources are far from being economically viable alternatives to fossil fuels. Thus, emission caps are likely to be violated until affordable, clean energy becomes a reality.
The resolutions of the climate change talks can be binding if high emitters share the benefits with less-developed countries through carbon credits and affordable goods. An effective compensation scheme can allow less-developed countries to benefit. Carbon taxes can also act as a disincentive to curb energy consumption (Enger & Smith, 2016). In addition, investing in greener and more efficient energy sources could help reduce fossil fuel consumption. These two strategies could be more acceptable by all nations than drastic cuts in carbon emissions.
Nuclear Power
Nuclear power offers multiple advantages over fossil fuels. Nuclear energy reactors yield high quantities of energy from a small amount of fuel, i.e., Uranium. The cost of uranium and those of operating a nuclear reactor are relatively low. Thus, low-cost energy can be provided through nuclear power. Nuclear power is also more environmentally friendly than fossil fuels due to its low carbon emissions (Enger & Smith, 2016). Its disadvantages relate to the mining/transportation of uranium, which presents a pollution hazard to the environment. There is also the problem of radioactive waste disposal. Radioactive waste emits low-level radiation that poses a threat to human and environmental health (Diaz-Maurin, 2014). Other disadvantages include nuclear reactors are prone to accidents, e.g., Chernobyl. The risks of nuclear power far outweigh its benefits. The potential for nuclear accidents is high because of natural catastrophes, human error, and terrorism activities (Diaz-Maurin, 2014).
Water Pollution
The problem in the dead zone relates to the declining marine life, especially fish population. The main cause of this ecological problem is hypoxia (oxygen depletion) due to the eutrophication phenomenon (Enger & Smith, 2016). Fertilizers used in the farms in the American Midwest are washed off into the Mississippi River that drains into the Gulf of Mexico. The nutrients, including nitrogen, cause a dense growth of algae that support a large population of protozoa. Bacteria digest dead protozoan cells/animals falling into the seabed, leading to oxygen depletion. As a result, marine animals that cannot swim die, leaving a dead zone. The nutrient pollution in the Gulf of Mexico could be considered non-point source pollution because it originates from land-use inputs, i.e., fertilizers, over a wide agricultural area (Enger & Smith, 2016). A possible solution to this problem relates to cutting down the use of nitrogen-based fertilizers that are washed down to the Gulf to cause the algal blooms.
Fresh Water: A Limited Resource
Las Vegas in the American West faces a serious problem of water shortage due to the fast-growing population. The water shortage problem could be attributed to rapid population growth and inefficient use of water. Las Vegas has exhausted its groundwater reservoirs and it is now pursuing a controversial plan of obtaining water from distant places/counties. The city obtains up to 90% of its water from the Colorado River through Lake Mead (Enger & Smith, 2016). The river supports agriculture, fuels hydroelectric plants, and feeds Lake Powell. The water level in the lake has dropped drastically due to a decade-long drought. The water level in Lake Mead, which depends on Lake Powell, has also dropped. A possible solution to this problem is to reduce irrigation-based agriculture to save more freshwater from the Colorado River that could be taken to the cities (Enger & Smith, 2016).
Climate Change
The Greenhouse effect is the general warming up of the planet that arises when a “blanket of greenhouse gases” in the atmosphere traps solar radiation, preventing it from being radiated back into space (Hansen, 2015, p. 271). The atmospheric gases that have a greenhouse effect include “carbon dioxide, methane, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride” (Hansen, 2015, p. 271). Therefore, the phenomenon results in elevated temperatures on the Earth’s surface, leading to changes in climatic patterns. Carbon dioxide and the other gases account for 25% of the greenhouse effect (Hansen, 2015). They affect cloud formation, which alters rainfall received in an area. Thus, the greenhouse effect indirectly contributes to desertification, melting of polar ice, and rising sea levels. Industrial processes and natural mechanisms, e.g., volcanic eruptions, add more of the gases into the atmosphere. This leads to global warming and climate change.
Paper, Plastic, or Plastics
The effect of plastic bags on the environment is indisputable. Dumping of used plastic bags causes municipal drainage systems to clog, lowers the aesthetic value of living spaces, and endangers the health of marine life, e.g., turtles (Enger & Smith, 2016). Taxes introduced on plastics in countries like Denmark have seen the level of plastic use decline considerably. Further, cheaper, biodegradable alternatives should be made available to the public to curb plastic usage. Therefore, a ban on plastic bags would mean that we have to pay more for paper-based bags and reuse bags.
Politics, Power, and Money
Politics, power, and money are intertwined. This strong relationship compromises fairness and the quality of legislative bills passed in the House. Big firms, including fracking firms, fund campaigns in return for political patronage, and favorable policies. Firms in the oil industry possess too much power because of the political contributions they make to candidates. As a result, they can lobby for favorable fracking regulations and policy outcomes to drive their profit goals. However, this scenario creates an unfair political system, as the oil firms can do explorations without considering the impact of their activities on the environment.
References
Diaz-Maurin, F. (2014). Going beyond the nuclear controversy. Environmental Science & Technology, 48(1), 25–26.
Enger, E., & Smith, B. (2016). Environmental science: A study of interrelationships. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Gomez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 86, 235-245.
Hansen, J. (2015). A slippery slope: How much global warming constitutes “dangerous anthropogenic interference”? Climatic Change, 68(3), 269–279.