“The Anthropocene Biosphere” is an insightful and informative article on the modern era and portrays why understanding the present impact of humans on the planet is crucial for future survival of Earth as a whole. The article by Mark Williams et al illustrates key aspects and contributions, as well as the positive and negative impacts of the current era known as the Anthropocene. The authors argue that this Anthropocene age is substantially different in comparison to any preceding metazoan and microbial eras, stating that four elements clearly distinguish the Anthropocene age as different; the restructure of ecosystems due to invasive species spread, the increase in consumption of materials in both marine and terrestrial ecosystems, the biological …show more content…
Consumption of resources is currently the highest it has ever been: “Humans have fundamentally modified the terrestrial landscape and marine environment in which ecosystems develop, with some 50% of the land surface being modified for agriculture (about 36%), urban, and other human-dominated purposes” (citation-footnote). Not only have humans consumed a great deal of materials and therefore demand a large energy production, but has also generated waste that has been inputted into the environment. “As a result of hyper-fertilization, the amount of reactive nitrogen at the Earth’s surface has approximately doubled by means of the Haber-Bosch process, a perturbation of the nitrogen cycle that may be the greatest since Proterozoic times…”(citation). Thus, the Anthropocene is unlike other epochs, as the sheer amount of consumption and waste production is the highest it has ever …show more content…
The authors are effectively able to convey the significance of the Anthropocene through four parameters; the effects of human migration on organism travel, production and consumption levels of the human population, human influences on the evolution of animal and plant species, and the incorporation of new technologies into the biosphere. “The Anthropocene Biosphere”, written by Mark Williams et al, proves to be an informative article on the Anthropocene era. It is a must-read because it simultaneously exemplifies why humans are a technological-advanced and prosperous species yet simultaneously explains how the Anthropocene will have a continued long-lasting effect on the planet. In their view, the Anthropocene, unlike any other time period has irrevocably altered the course of
Time and time again it has been seen that human interaction with his/her environment and it’s ecosystems has shown to be increasingly arrogant and self-serving. These endless accounts are proven by the amount of important biological diversity that is being lost to the surrounding environment due to these threats of human development and population growth. There are two forms of these losses of diversity by human hand: direct and indirect. Direct losses would be the destruction of an area needed for human requirements be it social or economical. Examples of these losses would be housing, agriculture, and others. Indirect losses would be those caused by the destruction of an area also needed for the same requirements but the area’s commodities which are valued, water, food, land in general, is needed elsewhere. These losses are few in number compared with those of direct losses yet they are of the greatest importance. They are important because they involve the removal of resources of an area in which other inhabitants are dependent upon. A great example of this regrettable indirect expansion is the loss of the rich habitat of the area known as Owens Valley.
While humans are becoming increasingly aware of the environmental issues that are occurring in the world, most human systems are still unsustainable. Being sustainable in a society means that humans treat Earth like it has a limited supply of resources that need to be carefully managed in order to prevent damage to the world around us (Chiras, D. D., 2016). So, being unsustainable is the opposite; when humans treat the world like they are dominant over it, as well as believing that the Earth has an unlimited supply of resources that should be consumed by humans. Human beliefs and practices influence unsustainability, which can, and often do, correspond with the root cause of the problem.
The Anthropocene marks a point in time where human activities were able to greatly alter the environment, some historians believe that it marked the point in time where the industrial revolution began (1700CE to 1900CE). The Industrial revolution essentially was mankind’s breakthrough into modernity, the rapid advancements in technology and the utilisation of fossil fuels gave man a seemingly infinite supply of energy that could be used to transform manual processes into automated ones which was a massive game changer for the manufacturing, communications and transportation industries.(1)
As small mobile groups of hunter-gatherers adopted a sedentary lifestyle, they mastered both agriculture and animal domestication. These small settled groups quickly evolved into cities and towns that encompassed the entire globe. Today the estimated population of the world is over 6.2 million people.1 As the population has grown, it has had several deleterious effects on the Earth. These include climate changes, the spread of diseases, declining food production, deforestation, and environment pollution (particularly air pollution). As people have become more conscious of these harmful effects, they have begun to devise strategies to combat this problem. Among the suggested responses include a switch to renewable energy, a call for zero population growth, and adopting sustainable agricultural practices.
Anthropocentrism has been a central belief upon which modern human society has been constructed. The current state of the world, particularly the aspects that are negative, are reflective of humans continuously acting in ways that are in the interest of our own species. As environmental issues have worsened in recent decades, a great number of environmentalists are turning away from anthropocentric viewpoints, and instead adopting more ecocentric philosophies. Although anthropocentrism seems to be decreasing in popularity due to a widespread shift in understanding the natural world, philosopher William Murdy puts forth the argument that anthropocentrism still has relevancy in the context of modern environmental thought. In the following essay, I will explain Murdy’s interpretation of anthropocentrism and why he believes it to be an acceptable point of
There is no hesitation when it comes to whether humans impact the global environment. However, it is questioned in whether human’s ecological footprint is either negatively or positively impacting. In clear perspective, humans share from both sides and their ecological footprint is noted towards whether it will benefit or harm the environment around them. Topics such as overpopulation, pollution, biomagnification, and deforestation are all human impacted and can harm the environment, but some include benefits into helping the world around us with solutions to their problems.
John McNeill, in his informative book, Something New Under the Sun, he discusses how the twentieth century brought the world into a steady decline. Although the world has improved technology-wise, it has also had a decline that overshadows the improvement we have seen. McNeil goes on to prove that it is humans, with our new technology are the reason behind this fateful decline. The world’s population has positively and negatively affected the twentieth century world by bringing “ecological changes” that will forever change the world(4).
There is no doubt that human activity is having a significant impact on our environment. These environmental impacts include depleting our natural resources, air and water pollution, climate change, destruction of habitats, and loss of biodiversity. Because of these growing concerns, we need to learn how to live sustainably. Living sustainably will allow us to conserve our limited resources more wisely so they will be available for future generations (Withgott & Brennan, 2011, Chapter 1).
“We are consuming the Earth’s natural resources beyond its sustainable capacity of renewal” said by Herman Daly, Beyond Growth, Boston 1996, 61[1] .
One of the major effects of the huge population increase has been the depletion of natural resources and the destruction of ecosystems. In the 1960's, theorist Paul Ehrlich predicted that, given the skyrocketing figures of human population, the amount of food produced would not grow at a fast enough rate for human survival (Professor Carr Everbach, personal communication). He predicted mass starvation and death by the year 2000 as the result of uncontrolled population growth. Clearly, this did not occur. Ehrlich did not foresee the advancements ma...
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
The environment today is not in a good condition, Climate change is evident, and oceans are getting polluted. Rainforrest's are decreasing in size due to deforestation and illegal logging. Animals are getting extinct due to the destruction of their habitats. Natural resources are being consumed at very large amounts, and get wasted. There are different ways these problems can be addressed, one option is environmental management. Environmental management focuses on conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats, and impact of humans on the environment. Conservation of natural resources is the smart use of the world's resources by humans, through this waste production is limited, and there will be less garbage in the world. By conserving
Overpopulation can be seen as one of the key factors responsible for the state of our rapidly decaying earth. Developments in medicine, agriculture and technology have allowed for the human race to take over all other species and be excluded from the natural food chain. Humans, particularly westerners, lead lives of extreme consumption that take huge tolls not only on the earth but also on certain groups within society. A great division has developed between the western world and the third world.
Social ecology is the conceptual principles for knowing the outcomes and relations of the many diverse individual and environmental factors. Social ecology is defined as the study of people within an environment, which have influence on one another. It’s believed to be the earth’s societies reflection upon itself, exploring, discovering, and considering its future (Gutkind, 1974). Factors of social ecology may include the infirmities of age, an increase of population, natural disasters, technology and the growth of society. Within social ecology it is important to notice which people are unable to see the environmental crisis. This movement is placing all the responsibility for destroying the earth on humans as they are overpopulating the planet. There is no possible way of convincing all humans to change their way of life (Bookchin, 1995). However, rather have humans distinguish and eliminate previous forms of control and destruction (Bookchin, 1995). The main standard of social ecology is the fact that problems occur from inherent social issues (Dogan, Rokkan, 1974). These problems cannot be understood without acknowledging the social issues. The development, of certain technologies, social characteristics, cities and science all has caused a vast majority of problems to the earth, which leads back to humans.
The degradation of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity is increasing at an alarming rate every year. Humans are certainly not the only reason for this, but they are the main contributors. The well-being of ecosystems affects our everyday lives - consumption and consumerism depend on natural resources. Everything humans use is derived from them, in seemingly indirect and direct ways. Yet despite the fact that humans are destroying the environment, many continue to and neglect to take important measures to protect it.