The article, Carbon’s New Math by Bill McKibben, explains how the future of humanity depends deeply on math. He explains how the numbers, in simple calculation, how abundant of the fossil fuels in the world’s presented coal mines and oil wells can burn if we want to avoid and prevent global warming from heating up the planet. If we want to save the planet from preventing any more catastrophic warming, there is a new study that shows, that we can’t afford to dig any new coals mines, drill any new fields, or build additionally pipeline. Human activity is one of the reasons global warming is occurring and we see the temperature increasing dramatically every year for this reason. In order to slow down or prevent this tragic warming we must cope …show more content…
Technology is now daily part of many of our lives all around the world, which can have a requirement demanding changes throughout the progression of technology. For instance, air travel is one of the fastest growing sources of carbon emissions around the world. According to the McKibben, “ By now we're used to ordering take-out food from every corner of the world every night of our lives—according to one study, the average bite of food has traveled nearly 1,500 miles (2,414 kilometers) before it reaches an American's lips, which means it's been marinated in (crude) oil. We drive alone, because it's more convenient than adjusting our schedules for public transit. We build ever bigger homes even as our family sizes shrink, and we watch ever bigger TVs, and—well, enough said. We need to figure out how to change those habits” (Par. 3). I completely agree with the author, sometime we use things or buy things that are not necessary, such as buying big televisions that are not that necessary to buy. I also agree with the author when we buy unnecessary big houses only for two people, especially in the United States, many people buy huge houses for only two people. However, I do not agree when the author said that is more convenient when we adjust our schedules for public transportation. This is very hard especially people who have kids or for …show more content…
Bourne, Jr., explains how Biofuels can be beneficial for some farmers in the United States, but it can be little beneficial for the environment, and actually more harmful than beneficial. Bourne stated in the article that corn requires large amount of doses of herbicide and nitrogen fertilizer and can cause more soil erosion than any other crop, and producing corn ethanol consumes just about as much fossil fuel as the ethanol itself replaces (page 41). However, all biofuel also consumes crops, that could be feeding a hungry people all around the world. Biofuels could reduce and lower food hunger and push up food priced in a world where, there’s thousands of people dying from starvation. Overall, the need for both fuel and food is expected to increase more than double by mid-century, and many scientists fear that in coming decades, climate change will challenge agriculture production. I agree with the author of the article, Bourne, even though there is many people starving all around the world ethanol is not the only way of food production. There is many other traditional ways if food production, such as: you can also make it from stalk, leaves and even sawdust- plant by products that are usually dumped, burned, plowed back
The author underlines that humans turn to technology to help solve our problems. Freeman shows that technology is linked in for a cause in obesity. When using technology people usually sit and are not moving. A solution to technology is to turn our backs to technology.
The U.S. government spends billions of dollars every year subsidizing corn production, livestock feed, processed foods, and ethanol production account for the greatest uses of corn in the United States. Supplying the livestock and processed food industries with cheap corn ultimately leads to an American diet that is heavily based on the consumption of meat and sugary processed foods. This diet is thought to contribute to America’s obesity epidemic. Corn subsidies also encourage production of ethanol. Ethanol may be no better than fossil fuels because of the required energy inputs and the environmental damage caused by its production.
Even though, the arguments put forth by the author are relevant to the central theme, they lack clarity. He tends to go off on tangents and loses the flow of the article. It seems that the author has a slight bias against our generation’s obsession with technology, but that can be attributed to him being a quinquagenarian. I feel that the author has not covered the topic thoroughly enough. He has not quite explained the topic in depth or covered it from various perspectives.
In conclusion, Corn Ethanol Biofuel has many negative and positive effects. It has a negative effect because it releases greenhouse gases but positive effects as well because it is inexpensive to produce and use, and is a renewable source. The future of corn ethanol is uncertain: “Corn-based ethanol will most likely not be the staple fuel source in the future, as it is only a short term solution and poses problems in the long run. Ethanol contains 33% less energy than gasoline, and corrodes engines that it is used in. Average production and final sales are 62 cents/gal higher than conventional gasoline. Even though political support is waning, Congress will most likely not abandon corn ethanol.” ("Future of Corn Ethanol.) I think corn ethanol
Since the Industrial Revolution, technology has become an essential tool in human life. Technology impacted lives in society by offering a way to “multitask” by using two or more technological devices. Technology and internet offers the facility to do homework faster through Google, while listening to music on Pandora or YouTube. Sometimes, you can even talk on the phone while you listen to music and do homework. All you need in order to multitask is to have all the technological devices needed. Many people consider technology as a positive change in our lives, because of the facilities it offers us. However, many other persons, like Christine Rosen, think that technology instead of improving our lives, it has only changed it negatively. Technology, in fact has provided us with many facilities, however such facilities are affecting our interactions with the physical space.
In the article “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math”, written by Bill Mckibben, he firstly opens up by saying that back in 2012, according to the statistics, we surpassed the global record high for climate temperature in our nation, destroying other previous records. Despite the research and the displaying of data, nobody is doing anything to adress the following issue. Mckibben outlines three distinctive numbers that outline the following issue., 2 degrees celsius, 565 gigations, and 2795 gigtons, which he uses to validitate and support his argument. Firstly, the ongoing problem of climate change in society is fundamentally a matter of individual moral responsibility that is inspired by the insight individuals are intentionally harming the environment. Secondly there is yet to be an effective collective state response to the issue of global warming, despite approaching two full decades of ongoing and reoccuring negotiations and the very near universal participation by states in the UNFCCC. Thirdly, because this issue has been put on hold for longer than it was innitially expected, greenhouse gases are being emitted into our atmosphere, polluting our environment. The South-North issue and an ongoing debate comes into effect as all the greenhouse gases that are created and used in the Northern hemisphere are being emmited into the southern hemisphere. Hence, my thesis is; despite the fact that global warming and climate change has been an ongoing problem globally for years, humanity has failed to resolve thiis issue as it quickly begins to escalate.
In today's world, technology is constantly changing from a new paperclip to an improvement in hospital machinery. Technology lets people improve the way they live so that they can preserve their own personal energy and focus on the really important factors in life. Some people focus their energy on making new innovations to improve transportation and the health of people that may save lives and some people focus on making new designs of packaging CDS. Technology is significant in everyone's life because it rapidly changes what is in the market. But, some new innovations of technology are ridiculous because they serve no purpose in helping mankind.
Americans abuse technology by taking advantage of it which can lead to environmental issues. Americans use more energy than most as Mckibben explains, “the average American uses more energy between the stroke of midnight on New Year's Eve and dinner on January 2 than the average, say, Tanzanian consumes in a year,” (559). In both essays, the authors discuss how Americans abuse technology and harm the environment, but Jensen's solution to cut technology altogether would be detrimental to our environment. Technology extends our capability to change the world to better suit us. Instead of cutting technology altogether, we should increase our technology in an energy-efficient way to minimize the harm it may
Ask anyone to name a few necessities that humans need to live in this world, and they’ll probably start to name items such as food, water, and shelter. Those who are a bit more bold might say a smart phone, computers, or even a TV. Are they wrong? It could be easily argued that they are correct in saying that those things are now important to have in day-to-day life. Phones and other technological advances are no longer a luxury for the privileged; they have become a necessity in today’s society.
Over the last few years almost everyone has heard that the earth is warming. Also, almost everyone has heard the pleas to go green and reduce carbon emissions, led by former Vice-President Al Gore. Even though there is not a truly accurate definition of global warming it can be roughly defined as a rise in average global temperature according to Laurence Pringle’s book Global Warming Assessing the Greenhouse Threat (19). Global Warming Assessing the Greenhouse Threat also bring up that the average temperature data that scientist are using only goes back to 1860 giving scientists today only 150 years of temperature data. Also, with this current warming, even with humans contributing to the rising average global temperature, scientist today do not fully understand all the complexities of the atmosphere (Pringle 19-21). According to another book by Mr. Pringle, Global Warming the Threat of Earth’s Changing Climate, scientists predict global temperatures could rise from two to six degrees Celsius by 2050 (33). Despite these predictions historical and new information show that scientist are incorrect that global temperatures will forever continue to increase. Global warming and the rise in global temperatures is due to humans burning fossil fuels and overconsumption of products, as well as natural cycles changing slightly and other natural phenomenon; however, this warming will eventually lead to global cooling.
A dependence on technology will not create a utopian society. Relying on technology for everything can create disruption of people’s bonds and love towards family members, disruption in people’s emotions and feelings and disruption to people physically.
‘If you argue correctly, you are never wrong’ (Naylor, 2005). This is Nick Naylor´s deep conviction. He made a career out of this belief. Nick is a lobbyist employed by the ‘Academy of Tobacco Studies’ (as of now: ATS). ATS is conducting research on the link between smoking and lung cancer funded mostly by tobacco companies.
The standard 21 year old adults have exchanged 250 thousand emails, spent 5 thousand hours video gaming and 10 thousand hours using their mobile devices (Lei, 2009). When people hear the word technology, they think of microwaves, televisions, cars, NASA, different types and transportation and more. For all that, technology has occurred long ahead these discoveries. Technology is an arguable matter amongst people. .In the old days, people lived an extremely simple life without technology. They used candles to light their houses and lanterns at the dark to travel, they used fire to cook and used newspapers and mail to share news. On the other hand, technology has seized an important place in our society. People are living in a stage of progressive technology. They are using all natural reserves applicable for making their lives better and easier. The society cannot picture life without electricity since it allows them to live through their everyday life. This paper argues that technology positively impacts people’s lives.
Every day I have to press a little button on a small remote controller so the gate at home opens by itself. It seems normal nowadays, but twelve years ago I had to step out of the car to open the gate by myself. I am now 20 years old and I have seen technology flashing through my eyes throughout the years. When I was in primary school I used to play with sand, ride bicycles or create my own games. Internet, smart phones, Facebook and Google were words that did not appeared in my vocabulary until some years ago. Even tablets were just medicines and not a computer device that looks like a small flat screen. Technology is getting modern day by day. People are always connected to something that is related to technology, such as the internet, social media, television or smart phones. It is very difficult to imagine life nowadays without technology. But does technology make life more convenient? Or was life better when it was simpler? In this essay I will fall in with these two questions about technology?
More farmers are now planting crops for biofuel, resulting to an intense drop in food production. According to experts this promising alternative energy source is seemingly causing a global decrease of food supply. As the demand for biofuels increases, more industrialized countries are offering encouragements and subsidizing farmers to grow crops for fuel rather than for food. The biofuel production method was also anticipated to be carbon neutral, as the crops would absorb the carbon dioxide released when the biofuel was burned. However crops for fuel are now grown at such a rate that they need more energy to cultivate, grow and harvest. By the time it reaches households, it would have consumed more energy and released more greenhouse causing substances than the feared fossil fuels would have. The fact that emissions are released during production, processing, fertilizer application and as a result of land use change is highly ignored. Somehow biofuels can sidetrack less harmful and clean resources like renewable energies such as solar and wind energy. Large scale cultivation of biofuel crops, unlike small scale, locally produced and biofuel owned farms are commonly challenged by problems such as severe use of water, chemicals, fertilizers and pesticides. These also often lead to pollution, depleting and degrading available water resources which can cause famines. According to contrary believe of analysts, it has also shown that there is not enough farming land on earth to produce biofuel crops to meet the huge energy needs encouraged by our current and unmaintainable ways of living. http://www.greenerideal.com/science/0516-biofuels/ &