Impact of Population Growth on Environment

Impact of Population Growth on Environment Thesis Statement: The negative impact of increasing population pressure upon environment may be at least partially improved by relocating people. Introduction The intimate relationship of geography and environment helps us to comprehend many salient features of history and the changes that occurred from generation to generation. A greater appreciation for environment may stem from deeper understanding of humanity in their complex aspects constituting life, work and play. Political economy may be understood as a union of agriculture with the different social, economic and political aspects of our existence. (Castree et al, Making Sense of Environmental Geography) The sustainability of the earth’s resources is being put to the severest test at the present moment when 7 billion people crowd the planet with excessive concentrations in some areas like Kolkata. On the other hand, some locations like Canada and Australia have a very low population density. Several other countries like Iceland and Bhutan have fewer people. The frozen wastes of the Arctic and Antarctic regions have no inhabitants only because conditions are not conducive to a normal existence. (Eaton, On the Farm and in the Field) While we cannot survive in difficult conditions of the earth, science dreams of colonizing other planets like Mars as an alternative to the earthly existence. What could be the causes of such a mismatch? Is it only an oddity of history or are pressing economic, social, religious or political factors behind such a divide. Are there any solutions like bringing about a global balance not only in population density but resources, standard of living, food, health and economic resources? The Kolkata Scenario: THE LAST TABOO In 2009, the world consumed the resources that would have belonged to 1.35 earths. United Nations believes that stability to the earth’s population would arrive in 2050 with 9.1 billion people. Strangely enough, the earth population was 3.3 billion in 1965. Of the 157 added to the world population every minute, only 4 are in the developed countries with 153 in the backward regions. Eastern India is home to 300 million or the entire population of USA. Excessive population and consumption problems are most severe in India. Hard to believe but in India, 17 percent of the global human population occupy 2.5 percent of the land resources. If the case of Kolkata is contrasted with America, it is a strange story of statistics beyond belief. The per capita consumption and income levels are at different ends of the spectrum. If people in Kolkata can survive on a dollar a day, Americans earn several dollars in a single hour. The absolutely unequal distribution of opportunities, wealth, education, health and lifestyle has been the topic of much heated debate. Is there a philosophical basis behind it? Why do people say that the world is almost equally divided between the haves and have-nots? How does Population impact Environment? It would be appropriate to commence with agricultural practice that sustains us in the first place and also includes the highest number of workers, both human and animal though more of mechanized farming is nowadays visible. Agriculture impacts the environment by releasing greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, methane too. Agriculture changes the land and leads to deforestation and a desert like condition. Climate change results from global warming and rising carbon dioxide levels and impacts agriculture positively and negatively. Irrigation reduces underground water levels. Over-irrigation may lead to water pollution. Agricultural chemicals soon turn into pollutants through misuse. The soil is degraded and plastics do further damage to the already fragile environment. Technology upon which the majority of urban lives depend has succeeded in creating an artificial order at the expense of a natural disorder. Metals and plastics are the chief pollutants besides industrial wastes dumped into river ways. The use of petroleum products only painfully reminds that oil reserves are finite and would exhaust sooner rather than later. The search for renewable sources of energy is never ending. Nuclear power has its dangers of radiation that enters living tissues and causes devastation. Fishing is depleting rivers and oceans besides the loss of ecological habitats due to greedy over ambitious entrepreneurs. Nanotechnology, paint and paper in spite of their tremendous benefits are harmful in diverse ways. Causes for Human Migration and Relocation Political and linguistic domination seems to be the heart of large scale movement of people. Stalin deported 1.5 million political enemies toSiberiaand theCentral Asianrepublics after the Second World War. Mussolini‘s establishment in Italy forced the minorities to adopt the national language and ethos. They wished to obliterate remnants of any race besides their own. All through recorded history we come across large scale movement of people based on religious, racial or political grounds. What can explain this large scale exodus? And what are the possible causes of banishment and exile? Like the ongoing Syrian war crisis, war affects the peaceful lives of people and thousands suddenly turn refugees when they are compelled to cross international borders to escape atrocities or to enter refugee camps to have their basic needs fulfilled. The partition and Independence of India in 1947 created two states along religious lines. The two religions Hinduism and Islam migrated across vast territories in the midst of violence, many having lost possessions and property. Political and religious enmity seems to make sense. Genocide or the destruction of an entire race that is considered inferior is what Hitler attempted during the Second World War. Migration and relocation for the sake of a better life with greater incomes, peace and prosperity attracts lakhs of people across dangerous illegal journeys each year. Many never make it in the process called human smuggling, a well run business across the globe. After the internal Bhutanese dispute with the Nepalis settled in the southern border of Bhutan, large scale evictions of Nepalis took place. The displaced people landed in refugee camps in Nepal and India. Many of them got to eventually live and work in USA. The most advanced country America isolated the native people in selected areas or reserves for unknown political reasons. CONCLUSION Having looked at the complex causes of history, environment, production and inequality, a possibility of leveling the human scenario to some semblance of justice may be achieved by relocating and transferring segments of populations. Something in the nature of adoption that is already practiced somewhat widely like Russian exchange students living in American homes; backward communities of Kolkata may be relocated to better off nations that suffer from population shortage. In spite of adjustment problems, people will work and earn in the new lease of existence. Many such countries like Australia and Canada want more people. If people have migrated on religious and political grounds, such a movement on humanitarian grounds could change the face of history. Who would organize it? United Nations, perhaps with the backing of the rich countries. REFERENCES: Castree, Noel et al. Introduction: Making sense of Environmental Geography  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781444305722.ch1/summary Eaton, Emily. On the Farm and in the Field http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13563467.2011.542802#.UvoJ9_mSy7Ade Sherbinin, Alex et al. POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792934/ List of Environmental Problems  http://www.buzzle.com/articles/lists-of-environmental-problems.html Rand, Population and Environment (A Complex Relationship)  http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB5045/index1.html

Satellite Radio and Howard Stern Essay examples -- essays research pap

Satellite Radio: Will Howard Stern's move make us change the way we think about radio? Howard Stern's plan to move to satellite radio in January 2006 marks a major turning point for the radio industry. Not only has Stern brought the  possibility of subscribing to satellite radio into the minds of the millions in his audience, he has also gotten more people to start thinking and talking about what really distinguishes satellite radio from traditional radio. Satellite radio was first authorized by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) in 1997, seven years after initial applications. The delay in approval was in part the result of protests by the National Association of Broadcasters which charged that the service threatened "traditional American values of community cohesion and local identity." Ironically, as these charges were being made, traditional radio was becoming nationalized through use of more national programming and industry  consolidation under Clear Channel Communications and Infinity Broadcasting.  The FCC dealt with these issues by restricting satellite radio to only national programming. Essentially this rule minimizes competition with traditional radio stations that only reach local markets and get the majority of their revenue from local advertisers. Despite there currently being very few small, independent, local broadcasters to protect, this remains the most significant regulation on satellite radio.[1] Today there are two main players in the satellite radio business: Sirius and XM. Though Sirius signed Stern, XM is currently the leader in terms of  subscribers. Both companies have neared bankruptcy at various points in their short history, and both have yet to make a profit. By signing Stern for $500 million over five years, Sirius must gain at least one million subscribers to pay this commitment.[2] Clearly satellite radio has a long way to go, but with steady growth and high-profile contracts (not only with  radio personalities, but with car companies who now install satellite radio  equipment in all new cars), the future remains wide open. Satellite radio is subscription-based, commercial-free, and largely unregulated. This last point appears to be the main draw for Stern. Since  the infamous Super Bowl incident this year, there have been calls for significantly expanding FCC indecency re... ...quot; due to his success with radio, books, television, and movies, but whether his kingdom will extend to satellite radio is yet to be seen. Free  speech is one of the key rights Americans have, but this right has always been in some degree of conflict with decency laws. The progressively stringent restrictions on the content of traditional radio have gotten so extreme in the past few years that, perhaps, finally they have gone too far. Listeners will soon wake up to the reality that what they want to hear in the morning has moved and in order to maintain their rights they must move too. If this is the case and audiences truly value "free listening," satellite radio will mark the end of traditional radio as we know it. [1] http://slate.msn.com/id/2097247/ [2] http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/06/news/newsmakers/stern sirius/ [3] see [2] [4] http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2004/10/06/ap1578735.html [5] http://www.forbes.com/business/2004/10/06/cx sw 1006stern.html?partner=rss [6] Telecommunications Act of 1996 Â § 507 [7] Being commercial-free and having a wider selection of programming in many areas are also deemed to be significant advantages of satellite radio.

Can Sudan Split Without Falling Apart? Essay

1. The fact that families like Achai Chol’s are leaving northern Sudan indicates that the people would rather be in southern Sudan fighting for southern independenceto stopthe imminent war and creating a better life for them and their families. 2. The thesis of the article is that Sudan has been politically unstable over the period of its two long civil wars. The south did not identify with the Arab led Sudanese society and created a referendum on southern independence. The two halves of the nation fight in an imminent war killing millions while trying to resolve the issues. 3. The size of Sudan is big compared to other African nations. Sudan is Africa’s biggest country. 4. The two halves of the nation differ in culture, race and religion. 5. In Sudan’s history, the United State’s brokered a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) to end more than half a century of conflict, creating an autonomous southern region and holding out the option of secession if the south so chose. 6. The south chose to agree to the CPA to separate the south from the north. 7. The words of Kiir Mayardit, â€Å"This is the final part of our journey,† are inherent compared to the direct quotes in the first two paragraphs because they are saying that south Sudan is their home, the place where they belong, and the place that they want to fight for. 8. Mutual reliance is when two sides are interdependent on each other. Where there is a relationship in which each member is mutually dependant on the other. 9. The first sentence of paragraph six â€Å"But if Sudan’s history makes dividing the nation seem an obvious solution, drawing a line in the sand is not as easy as it sounds† is saying that it is obvious that Sudan should be divided, but it’s not possible to just draw a line between the north and the south. It requires negotiating, which they are not willing to compromise to. 10. Parts of the north wanting to secede along with the south is most likely going to stand in the way of a peaceful solution to dividing the country, because the north does not approve of it. 11. The chief method used to pursue a peaceful solution is to use Sudan’s oil as a force for peace. 12. The United States and other countries are willing to make diplomacy to ensure peace in Sudan. 13. â€Å"Divorce could mean a crushing alimony† is the analogy the author uses to illustrate that the division might be difficult. The author is describing the separation of the two sides as a divorce, and the expense that it’s going to cost the north as the alimony. The type of figurative language used in the analogy is a metaphor. 14. The most glaring divide between northern and southern Sudan is the government structure. 15. An agreement to share the prosperity of aid and oil exports will be required of all parties involved to reach a successful end. 16. When reading the quote in the concluding paragraph, â€Å"Damned if I know. There are an astonishing range of problems that are going to wash over this place,† I visualize a man of high power saying it. The inclusion of the quote keeps the meaning of the article by saying that the two sides are still going to have many problems and war even after they are separated. 17. The author uses the information in the last paragraph to describe how Sudan has problems and will still have problems and war. â€Å"Failure – in the form of war – will be easy to spot.† But the author also says â€Å"Success will be less obvious: slow, messy and with endless setbacks,† meaning that the problems are being resolved in a slow and unmannerly fashion.

Movie Gravity Renews Debates about Hard Science Fiction

Relationship between science (or, rather, reality) and science fiction has always been turbulent. Some people (what is worth noting, not necessarily scientists) say that fiction should adhere to the scientific facts as closely and as faithfully as possible. Others think it to be unnecessary – after all, a science fiction book isn’t the same as a physics textbook, and has completely different purposes. If the writer needs something to be different from reality or simply cannot be bothered to investigate all the minute details before starting to write – why is he wrong? If readers feel pleasure reading him, what’s the problem? Movie Gravity was announced in the news as a new take on hard science fiction in cinematic industry. And it immediately showed that no matter how hard editors and directors strive to achieve this â€Å"hardness†, there will always be somebody who is able to find fault with their work. In this case, it was astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson, who, after praising the film for both its plot and adherence to scientific accuracy, still found some mistakes in its depiction of space. For example, Hubble telescope and a Chinese space station can never be visible from the same spot, debris and satellites orbit the Earth in the wrong direction, characters’ hair behave unrealistically in zero gravity and so on. Little mistakes which have no influence on the plot, but still mistakes. Some do it better, some do it worse. And while in literature there is a very strong subgenre of hard science fiction, striving to keep as close to reality as possible, in movies it is not so widespread. The reason is simple – directors often think that realistic depiction of science fiction will be uninteresting for the viewers. Another reason is the fact that some science fiction clichà ©s have already took such firm roots in people’s imagination that it is virtually impossible to fight them. For example, sound and fire in space – because space is vacuum, there cannot be sound and there is no oxygen to burn. However, if you try to show it in a movie, you first have to explain why it is so, and what you most likely get is accusations of trying to save on special effects. And it is quite likely that there is no need to eliminate these myths. If people like things the way they are, why try to change their picture of the world?