You won’t see beautiful coral reefs, if they bleach out. Under global warming and some anthropogenic factors, over about 60% of the Red Sea’s reefs have been damaged (Waghorn, 2007), up to 90% of corals had been killed in Australia in the summers of 1998 and 2002, and a similar situation happened in Maldives, Sri Lanka, Kenya and Tanzania and in the Seychelles (Coral Bleaching, 2007). Global warming made the temperature higher in the air and under the sea, and almost all of the coral reefs were threatened and died. Tender and liveing in a limited range temperate, coral reefs are hurt easily by heat waves. Colorful corals and their zooxanthellae live harmoniously and have many other species around them. Enjoying the sight underwater is a wonderful trip for human beings. However, this kind of tour is limited by global warming. According to Science Daily (2007), local action can help to re-build the reefs and promote their recovery. In order to maintain coral reefs and other underwater species, and to have a beautiful undersea life, building artificial reefs (Waghorn, 2007), banning overfishing (Barclay, 2007) and pushing the USA to sign the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change are good solutions.
First, putting artificial reefs underwater will provide food, shelter protection and spawning area for hundreds of species of the fish and other marine organisms. They also provide alternate areas for divers and anglers to use, and can reduce pressure of natural reefs. In some countries, they have put artificial reefs to build a new environment for species related to coral reefs. This solution to save coral reefs takes 25 years less than natural processing, which requires over one hundred years. Global warming threatens our environment actuely. If we don’t take action immediately to protect the flimsy corals, underwater bio-chains will be broken and some species will extinct in a short time. Another benefit of building artificial reefs is for people to know more about underwater animals and have trips underwater. To build a new environment for undersea species is not only good for the ecosystem, but also for our sustainable environment.
Second, to enforce the laws against overfishing, and to regulate the international trades of live fish are the important strategies to ban overfishing. Some countries have laws; however, they don’t enforce them. In some developing countries, people have to fight for their lives to take adventures in illegal fishing or to work for the international trade. Moreover, they couldn’t care less about how the ecosystem is changed by them. Local governments and national institutes should stretch out to help the people to find alternate ways of survival, and give them other opportunities for existence. The action requires local and national awareness and the education of fishermen on alternative fishing methods. At the international level, to work together to regulate the trade of fish, and to find the balanced approaches in a sustainable manner are critical.
Man-made reefs could save the underwater ecosystem, and could be destroyed by humans yet. As we know the Red Sea coast has had artificial reefs for several years; nevertheless, the ecosystem of coral reefs, fish, and other zooxanthellae were still damaged. The local governments’ standpoints are important in the building of artificial reefs, for instance, sightseeing, studying, or preserving. These purposes could either be ways or effects. For studying and preserving, the artificial reefs would attract a lot of related species to live, would have new kinds of zooxanthellae, and would allow people to know more about the growing trend of underwater species. In this kind of situation, the man-made ecosystem provides a living chance under global warming. For tourism, the artificial reefs may be destroyed, because sightseeing people could not control their behaviors to stand on reefs or touch corals and too many people going for tourism are pressured into contact with some animals. We can make tons of artificial reefs, and they should be protected and be valued, or they will die out.
Building artificial reefs and banning overfishing are good ways for maintaining our ecosystem and barely preserving coral reefs. However, this is not enough. People should keep the perspectives of ways of saving coral reefs and holding operations to have a sustainable ecosystem.
References
Barclay, E. (2007, Oct. 31). African fishermen find way of conservation in the Koran. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1031/p01s04-woaf.html.
Coral Bleaching. (2007, Oct. 17). Coral bleaching.Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siki/Coral_bleaching.
Oceans Alive. (n. d.). Solutions: what we can do. Oceans Alive. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.oceansalive.org/explore.cfm?subnav=article&contentID=4710.
Science Daily (2007, Oct. 22). Coral reefs on brink of disaster, scientists urge action now. ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071021225256.htm.
Waghorn, D. (2007, Oct. 25). Race to save coral reefs from scuba divers. CDNN Global News Network. Retrieved on November 01, 2007, from http://www.cdnn.info/news/eco/e071025.html.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Wal-Mart
You want a big Supercenter far away from your home or a convenient store near your home? I think it better to have an accessory store in my neighborhood, because it will be more convenient to buy things and I don’t have to store supplies at home. However, the developments of some chain stores focus on expanding their products and acreage (Shopping for Subsidies: How Wal-Mart Uses Taxpayer Money to Finance Its Never-Ending Growth, 2004; USA Today, 2003). I believe that the spreading Supercenters will cause traffic air pollution, less exercise, and economic downturn across the communities and neighborhoods.
Many people driving cars to Wal-Mart caused a lot of air pollution around the area. In UFCWIU (2005), “A study of estimated additional driving cost of Supercenters in the San Francisco Bay area concluded that there would be up to an additional 238 million vehicle miles traveled per year” (par.1). Most Wal-Mart stores are placed in the suburbs, and people have to drive their cars to go there. Their attraction of low price and complete products make people want to shop merely there. Moreover, so many people have to shop one time each week, have to shop when they forget to buy something, or when they have to buy something urgently. Under these kinds of random frequencies, the air becomes worse and worse, people will complain about that finally and forget the benefits they thought of before.
If the stores are near our home, we can walk to shop all the time, and don’t have to use cars. It’s a good idea of preserving our environment and maintaining our health. No convenient stores are near neighborhoods in most parts of the U.S., and there are fewer opportunities for residents to shop by foot. Having stores near houses is not only a chance for inhabitants to know more about their community, but also a chance for them to use their available time to exercise and shop. On the other hand, using cars more will make people have less time of physical activity, and spend more time and money on cars. People should think in more detail about what the ultimate consequences of a big Supercenter setting in a suburb are. Don’t forget to think more about your health than about saving money.
The large alluring factor of low price and providing jobs for the dwellers makes people want to shop there to save their money and agree with their establishment (Hoenig, 2004; Locke, 2004). According to the Dallas Morning News (2002), the enlarging of Wal-Mart brings the smaller stores in the country to lose their competitiveness and close eventually. We can find that the facts behind the superficial benefits are very serious for the common people. Despite the good effects, the bad effects are more than them, and have longer influence to local people. Local people should fight for their own economic benefit, and make a better way for themselves.
In conclusion, setting a big Supercenter to help local finances or make a better life are not worthwhile, and will cause air pollution, less exercise, and economic decline. Think about these effects and try to shoot for residents and their descendents in the communities.
References
Dallas Morning News. (2002, February 10.). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart: Community Impact. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Hoenig, J. (2004, February 10.). Welcome Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, fromhttp://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4561.
Hopkins, J. (2003, January 29.). Wal-Mart’s Influence grows. USA TODAY. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation_x.htm.
Locke, E. (2004, February 22.). Three Cheers for Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3534.
UFCWIU. (2005). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Many people driving cars to Wal-Mart caused a lot of air pollution around the area. In UFCWIU (2005), “A study of estimated additional driving cost of Supercenters in the San Francisco Bay area concluded that there would be up to an additional 238 million vehicle miles traveled per year” (par.1). Most Wal-Mart stores are placed in the suburbs, and people have to drive their cars to go there. Their attraction of low price and complete products make people want to shop merely there. Moreover, so many people have to shop one time each week, have to shop when they forget to buy something, or when they have to buy something urgently. Under these kinds of random frequencies, the air becomes worse and worse, people will complain about that finally and forget the benefits they thought of before.
If the stores are near our home, we can walk to shop all the time, and don’t have to use cars. It’s a good idea of preserving our environment and maintaining our health. No convenient stores are near neighborhoods in most parts of the U.S., and there are fewer opportunities for residents to shop by foot. Having stores near houses is not only a chance for inhabitants to know more about their community, but also a chance for them to use their available time to exercise and shop. On the other hand, using cars more will make people have less time of physical activity, and spend more time and money on cars. People should think in more detail about what the ultimate consequences of a big Supercenter setting in a suburb are. Don’t forget to think more about your health than about saving money.
The large alluring factor of low price and providing jobs for the dwellers makes people want to shop there to save their money and agree with their establishment (Hoenig, 2004; Locke, 2004). According to the Dallas Morning News (2002), the enlarging of Wal-Mart brings the smaller stores in the country to lose their competitiveness and close eventually. We can find that the facts behind the superficial benefits are very serious for the common people. Despite the good effects, the bad effects are more than them, and have longer influence to local people. Local people should fight for their own economic benefit, and make a better way for themselves.
In conclusion, setting a big Supercenter to help local finances or make a better life are not worthwhile, and will cause air pollution, less exercise, and economic decline. Think about these effects and try to shoot for residents and their descendents in the communities.
References
Dallas Morning News. (2002, February 10.). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart: Community Impact. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Hoenig, J. (2004, February 10.). Welcome Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, fromhttp://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4561.
Hopkins, J. (2003, January 29.). Wal-Mart’s Influence grows. USA TODAY. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2003-01-28-walmartnation_x.htm.
Locke, E. (2004, February 22.). Three Cheers for Wal-Mart. Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3534.
UFCWIU. (2005). The Real Facts About Wal-Mart. WAKEUPWALMART.com. Retrieved on November 27, 2007, from http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
The Causes of Coral Bleaching in India
in “Coral bleaching” Coral bleaching happened greatly in Australia's coast and Indian Ocean, and formed an unattractive benthonic scene. Colorful corals are created by zooxanthellae. At higher water temperatures, decreasing of zooplanktons, solar irradiance, varying water chemistry, silt runoff, and infections, and coral bleaching start out and can’t cease. Different types of coral species or of zooxanthellae have variable bleaching rates, and different recovery abilities and tolerance, and their health conditions and disparate genetics influence their resistance to coral bleaching. Fortunately, we know that some reef creatures, soft corals, giant clams and sponges could expel the stressful conditions of bleaching. However, coral bleaching takes months and even years to recover from, and threatens species undersea.
India has the most wide and beautiful coral reefs, but large parts of them suffer from bleaching and aren’t as beautiful as they were in the past. In the age of protecting environments, India, a poor country, worries about slower development of economic growth, and doesn’t want to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. Their response could be understood but couldn’t be accepted. As industrial development, overfishing and sightseeing are their main economic growing forces, over 90% of coral reefs in India are damaged.
World restriction programs would be useful in fighting the pollutants that damage coral reefs. Industrial development makes huge amounts of carbon dioxide, which acidifies air, soil and oceans, and creates wastewater, waste gases and waste materials, which pollute our living environment. Particular economic growth in India has been noticed in recent years, when the United Nations cared about the effects of global warming and tried hard to seek resolutions. In order to increase average income, electronic, heavy metallic or other high-technological industries are well expanded.
Changing overfishing is the simplest way to protect India’s oceans and promote economic growth in India. In order to survive, people in India like to fish for food and could not obey the laws of the ecosystem all the time. They fish by themselves without spending money, and consider this as an beneficial way to survive. They have good skills in boating, fishing, and resisting natural forces to get their food. How to increase other abilities to earn livings could be the important points. They could begin assistance of finding jobs, guidance in getting market or creating their crops into new products, or helping them to market products in foreign countries.
Many activities on the sea, such as hydromotorcycles, banana split boats and parasailing, are the risk factors of coral bleaching. These activities are popular in India and are greeted with joy for visitors, nevertheless, these activities scare benthos to go away from their original places, change the air above the sea and the water undersea, and cause pollution, and coral reefs and their zooxanthellae would die and become bleached. The sightseeing development in India has been brought up in recent years. People would like to visit one of the top historic spots in India, and to experience undersea views. It is a valued trip to visit a view of coral reefs and animals underwater in India. However, some people have less knowledge of diving behaviors and might touch coral reefs or stand on them; caused zooxanthellae of coral reefs stay away and coral reefs without their zooxanthellae would die.
In short, the key destructive factor of Indian oceans is economic growth. This kind of situation is happening in most less-developing countries, but it could be controlled by the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Limitations strategies would help our ocean environment come back as we go for it.
Reference
Coral Bleaching. (Oct, 17, 2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching .
India has the most wide and beautiful coral reefs, but large parts of them suffer from bleaching and aren’t as beautiful as they were in the past. In the age of protecting environments, India, a poor country, worries about slower development of economic growth, and doesn’t want to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. Their response could be understood but couldn’t be accepted. As industrial development, overfishing and sightseeing are their main economic growing forces, over 90% of coral reefs in India are damaged.
World restriction programs would be useful in fighting the pollutants that damage coral reefs. Industrial development makes huge amounts of carbon dioxide, which acidifies air, soil and oceans, and creates wastewater, waste gases and waste materials, which pollute our living environment. Particular economic growth in India has been noticed in recent years, when the United Nations cared about the effects of global warming and tried hard to seek resolutions. In order to increase average income, electronic, heavy metallic or other high-technological industries are well expanded.
Changing overfishing is the simplest way to protect India’s oceans and promote economic growth in India. In order to survive, people in India like to fish for food and could not obey the laws of the ecosystem all the time. They fish by themselves without spending money, and consider this as an beneficial way to survive. They have good skills in boating, fishing, and resisting natural forces to get their food. How to increase other abilities to earn livings could be the important points. They could begin assistance of finding jobs, guidance in getting market or creating their crops into new products, or helping them to market products in foreign countries.
Many activities on the sea, such as hydromotorcycles, banana split boats and parasailing, are the risk factors of coral bleaching. These activities are popular in India and are greeted with joy for visitors, nevertheless, these activities scare benthos to go away from their original places, change the air above the sea and the water undersea, and cause pollution, and coral reefs and their zooxanthellae would die and become bleached. The sightseeing development in India has been brought up in recent years. People would like to visit one of the top historic spots in India, and to experience undersea views. It is a valued trip to visit a view of coral reefs and animals underwater in India. However, some people have less knowledge of diving behaviors and might touch coral reefs or stand on them; caused zooxanthellae of coral reefs stay away and coral reefs without their zooxanthellae would die.
In short, the key destructive factor of Indian oceans is economic growth. This kind of situation is happening in most less-developing countries, but it could be controlled by the Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Limitations strategies would help our ocean environment come back as we go for it.
Reference
Coral Bleaching. (Oct, 17, 2007). Wikipedia. Retrieved on October 23, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
