Carney argues that the new energy-efficient light bulbs cost ten times more than the regular incandescent light bulbs and only last four times as long, which he believes is a way for the companies that make the light bulbs to take advantage of the situation to make a huge profit.  But one of the reasons his argument is flawed doesn’t even have to do with environmental science really.  It has to do more with economics and that is the manufacturing cost of the new light bulbs.  They are obviously more complex technology and therefore require more resources and cost more to manufacture.  This fact alone takes care of much of the increase in cost, but the new light bulbs also use less energy when they are on, which saves the person using the bulb money as well as that less coal needs to be burned to keep the bulb on for the same time.  This fact opens up a multitude of benefits for the public and the environment. 

Because the bulbs last longer, there will be less of them to throw away, which will reduce on the amount of landfill space taken up by light bulbs.  Because less coal needs to be burned in order to keep the light bulb going, less of the negative effects of burning coal will be experienced.  These effects include less particulate matter (small solid particles that, if breathed in, can affect the function of the lungs) will be put into the atmosphere.  Also, less radioactive emissions will be put onto the air which could immediately affect the health of those living in the immediate area of the plant.  Because less coal needs to be used, less needs to be mined and that cuts down on the amount of habitat destruction needs to be done in order to mine and transport the coal.  If the energy is coming from a nuclear power plant, less radioacive material neeeds to be used in order to run the plant and that again means less habitat destruction through mining and transportation of materials.  With less habitat destruction, there will be less affect to endangered species or of adding new endangered species, since the main cause of species becoming endangered is habitat destruction.  With so much less harmful greenhouse gases coming from power plants, there will be a reduction of global climate change.  With all of these benefits and the difference being simply paying a little more for a light bulb, I think that is a “pretty good trade.”

Sherwood Forest is a collection of many rare and ancient oaks and is thought by many to be the largest collection of oaks in Europe.  Many people identify Sherwood Forest and Robin Hood as being distinctly English, but the legendary forest is in serious trouble these days.  The original size of the forest was around 100,000 acres, but today the center of the forest only spans across 450 acres, with patches spread throughout the rest of Nottingham County.  The forest has been broken up throughout the years because of farming, mining, logging, and for the builing of towns.  The 450 acres that are left are in danger, as well.  The usual tree decline is that one oak per year falls. This year, seven oaks have already fallen, with many others looking very worn.  To try and save the forest, about 15 environmental organizations have joined together to try and win a $100 million grant that is being given through a tv program.  The program, called BIG Lottery, is a branch of the National Lottery and gives money to good causes.

Many people in both America and Britain grew up with the stories of Robin Hood hiding out in Sherwood Forest from the evil Sheriff of Nottingham and it has become somewhat a symbol of good in and of itself.  If the forest becomes no more, a nation will lose one of its defining features, as well as later generations of schoolchildren will not be able to see the places where many of their favorite legends and stories are said to have taken place.  This is just another example of how human expansion into nature can cause us to lose some of the things we love the most, even if we didn’t intend to getr them when we started off.

I believe that there is no “wrong time” to be trying to improve the world in which we live.  Although I have not agreed with the practices of Chicago’s mayor many times, I do believe that he is trying to do something good, even if it is just to improve the citie’s imaga and put it among other cities in the world that have gained better reputations by “going greeen.” 

I believe the problem that people have with investing money in the environment is that they cannot visibly see any changes in the short term.  When they spend money towards new roads or better schools, they can see the road or building being built, but when they use money for the environment, they have to trust some obscure reports that say things are improving, and these may not come until a year or two later.  I believe that this skepticism must be fought against with education.  We need to teach people that if we do not make the changes necessary to minimize the impact of human activity on the environment, then the planet will be used up and will no longer be liveable.  We need to give the people who make these decisions vivid images on how drastically life would change if the status quo is not changed.

Daley’s plan so far calls for two high-profile concepts.  The first is the addition of wind turbines to be fitted on top of Sears Tower in order to harness the power of the strong winds that blow at the top of one of the tallest buildings in the world.  The other is the builing of a “green roof” on top of the Merchandise Mart.  Now the plan wishes to drop the key greenhouse gas levels by 25 percent from their 1990 levels according to early reports.  To do this, however, a a major chain of improvements must be made to the cities’ transportation system, around 2.7 billion in all, and this is after CTA has floated several major budget-cut scenarios. 

Although there is much early opposition to this plan, I believe that it is a very important step to improving not only the environmental impact of the city collectively, but also the quality of life in the city, as the air will become cleaner and improvements to the transportation system will make city travel more enjoyable and safer.  I sincerely hope that this plan is set into motion and that people come to realize that although they may have to sacrifice much for the sake of the planet, it is worth it in order for our posterity to take care of the planet as we have not yet done.

Two years after the treaty was signed, large groups of animals that previously were indigenous to southern Sudan are returning, bringing much excitement to scientists and environmentalists in the area.  Some of the animals that are returning include:  elephants, giraffes, antelopes, lions, leopards, and gazelle.  After large numbers of these animals left years ago, some thought that many of them would never return.  An arial survey of the area revealed that the number of antelopes in the area is calculated to be around 1.3 million, which is one of the easons that some are looking at this as one of the largest mammal migrations in history.

The animals are returning because of the peace that has returned to the area, but that peace is very fragile and tensions are rising again between the North and the South.  If the peace is broken, it could not only mean a return to the bloodshed that had plagued the area for years, but it could also mean that the animals will once again leave the area and push into other ecosystems, causing environmental imbalances in other areas. 

The article made me think of ways in which war and other human activities that we may not think of as being inherently damaging to the environment can seriously affect the environment surounding it.  It just goes to show that almost every major human activity has some kind of impact on the environment.

The problem I have, and which is what the article adresses, is companies who put up the image that they are being envrironmentally friendly, when in fact they are just doing the bare minimum and not actually contributing at all.  The problem I have with this is that companies are taking advantage of the fact that even though most if not all people want to help the environment, they really have no idea how to do so.  The real way to help the environment would be to educate people on how to do so, but instead they are using the idea of free market capitalism to take advantage of people’s ignorance. 

The article gave several tips on how to determine whether a companies’ practices are actually environmentally friendly or whether they are just putting on a show in order to boost sales or ratings.  One tip-off for food products was to read the labels on the package.  Make sure that the phrases used are specific.  The more generic the wording, like “eco-friendly” or “earth-safe”, the more skeptical a perspective buyer should be.  Other companies have parts of their web site that outline how they are being environmentally friendly, but readers should have a critical eye.  Some companies are completely honest and forthcoming about their dedication to the environment, while others use this as a tool for marketing.  If it seems that a company is exaggerating what they have done to change their polluting ways or if, again, the wording is vague, the report is probably misleading or not completely factual.

Many things people can do to reduce their affect on the environment are things that don’t take too much effort or cost too much, such as carpooling or switching to fluorescent light bulbs.  This brings me back to my previous point and leaves you with just a few words of advice: the best thing we can do is to get educated about the environment, so GET EDUCATED, learn anything and everything you can, but beware of misinformation and those trying to take advantage of people, but don’t ever be deterred from learning, because that is perhaps the best thing you can do, is learn all you can.

The Florida Everglades are essentially a slow moving river which was formed from flooding during the rainy season in southern Florida. The flooding caused waters from Lake Okeechobee, a large, shallow lake, to overflow into the very flat, limestone valleys below.  Likewise, the Kissimmee River would overflow its banks in the wet season and add to the flood that brought about the formation of the Everglades. This slow-moving body of water flows from Lake Okeechobee down to the southern tip of Florida and Florida Bay.  The Everglades exists because of Florida’s distinct wet and dry seasons, Florida’s flat topography, and Florida’s extensive system of shallow lakes and rivers, which give the Everglades the ability to continue, but that sustainability is being threatened by human interaction with the natural ecosystem.

The Everglades has long been a significant source for freshwater for many years.  The city of Miami draws its water supply from the Everglades and therefore greatly benefits from its existence, although they may not totally realize it.

The ecosytem of the Everglades is a place where numerous rare and endangered species survive, such as the Florida panther, the West Indian manatee, and the wood stork, along with twelve other species.  These species are quite rare to see, even for scientists who study the Everglades and frequently go on excursions into the area.  The population of Florida panthers is especially small, as there are only 30-50 of the animals left,  making it the rarest native animal in the area.  The panthers are suffering from human intervention cutting down their habitat and therefore are also suffering the effects of inbreeding with such a small population.  The West Indian manatee is an animal which is perhaps one of the most  gentle in the world.  It has no known natural enemies, save perhaps the human, and that only because WE have made it so.  The manatee’s time is divided between resting, playing, and eating, the good life.  The manatee’s greatest problem is people boating.  Manatee’s like to float near the surface of the water, and the propellers from boats can cut the manatee’s back and cause infections that can lead to their death.  This has prompted officials to set no wake zones where manatee’s are known to live in order to try and prevent this from happening.  The wood stork is a bird which has been studied as the indicator species, which means that because the wood stork has adapted so well to living in the Everglades, researchers have taken how well the stork is doing as a measure of how well the Everglades in general is doing.  Well, neither the Everglades nor the wood stork are doing well.  Since the Everglades has been systematically cut and drained over the past few decades, the woodstork, as well as many other birds indiginous to the Everglades, has been diminishing greatly in number.

The main reason that the Everglades has diminished to half its original size is mainly because of agricultural and real estate interests.  Farmers and developers alike want the land that was once thought to be uninhabitable.  The draining of the marshy areas causes the original habitat to be destroyed and the indiginous species can no longer live there, causing them to be smushed into a smaller area.  Another reason why indiginous species are losing population are because of invasive species that human have introduced into the environment.  A tree called the melaleuca tree was spread by planes over the Everglades by plane in order to “dry up” the land so that it could be made suitable development.  Now, the tree has grown rapidly throughout the area and has endangered the survival of some of the indiginous plant species, as well as that the tree is highly flammable, which adds to the probability for wildfires.  An animal that has been introduced into the area and is causing trouble is the Burmese python, indiginous to southeast Asia.  The rise of the python in the area is because of the pet trade.  When people see that their python has grown too large, they let thier pet out into the wilderness.  Apparently, the Everglades is the perfect place to have pythons, because they are growing rapidly and are coming into contact with some of the endangered species of the area, such as the Amercian alligator.  There have been at least four recorded incidents between pythons and the endangered alligators.

Steps are being taken in order to try and preserve this truly unique ecosystem and allow the creatures that live there to continue.  I only hope that the action being taken is not too late and that this wonderful area can be preserved for generations to come.

According to the research that has been conducted by scientists which I have read, the lawns in the United States are most certainly a collective foe to the world environment.  The use of water to keep our lawns looking beautiful is a large drain on the world water supply, which as of right now is becoming very short in supply.  The study done by scientist Cristina Milesi showed that the vast majority of lawns in the U.S. cannot sustain themselves by the water allotted them by nature and would die if it were not for the large amounts of water people use in order to keep their lawns green.  The problem is that most of the grass used in lawns today are not indiginous to the area in which they are planted.  An example used by Milesi was the common use of Kentucky blue grass for lawns.  Normally, this type would be restricted to a specific area in which its optimal growing conditions are maintained, but because of the want for lawns to look a certain way, thic type of grass has been transported throughout the country to environments in which it doesn’t naturally grow.  The result is that large amounts of water are used to make sure the grass grows.  If the grass used in lawns were indiginous to the area in which they are being grown, vast amounts of resources could be saved in watering and the use of fertilizer.  As Milesi explains in her article, in her birth country of Italy, the lawns are small and made up of indiginous plants which are able to withstand the hot summers without drying up and dying.  If this was applied in the U.S., a majority of the estimated 200 centimeters per year needed to water the average lawn could be saved, which is also 2 meters of water.  Another problem that exists with the typical American lawn is that, although altogether the combined lawns could store a large amount of carbon, 16.7 teragrams per year, which is 16.7e10 kilograms and 3.68e10 pounds, this is only a small amount compared to the amount of carbon released from the emmissions of carseach year, as well as the amount of carbon that trees could store in that same area would immensly outweigh that of grass.  Therefore, growing trees in stead of non-indiginous grass would be greatly better for the environment and therefore the human racein the future.   If people grew four trees in place of their lawns, the impact would be enourmous and would most likely greatly help the crisis that is going on today.  Another advantage to trees is that they need not nearly as much water as lawns do and therefore would help stave off the elimination of the world’s fresh water supply.  Milesi’s report claims that leaving grass clippings on lawns would lead to a greater storage of carbon, which is because the grass left on the lawn would store carbon before i decomposes.  However, the article also states that the leaving of clippings could eventually lead to no real benifit because as the grass decomposes, it releases carbon emmissions which could cancel out the carbon that the grass storedin the first place. 

There are several steps which can be taken in order to reduce the negative impact which a lawn has on the environment.  One is to simply have an efficient use of water.  People should have set amounts of water they are able to use for watering according to the areain which they live and the amount of recent precipitation there has been.  Some areas out West are already employing this tactic, however I believe that the entire country should use this method in order to conserve water supplies.  Another step that could be taken would be to plant a tree in stead of grass because trees store more carbon than grass.  If we do not change the ways in which we take care of our lawns, they will continue to be a contributing factor in the environmental crisis that the world is facing today.