Spring 2014
Vertical Farming has finally been implemented commercially in Singapore.
It also seems to be making money, which is one of the key points of making vertical farming sustainable for the future.
It saves land and water by being around 10 times more efficient than a conventional farm.
To those of you who skipped class, we talked about pros and cons of natural gas, as well as how there can be improvements.
Benefits
Negative consequences
Area of improvement
We also watched some YouTube videos involving fracking, including…
A Killer of Bats Inches Towards Texas
The disease we talked about in class, the White Nose Syndrome, is now moving towards Texas. The extent that cavers are willing to go in order to prevent disease spread is larger than I thought. As the article said, hopefully bats in the US will develop an immunity or non infected bats can take over.
In this article, published in the New York Times, Stephen Castle touches on the issue of the smog that beset London on Wednesday. According to Castle, “Central London had moderate levels of air pollution on Wednesday, with a score of 6 on an index on which 10 ranks “very high.”” Recall that a number of cities in China were beset by the same problems with smog earlier this year. In fact, in this article, published in The Guardian, author Adam Vaughan identifies nine cities that suffered from the same smog issues. Call to memory too that Paris came under clouds of smog earlier this year, initiating a driving ban and offering free mass transit. More on this can be found in this article published in the Los Angeles Times.
In an era where cities around the world are being beset by smog and all of the health-related implications of the pollution causing it, will this become the new norm?
In this article, published in the New York Times, author Coral Davenport blows the whistle on the Environmental Protection Agency, which “failed to consistently disclose health risks, including possible cancer risks, to research study participants who were exposed to dangerous pollutants.” In studies conducted in 2010 and 2011 by the Environmental Protection Agency, participants were “exposed…to soot and diesel exhaust emissions,” potential carcinogens, yet the risks for cancer were notably omitted from “consent forms obtained from the subjects.”
The purpose of sharing this, I think, is to keep in mind that progress is important when attempting to find new solutions, methods or even cures meant to have a greater benefit than the potential detriment caused by a study, yet just as important is utilizing the right methods to go about these discoveries. The means must be just as honorable as the ends.
In this article, published in the New York Times, author Justin Gillis touches on the recent report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a branch of the United Nations “that periodically summarizes climate science.” The main point of the report was that the worst is yet to come. Given that climate change is a present issue, occurring everyday, the effects of it are difficult to slow down without taking the serious steps to cut back on carbon and greenhouse gas emissions.
On the front of human rights, the report “emphasized that the world’s food supply is at considerable risk – a threat that could have serious consequences for the poorest nations” (emphasis mine).
Furthermore, on the sociological and political fronts, the report “cited the risk of death or injury on a wide scale, probable damage to public health, displacement of people and potential mass migrations.”
Finally, on the economic side, “climate-change impacts are projected to slow down economic growth, make poverty reduction more difficult, further erode food security, and prolong existing and create new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hot spots of hunger.”
Climate change is not only about the earth and the resources that are exhausted through mass consumption, though these are two ends in and of themselves. Climate change has implications in the realms of economics, politics and even human rights.
In this article, published in the New York Times, author John Schwartz tackles the subject of the federal government’s program supporting the planting of various plants meant to sustain bees and also produce economic benefits through a reduced need for pesticides and greater plant pollination.
According to Schwartz, “researchers are trying to find assortments of bee-friendly plants that local farmers and ranchers can easily grow, whether in unusable corners and borders of their land or on acreage set aside with government support.”
So far, the Midwest has been included in a $3 million government plan to support growth in the bee population, though Schwartz also mentions that, while the variety of plants supporting this growth may be different from place to place, there is great potential. For example, in drought-ridden California, drought-resistant plants can play a major role in the desired bee population growth.
Furthermore, the most important aspect to note from this article, is the principle, according to Laurie Davis Adams, “executive director of Pollinator Partnership,” that “This is not one size fits all. This is one ethic fits all.”
In case you missed it – see NYTimes story
One advantage of converting to renewables would be less of these messes (recall the much larger Deepwater Horizon spill in spring and summer 2010).
© 2025 Sustainability and Built Systems
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
Recent Comments