First Blog - Climate Change

I personally think that we should not be concerned about the stories on climate change because the earth’s climate is and has always been changing beyond the human history and that the changes have nothing to do with humans. Carbon dioxide is food for the plants which improves global farming activities and only takes a small part of the atmosphere to cause global warming. Increase in temperatures causes the rise in the level of carbon dioxide and not the other way round. After all the observations of temperatures taken by weather balloons and satellites do not support the theory of global warming and the computers used to predict the future climate are unreliable and based on a series of assumptions as shown by the results that sometimes the predicted weather does not occur.

I believe that global warming has to do with the sun which very little is known by a human being. The climate is actually affected by the cosmic rays from the sun. Even if the temperatures rise by 5 degrees each year human beings have been known to adapt well to weather conditions. People who live in the African continent will not die if they migrate to the Far East where temperatures sometimes reach -25 degrees Celsius. The scale of negative effects of climate change is often overstated and there is no need for urgent action. Global warming alarmism is an implausible theory for which there is little evidence (Myron Ebell), director of global warming policy, competitive enterprise institute.

After Kyoto and Copenhagen conferences global warming remains to threaten a great reversal of human progress as we are not weighing the costs and benefit of possible climate proposals which creates yet a major gap and conflicts between the rich and poor countries of the world. Obviously the poor countries of the world cannot put money to fight global warming at the expense of starving people in their countries or either makes a priority in campaigning for the cut in carbon emissions yet they do not even have cars to drive in those countries. The pledges made by the British Prime minister Gordon Brown of £500 billion could for example go a long way in improving the lives of people in developing countries or set aside for unpredicted disasters like the resent Haiti quake. If scientists were critically doing accurate predictions they would have predicted the diverstating earthquakes and tsunamis which have taken so many lives today than predict a global warming for over 50 years to come.




I have a feeling global warming have been going on for a long time beyond our history at a very slow pace and there are no clear scientific facts on the measurements of the impacts on the environment. If scientists could predict the future on global warming then the solution should not be a problem and there should be no panic concerning the impacts at the moment. AS far as I can see it men can only be limited to what he can do on this earth and not bother about the future impacts since there is very little we can do as far as nature is concerned.

Green Transport, ‘Pros and Cons’

Although sustainable transport is a good concept, an idiology and in some countries, a governmental policy that consists of strenghening or replacing the current transport systems of an urbaan/suburban area with a more fuel efficient, space-saving and healthy lifestile, promoting alternatives and has low impact on the environment and human health, it has its own critisism.



Sustainable transport systems make a great contribution to the environmental, social and ecomonic sustainability of the communities they serve as poor transport management systems account to between 20-25% of the world’energy consuption and emmissions. Greenhouse gas emmissions from transport are increasing at a faster rate than any other energy using sector and is a mojor contributor to local air pollution and smog. traffic conjestion imposes economic costs by wasting people’s time and slowing business. The driving forces to sustainable mobility are encouraging walking, cycling and use of public transport.

David Banister and other writers’s ideas on sustainable mobility paradigmand and the London experience on controlling traffic are not bad ideas but might not be replicable in the other UK cities or be sussessful because each city in the UK has a unique cultural backgroung that includes the degree of conjestion, the city’s structures, the public transport situation (level of conjestion), the residential areas location to the city, the social developments, work and leisure facilities as compared to London. Mobility is essential to economic and social development. It enables people to access goods, services and information, as well as jobs, markets, family and friends (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneva, 2010).

http://www.urbcsd.org/web/mobility.htm




Most of UK’s major developments are driven by the residents acceptance. Each UK city is dependent on the residents acceptance to its development project and this is influenced by the cultures and their ability to accept any planned development within their cities and surounding areas. My comment on the issue of sustainable mobility is based on the public awareness campaign. I feel there is still need to increase the awareness campaign in most of our UK cities, firstly for the residents to understand the benefit of using less cars in our streets and the negative impacts caused by traffic conjestion to the environment and to public health. Most people do not understand why trafic management is linked to the human health and the environment.

Once the people have a wider understanding of the advantages of controlling traffic, will only drive them to accept the plans to improve their citie’s structures in line with the London’s ideas and help to reduce conjestion and pollution. Currently people take cycling and walking as the means to exercise and have goog health and not the indirect impacts on the environment and health. Sustainable mobility can be encouraged by indirect measures like bringing the goods, services and information, jobs and markets closer to the residential areas. Other indirect measures can be encouraging schools to come up with their transport plans to avoid conjestion to our city roads near schools. More park and ride facilities must be cited near major cities. Public acceptability is the key to the issue of sustainable mobility

Promoting Sustainable Travelling Choices



Sustainable travelling can be achieved by strategies like the following:
• improving public transport facilities
• using travel awareness campaigns (personalised travel planning, Information and marketing)
• car sharing and car clubs
• home shopping and technology
• walking
• cycling

The UK government is encouraging all its town/city authorities to step up their campaign towards smarter choices of travelling in all the country’s urban areas and countryside in order to cut down on the CO2 emissions. Most of the counties have promoted the ‘smarter choice’ in one way or the other including Darlington, Peterborough and Worcestershire who have carried out combined promotional strategies and came up with a convincing result that sustainable travelling is possible in some areas. The results from these three counties show that there is a considerable increase in the number of people who have chosen the sustainable travelling route. Sustainable travelling has positive results in improving air quality and reduces congestion.

The smarter choices implemented by the above counties have led to the following statistics:




The case study show an improvement in reducing the car trips by using other travelling options, although this needs some resource inputs efficiency, planning and might take time to implement. The pattern will obviously differ from one county to another due to some factors like availability of cash, the design of the towns/cities (including shopping /leisure places location, the size of the town/city, compliance of residents to changes and other unforeseen factors. The above results cannot be an accurate representation for all the towns/cities in the UK
Likewise Leicestershire’s eco-town proposal through the Co-operative (a sponsor) has put forward a proposal aimed to assisting the residents to optimise their use of public transport, walking and cycling to work places and schools.

The eco-town will be on the edge of Leicester conurbanation and will connect to the existing transport network by means of faster trains, buses as well as cycling and walking. The plan will also include a park and ride site, shopping complex and high quality transport interchange system. The plan aims to achieve a modal split of 55% public transport, 20% walk and cycle and 25% private car journeys out of the town. The eco-town will follow the Leicestershire’s Local Transport Plan (LTP) for 2006 to 2011 which includes tackling congestion, improved access to facilities and improve the air quality.71% of Leicestershire residents travelled to work by car (65% driving and 6% as passengers). Only 17% of the journeys were made by other options (9% walking, 50% by bus and 3% by cycling (2001 cencers).

Links:
http://www.ecotownforleicestershire.coop/
http://www.cleanersafergreener.gov.uk/
http://www.i2i.org/articles/2-2005.pdf
http://www.plan4sustainabletravel.org/

Air Pollution in Northampton Town Council.
Northampton among other towns and cities of UK is no exception as far as air pollution is concerned. This has led the county to designate eleven areas as Air Quality Management Areas(AQMAs) due to high levels of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The Nene Valley and Barrack Road among other locations have been designated areas of Air Quality Management. The main source of air pollution in Northampton is emissions from vehicles and Industries (Crake2009). Other areas include St James, Victoria Promenade, Kislingburg and areas along the M1 corridor(www.e.health@northampton.gov.uk)

Northampton declared so many air Quality Management Areas(AQMAs) in order to deal with the problem at the source as early as they can, reducing the effects of Global Warming as well as preventing acute health problems and reduce their direct impact upon the planet. Diesel engines emit as much as 26 automobiles (USA Environmental Protection Agency 2001-2002). Northampton has a high volume of industries and lies in the midlands with a high proportion of delivery trucks in and surrounding areas as compared to other cities. It is a centre of activity as far as transport business is concerned hence a high level of emissions from vehicles. It has a busy motorway (M1) that connects the south region to the north which adds to its problem of emissions.

Air pollution has a risk of people inhaling dangerous chemicals that will have found their way into the air. Each person has a capacity to inhale 20,000 litres of air every day. This air can be trapped inside buildings causing indoor pollution that lasts for a long time (Environment-A Global Challenge 1999).All pollution cause risk to human health and also affects the ecosystem (Caroline el at 1999). The fine dust is produced by diesel exhausts, power stations and industry. The UK has estimated the safe level for these particles is exceeded in most cities 10 percent of the time, causing 2,000-10,000 extra deaths per year (WHO, 1995; Martinson, 1996).


Real Time Analysers have been installed to accurately monitor local nitrogen oxide (N02) levels in the areas that have been designated Air Quality Management Areas in Northampton. Data is downloaded from these analysers every two days to provide a clear picture of the air quality (Burridge 2006, www.bbc.co.uk). Other solutions that can reduce air pollution include driving a car that gets at least 35 miles a gallon, walking, using a bicycle, using mass transit when possible. Others include making homes more energy efficient, using energy efficient appliances, recycle newspapers, aluminium and other materials. The most common solutions include planting trees, avoiding purchasing products such as Styrofoam that contain CFCs, supporting much stricter clean air laws and enforcement of international laws. Northampton county Council is trying all the best practises available to keep the pollution levels low. The big question is are they winning the race?
Posted by me.....
Took a while.

Global Problems:
Where should we start solving global problems? I am of the opinion that if we all thought like Bjorn Lonmborg we can solve global problems as long as we can make wise priorities and spend our available hard earned money wisely. There are so many global problems facing us today such as climate change, hunger, diseases, water shortages, conflicts to mention a few. The problem is the difference in our lifestyle makes us think differently towards making priorities in solving these problems.
The gap between the rich and poor nations has led to conflicts, hunger, poor education, corruption and financial instability and communicable diseases in poor states. It is the rich nations that think of climate change as the first priority to diseases and hunger as they are not affected by the later. The poor countries will however think it is better to prioritise hunger, diseases to education or climate change.
The problem is that the world is not united enough to fight these problems as one body. If we were to think the same surely where should we start to solve the global problems? Should we start with climate change of which the impacts are forecasted to take place some years to come and spend Billions of dollars each year towards it at the expense of millions of people dying from diseases, hunger, and lack of clean water, or should we channel the money to these problems first? Should we consider educating hungry people first or should we feed them and treat them before they die of diseases? Should we put money to stop the conflicts which we create ourselves or should we finance the nations which are financial unstable to buy more guns to fight fellow member states or to fight tribalism within their nations? Corruption will never end as long as the nation is in a state of hunger even if we pour money into that nation.


I would personally propose the following priorities if I had the means:

(First Priority)

• Malnutrition and hunger
• Communicable Diseases
• Water Sanitation
• Conflicts
• Education
• Government Corruption
• Financial Instability
• Climate Change
• Subsidies and barriers

(Last Priority)


What do you think?