Category: Source Entry RD (Page 8 of 13)

Part 1:

Ortiz, D. A. (n.d.). Ten simple ways to act on climate change. Retrieved October 23, 2020, from https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181102-what-can-i-do-about-climate-change

Climate Solutions. (n.d.). Retrieved October 23, 2020, from https://ucsusa.org/climate/solutions

*Both sources cited in APA Format*

Part 2:

The first article written by Ortiz tells me ten ways that are simple to act on climate change. One way he states is that, “The number one goal? Limiting the use of fossil fuels such as oil, carbon and natural gas and replacing them with renewable and cleaner sources of energy, all while increasing energy efficiency.” He’s not wrong since fossil fuel burns a lot. Ortiz refutes the claim folks made that renewable energy is expensive by telling me, “Actually, renewables like wind and solar are becoming increasingly cheap across the world (although final costs are subject to local circumstances). The latest report from the International Renewable Energy Agency (Irena) found that several of the most commonly used renewables, like solar, geothermal, bioenergy, hydropower and onshore wind, will be on par with or cheaper than fossil fuels by 2020. Some are already more cost-effective.” To sum it up, climate change will have an impact on lives and the actions we take will influence the planet for oncoming decades, for better or for worse. 

The second article tells me about possible solutions to avoid the worst. They first talk about cutting emissions to reach “net zero.” As stated, “To achieve net zero emissions, we need a massive transformation in how we produce and consume electricity. We need a newer, better transportation system. We need to stop deforestation. We need a climate-friendly agricultural system.” It’s always best to prepare for the worst (in case it happens) and adapting. The unknown author says, “Cutting carbon is the only long-term solution for avoiding climate impacts. In the short-term, we need to adapt. That means everything from discouraging development in high-risk areas, to planning for water scarcity, to building more resilient cities and communities. Investments should be scientifically sound and socially just, and focused where the impacts are greatest—often in low-income communities and communities of color.” It’s great that they are including other sources to adapt other than the weather or relying on data. The article ends with them putting emphasis on “act” and how it is important for everyone to do their part to make the Earth a healthy place to live in. 

Part 3: 

I agree with the first article a lot and what is showcased about ten simple ways to act on climate change. As Ortiz puts it, “In a new report published in September 2018, the world’s leading climate scientists made their starkest warning so far: our current actions are not enough for us to meet our target of 1.5C of warming. We need to do more. It’s settled science that climate change is real, and we’re starting to see some of the ways that it affects us. It increases the likelihood of flooding in Miami and elsewhere, threatens the millions of people living along the Brahmaputra River in north-eastern India and disrupts the sex life of plants and animals.” Ortiz has a point, if we have a target and are trying to reach it, but no one is helping or understanding than it affects the lives of plants and animals in different parts of the world. Ortiz also states, “Changing how industries are run or subsidized doesn’t sound like anything I can influence… can I? You can. Individuals need to exercise their rights both as citizens and as consumers, Robert and other experts say, putting pressure on their governments and on companies to make the system-wide changes that are needed.” This quote is telling me that everyone needs to be involved. It can’t be just the people it has to be people and the government. 

I agree with the second article because all the points that the unknown author made were spot on. In the article it states, “The best policy ideas in the world aren’t worth much if we don’t have activists, experts, and everyday people fighting for change. From school groups to churches; from corporate boardrooms to mayors and local leaders: we need action.” This quote really helps tie the fact that we need everyone for change, yes it starts with one person then more people chime in to be the change. A good thing to point out is that disinformation really does mislead the public eye and can lead the topic to propaganda no matter how controversial or debatable it may be. As the unknown author puts it, “This barrage of disinformation misleads and confuses the public about the growing consequences of global warming and makes it more difficult to implement the solutions we really need. Until the influence of these special interests is sufficiently diminished, climate action will be that much harder.” Therefore, this article is a good read and has taught me so much about possible solutions.

Part 4:

“Climate change is one of the most challenging problems that humanity has ever faced. At stake are hundreds of millions of lives, innumerable species and ecosystems, the health and viability of the economy, and the future habitability of this planet.” (second article)

“Fortunately, climate change is solvable. We have the technologies. We have the science. We now need the leadership—and the courage to change course.” (second article)

My sources: https://youtu.be/8Ra8udKbHro

    In this video it explains what’s really happening in the United States Mexico Border from the beginning where everything started. In the data it shows how in the last 10 years the amount of  immigrants crossing the border have changed continuously. After 2014 it has shown more families traveling with children looking for refugee status. Most of these immigrant families are from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras which are from Central America. The international and U.S. law gives the right to any people that show up at the border to request for an asylum. An asylum can be granted to people or refugees that can not return to their home country because of prosecution. Although in April 2018 Trump announced the zero tolerance policy. Which is for any undocumented bordering crossings to be prosecuted criminally. Resulting in separation between parents and their children. Where these children are kept in tents and weren’t taken care of properly because they have been seen dirty. Haven’t been given enough essentials to be clean and not enough food. Based on the video many people are still coming across the border because they face more danger in their home country’s. 

    After viewing this video I disagree with the actions that our president Trump has taken towards immigrants. Mostly because of these specific actions is what caused so much horror for these immigrant families. For example the zero tolerance policy is an action that shouldn’t have ever been made. This policy apart from going against the law for undocumented people wanting to request for an asylum are treated drictely as criminals. According to the video it states “People don’t leave their home countries unless they have to unless what they are facing at home is so much worse then the dangers they face along the way”. I totally agree with this quote because these people don’t want to cross the border illegally but because they need to for their families. Most of these people are coming in to protect their families and construct a better life for them. Which is not fair to create this zero tolerance policy and making it result in family separation at he border. Knowing these people are coming in because they are in need. 

    In this video some rhetorical factors I like that the authors used was the choice of evidence they picked. Meaning a part of researching and gathering ll the data to use in the video. They have included an attorney. Where in the video you’ll hear audio parts from the attorney speaking about this matter. 

“The situation has been called in an invasion, national emergency, and a humanitarian crisis”

Part 1: 

Hansen, J. (n.d.). Transcript of “Why I must speak out about climate change”. Retrieved October 23, 2020, from https://www.ted.com/talks/james_hansen_why_i_must_speak_out_about_climate_change/transcript?language=en

*Cited in APA Format*

Part 2: 

James Hansen talks about the generality of climate change and why it is important to speak on it. Hansen states, “I was fortunate to join NASA and successfully propose an experiment to fly to Venus. Our instrument took this image of the veil of Venus, which turned out to be a smog of sulfuric acid. But while our instrument was being built, I became involved in calculations of the greenhouse effect here on Earth, because we realized that our atmospheric composition was changing.” Hansen talked about the greenhouse effect telling me, “… that gasses such as CO2 absorb heat, thus acting like a blanket warming Earth’s surface. In Hansen’s Ted Talk he states that, “By 15 years later, evidence of global warming was much stronger. Most of the things mentioned in our 1981 paper were facts. I had the privilege to speak twice to the president’s climate task force. But energy policies continued to focus on finding more fossil fuels.” Global warming is affecting a lot of folks. Stated in the Ted Talk, “The Texas, Oklahoma, Mexico heatwave and drought last year, Moscow the year before and Europe in 2003, were all exceptional events, more than three standard deviations outside the norm. Fifty years ago, such anomalies covered only two- to three-tenths of one percent of the land area. In recent years, because of global warming, they now cover about 10 percent — an increase by a factor of 25 to 50.” Lastly he tells me why he is alarmed on climate change, how clear the science is, and communication is key to the urgency of the situation and how we can find effective solutions. 

Part 3: 

I agree with James Hansen on what he has to say about climate change as well as the individuals that are affected. He made points that are poised and believes that change is upon us. I thought it was excellent to provide data because data helps us have clarity in scientific information. One piece of data in Hansen’s Ted Talk is, “What sea level rise can we look forward to? The last time CO2 was 390 ppm, today’s value, sea level was higher by at least 15 meters, 50 feet. Where you are sitting now would be under water. Most estimates are that, this century, we will get at least one meter. I think it will be more if we keep burning fossil fuels, perhaps even five meters, which is 18 feet, this century or shortly thereafter.” He’s saying that burning fossil fuels are bad.

Another thing to note is that the ice caps are melting by stating, “Ice sheets would continue to disintegrate for centuries.” Hansen is not wrong because the previous point he made about the sea levels correlates with ice caps at their melting point which can add onto sea levels rising. He also states, “This path, if continued, guarantees that we will pass tipping points leading to ice sheet disintegration that will accelerate out of control of future generations.” Human beings are the root of ice caps that are at their tipping point. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions have temperatures that are so high. Poles are even higher which result into glaciers that melt rapidly which go into land and sea. 

Time is really of the essence right now, we can make climate change have a positive effect even when the cause is bad. I really do question the future of the Earth. In Earth Science class at high school I was taught briefly about Earth and how it was made. There are so many layers to Earth and what it can do, and it is our planet to protect as if we are the guardians of it. So, why can’t people suck it up and care? Why is it hard for folks to recycle, reduce, and reuse? “Imagine a giant asteroid on a direct collision course with Earth.” It seems like you all want this if you don’t try to care for the planet you’re living and breathing on.  

Part 4:

“That is the equivalent of what we face now. Yet, we dither, taking no action to divert the asteroid, even though the longer we wait, the more difficult and expensive it becomes. If we had started in 2005, it would have required emission reductions of three percent per year to restore planetary energy balance and stabilize climate this century. If we start next year, it is six percent per year. If we wait 10 years, it is 15 percent per year — extremely difficult and expensive, perhaps impossible. But we aren’t even starting.”