Tagged with " Climate Change"
Glacier National Park, located in the state of Montana at the borders of the US and Canada has been the hub for extreme sports and outdoor activity including hunting, winter sports, fishing, climbing and hiking.
But it has been reported that due to climate change melting away its glaciers, ‘Glacier’ National Park may no longer be a suitable name for what the park is known for. It is expected that its glaciers will be completely gone in 16 years. The park was established in 1910 and once had 150 ice sheets. Sadly, less than 30 now remain.
The park had many small ski areas, but as the Winters are shorter and the snow being lighter, the ski areas have been unable to stay open. And not only has the level of winter activities lowered, but the wildlife has been effected too. The bull trout population has decreased as the water temperatures have risen.
Below, is an after and before picture of the Boulder Glacier Terminus.
Left, taken in 1913. Right, taken in 2012.
Imagine if the Earth’s temperature could cool down by the sun’s radiation reflecting back to space? Or if the Carbon Dioxide was captured directly and buried underground? Would these solutions give you a good reason to continue using your car and less of public transport? Would you become less conscious of electricity and energy usage?
In case you’re wondering, these questions are referring to ‘Geoengineering’. Geoengineering is a controversial aim of manipulating the Earth’s climate at a large scale. Its solutions can be divided into two groups:
Solar Geoengineering and Carbon Dioxide Geoengineering
Some examples of Solar Geoengineering can include:
- Forming reflective particles in the stratosphere
- Increasing the reflectivity of low level marine clouds
- Altering crops to make them more reflective
And some examples of Carbon Dioxide Geoengineering are:
- Capturing Carbon Dioxide directly from the air and storing it underground
- Fertilising the ocean to increase Carbon Dioxide uptake
- Large scale afforestation
Geoengineering is still at its early stages and more research is being carried out. Of course it has promoted many debates, as many think it is ethically wrong seeing that it involves interfering with the natural environment.
A study showed that those who are wealthy or has a self-image created from power and high status were more likely to go with the statement: “Knowing Geoengineering is a possibility makes me feel less inclined to make changes in my own behaviour to tackle climate change.”
So the big question is, what are your views on Geoengineering? And if you’re someone who isn’t against Geoengineering and have improved your behaviour towards environmental-care and climate change, would you continue with this behaviour if there were confirmed plans for Geoengineering to come into operation?
As we all know, it takes time to get someone to do something different, especially when it’s out of their comfort zone. For many decades, we’ve all known that there is a greater need to care for our lovely earth and although new measures are put in to place all the time, our old habits still get in the way. However, it’s all about good, regular communication and encouragement, to get the public to do what you want them to do.
Manchester United is one of the biggest, iconic UK football clubs, it’s a brand within it self and is recognised all over the world with about 660 million fans – Manchester United is definitely powerful enough to communicate positive messages of caring for the environment and turning their fans into environmentalist. Well, maybe not to the extreme of becoming an environmentalist, but if they can encourage them to do a regular contribution by doing something as basic as placing the plastic and glass bottles into the right recycling bins rather than dumping them in the regular bins without a second thought, then at least some positive difference would’ve been made.
As there is a strong correlation between sports and good behaviour change, this will also be a good way to encourage the younger generation and to develop good habits while they’re still young, as plenty of them look up to these footballers as icons and role models.
Other sports teams around the world have recognised the need to promote environmental-care, for example, the Barclays Centre in New York, home to the NBA Brooklyn Nets basketball team, runs competitions for local businesses. These businesses have to implement some energy efficiency measures and who ever achieves the highest performance will win signed memorabilia and free tickets to watch the games.
The Seattle Mariners baseball team holds weekly challenges in which fans have to answer a set of questions. The clues are kept at recycling points around the stadium. The winning prize is a tablet computer.
So competitions can be an effective way to get the wider public involved in environmental-care. After all, it’s the chance of winning a prize that makes it more attractive. But could there be a down-side to holding competitions? Will this really improve the fans’ behaviour towards environmental-ethics even when there isn’t a competition or challenge involved?