The design of cities is highly correlated with the carbon output of its residents. aside form obvious causes like the power grid and whereof it draws its energy, street design and urban sprawl create a mandate for personal vehicles to get on with daily life. In towns and cities in Europe which were originally built when there were no cars, it was expected that everyone would walk everywhere. As such the distribution of houses, shops, and institutions was condensed such that it was possible for an individual to reach them on foot. These cities retain, even now with automobiles, the relevance of walking. With narrow streets designed for walking it can often be cumbersome to drive, lowering the otherwise resulting emissions. In modern cities this is a stark opposite to the urban sprawl and normalization of driving everywhere.

cite:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/129 … y-country/

Hello Hilo,

You bring up an amazing point about how historical design shapes current sustainability. I also would add that cities with walkable infrastructure also benefit from reduced emissions. Not just due to less driving, but because dense urban living often means smaller living spaces, which consuming less energy overall. However, in our wonderful country the United States, many newer developments prioritize wide roads over narrow and start to enforce zoning laws that separate residential from commercial areas, making cars almost necessary. So if we start to reimagine urban design around mixed-use zoning and transit-oriented development, it could definitely help reverse some of the effects of urban sprawl.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "compact, mixed-use development helps reduce emissions and promotes healthier lifestyles."

Transportation makes up a large part of both personal and national carbon emissions and is definitely a problem that needs to be addressed, especially in the United States. Public transportation has been underfunded for years in the U.S. and it is very difficult to live in most cities without a car, but in many European cities people can rely solely on walking and public transportation. European citizens on average have much lower carbon emissions, too, though likely from a combination of things. Better train systems in the United States would also lower the number of domestic and intrastate flights taken, which right now is a number in the tens of thousands per day range and affects greenhouse gas emissions greatly. The government needs to focus on providing safer and more widely accessible transportation options and U.S. citizens need to commit to choosing them over personal vehicles when possible.
https://www.sei.org/publications/consum … itigation/
https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involv … alculator/

We don't all have the resources to do big things to save our planet, like spending money on electric cars, or buying expensive heating systems that use electricity instead of gas. And that is totally fine because there is so many more different ways we can help our planet, for example: recycling and composting, when you recycle it reduces the amount of garbage that would have been sent to the landfills. Or just putting your left over scraps in a bin thats only for compostable things, that reduces so much waste that we would mix with garbage and put and put in our landfill. Other simple things we can do are: Talking to people about this topic, turning off lights when leaving rooms, taking more transit or carpooling, bringing reusable bags to the grocery store. And all those small things can help reduce the affect us humans have on the climate.

I completely agree. Nobody's forcing you to change your home's heating or invest in new cars, but so many easy things can reduce our carbon footprints. One example is taking shorter showers. Instead of taking your time and using the water for 20 minutes, you can easily reduce down to 10 minutes by going at a normal pace and using the water for a small amount of time. Another thing is powering down your laptop. If it goes into sleep mode, it's still using battery and it's technically still on. Constantly leaving it on can also cause it to have a shorter life. These are two examples of things that don't require you to spend money or make huge changes in your daily life. I think everybody needs to consider opportunities like this to lower our carbon footprints.

I really appreciate both of your points – especially how you emphasize that even small changes in our daily habits can make a big difference. I completely agree with the idea that we don’t need to make expensive lifestyle changes to help the environment. I also liked the example about taking shorter showers – that’s something I’ve started doing too, and it really made me more aware of how much water I was using before. Another simple action I’d add is washing clothes in cold water. Experts say that about 90% of the energy used by washing machines goes toward heating the water, so switching to cold water saves energy and lowers emissions. It's a small change, but if many people did it, the impact could be huge. These everyday actions might seem minor on their own, but together they can build a more sustainable lifestyle.

I agree with the idea that we don’t all need a lot of money to help the planet. It’s true that small things like recycling, composting, or turning off lights can make a big difference if everyone does them. It’s good that the text points out that you don’t need to buy expensive things like electric cars. People often think they have to do something huge, so they end up doing nothing. That’s why it’s important to talk about small steps that everyone can take. I think messages like this should be shared more often in schools and communities.

I also think that making even small changes can have an effect. I personally have thought before that i'm one person and the things I do cant make a difference. But if everyone thinks this way then we make no changes. One persons decision to make a change can be followed by other eventually creating an impact.

It's very true how small actions can make a big difference, especially when not everyone can afford expensive solutions. I agree that composting, recycling, and turning off lights are all great ways to help. One thing I would add is the impact of water use, such as cutting down on how much water we waste. Things like by taking shorter showers or fixing leaks also helps the environment out. As you mentioned, starting conversations can lead to bigger community changes and it's important to continue doing so in the future.

I like how you are emphasizing that the little things do matter. I agree, and I think that sometimes people get discouraged because they don't have the time, money, or resources to change their lifestyle in a large way. Some things I do to help are reusing containers from things like skincare or hair products, I always turn off the lights when I leave a room, and I carpool almost everywhere I go. Although these things may seem like they are making minimal impact, if everyone did this bare minimum, our world would be much better off.

I agree with you that everything matters. Many use the fact that they don't have power or money to excuse them not attempting to help, but even one person can make a difference. We all need to be advocating and raising awareness for this because we are, unfortunately, all contributing to this. I also like all the suggestions you made like composting and using reusable items. Anyone can do this and if we all did it the world might not consider this such a big problem. The reality is whether or not we have power or money, we are all responsible for doing our part.

I completely agree, especially your point about how we don't need to make big sacrifices to save our planet; instead, small, everyday actions can make a big impact. I try to do small things every day, such as turning off my lights when I leave my room and using a reusable water bottle rather than plastic ones. I also bring reusable shopping bags for groceries when I go shopping. I believe these small actions can lead to the best results in protecting our Earth, and if each of us does just one small thing every day, we will see a better future for our world.

The human population has been growing since the 15th century in Europe and its been growing ever since.  The population continues growing but at a slower rate. The human population is expected to reach 10 billion by 2058, if the population continues to grow, ( which is predicted to grow) the humans will out compete other species, which can lead to a lot of animals going extinct. The planet will no longer be  able to sustain the growing population and we will end up reaching the carrying capacity. As our population grows other populations of other species will drop, we will end up killing them all. As humans it is our responsibility to look after the other species that we are out competing.

I think that this is very insightful because it acknowledges that climate change is not just what humans are doing, but also that there are a lot of them. Everyone blames climate change on how poorly the human race uses our resources and makes choices that contribute to an increase our greenhouse gas emissions, but as a race we are also increasing in population, which increases our greenhouse gas emissions. We still do need to work on how much greenhouse gas we emit and make sure we make good decisions for our climate.

Fast fashion is cheap, poor quality, disposable clothing that is produced quickly and sold at low prices. It is not something completely new and it has been around for a long time. You don't even know it but most of your favorite stores like Zara, H&M, Primark, Forever 21 and Shein that have lately been very popular are considered fast fashion brands. This has always been a big problem and today even more because fast fashion is responsible for 10% of global carbon dioxide emission. So, next time you want to shop in one of these stores think twice.

There are a lot of sad things happening around the world, and unfortunately, they are usually what make the news and get lots of publicity as opposed to the good changes and actions happening. This can lead to hopeless or anxious feelings about climate change that cause some people to stop trying to fight climate change. It is important to be aware of the good and innovative things happening in the world as well as the bad.

I agree! I think that if people were more informed about the good changes that others are making to help fight climate change, then they would be more motivated to help make changes to improve as well! I think that instead of promoting the tragic news to make people feel hopeless and doomed (although it's still good for awareness), we should promote more news about positivity to motivate others into willingly helping improve the state of the world. Positive news could be more inspiring and help lead someone into wanting to do what others are doing to make the world a better place for everyone to live in and to inform them of the small changes they can do to make a big difference. Sad/tragic news on the other hand could make someone feel like it's too late to make a change or the problems are too big to be able to do something about it (which is completely untrue)

I agree with this, I think it is very important to focus on what we can do and change instead of what we are doing wrong all the time. Though it is important for people to know the severity of whats happening right now I think we could educate people on whats happening in a less scary way. Educating people and especially kids in a way that makes them feel like they can do their part is vital so people actually start making change instead of being scared of how much they need to change their lives in order to save the whole world. I think a great way to educate everyone is start with small things like how to recycle properly and to advertise clean ups that you could sign up with your friends or family.

Doing things as simple as composting, turning off lights when you're not home, recycling, taking quicker showers, and carpooling or riding a bike or walking can help the environment. these are all easy and not very time-consuming lifestyle choices that you can make that can help save our earth. Obviously, there are larger problems than plastic straws in the world but every little thing can help.

Dear BigCmanCrago, i agree that we must make these small changes in our own lifestyles, and even though it may not seem like it's making a big deference, if everyone does it, it will.  I know this to be true because I used to use the opposite argument, that if i buy and throw away just one or two recyclable bottles, its not that big a deal. If I take 30 minute showers just this week, it wont really matter. Yet its when everyone in the world thinks like this that we have a problem. We must shift our our mindsets together to start thinking about the little things, and thinking about our future.

I think osker makes a very good point. It can be easy to forget about the other eight billion people we share a planet with, often using the excuse “what difference can one person make?”. And sure, one person who chooses not to recycle couldn’t have less of an impact, but when hundreds, thousands, millions of people decide that its no longer their responsibility, well you can imagine the problems that would come with that. It is imperative that we do not keep a solitary mindset, as climate change is not a battle we are fighting alone.

I agree that these small actions make the environment around us a better place, but what will these actions do for our planet in the long run if not promoted? What is the point of putting ourselves through more work to act sustainably if it only benefits our egos? I understand that taking actions like carpooling and taking short showers takes away from our carbon emission, but these actions will not have a large impact on our planet if there are very few making an effort. This is why I believe that we, as students, must find ways to promote our healthy lifestyles as much as possible. Although much debated, one citizen acting sustainably and keeping it to themselves will not have an impact on climate change or global warming. If change is desired, we should be actively looking for ways to promote our healthy and sustainable ideas to many others.

I agree that every little think thing helps and just by taking a 10 min shower instead of 20 can be helpful, but also just by decreasing your meat eating by one meal can help so much more than you think. For example a McDonalds Big Mac cause around 2.35kg of CO2 where an impossible burger (which is a type of veggie burger) produces 0.75kg of CO2. So yes every little thing helps, but it’s is also good to think about the bigger things like becoming vegan and things like that.

In class, we talked a lot about our environmental footprints, which I didn't even know about before. I also learned that the United States is in a concerning ecological deficit which may be scary on the surface, but there are many people working to make a change.

The major thing that I've learned throughout all of my research is how many people genuinely want to make a positive change and help our Planet. This entire sustainability idea means a lot to me, and it makes me hopeful knowing that so many want to and are trying to help

#climatechange is gonna save the planet everyone!

Except its not. It may, on the rare occasion, educate others and encourage them to take action, but the post itself is not enough. We like and follow, but do we take the time to learn about the topic and what needs to be done in to help. Social media is helping us convince ourselves that we are “doing our part”, and I think that many of us struggle to find reassurance, scared that we too are a part of the problem. But we soon become so enveloped in this fear are that we neglect our duties of a citizen of planet earth. It is important that as we move forward with climate change that we remember that a repost is not a solution, it is simply a bandaid stuck on top of a problem that has become to real.

You're 100% correct. We often use social media as a mask and a tool to at like people we're not. In this particular case instead of acting like someone, were acting like were doing something that were not.

I've been thinking about this for some time now. I mean, boosting a video and then just continuing doing what you've been doing won't magically make climate change disappear. It may help raise awareness, but not everyone is willing to try and help.

Oil & fossil fuels are some of the biggest contributors to pollution and our global ecological footprint, so why don’t we stop using them? There is no true answer because there are too many unknown variables. Although I am confident in the belief that through innovation we can find an alternative what if we don’t, can we really continue to rely on oil & fossil fuels until we pollute the earth beyond repair? What would we be able to do without our main source of energy? Oil fuels every industry within our lives, transportation (which already affects every other industry), medicine, the production of electricity, etc. Without oil, we would essentially be back to the days when electricity wasn’t a thing. So my question is, what is the answer, what if we never find another way to harvest enough energy from resources besides fossil fuels?
    Personally, I think that right now we should focus on innovation so that we can solve these problems, however, if we were to assume that we can’t or we are incapable of doing so I think that we should begin to slow down oil production and begin to rely on more environmentally friendly resources until we can become stable off of just these resources.

I think that us cutting off oil wouldn't be possible, because the use of cars every day, machines in factories, heating in buildings are a few things we can't live without. People with gas cars might not be able to afford electric cars, people using machines in factories are needed for jobs, and heating in buildings / houses are needed so people don't freeze. Therefor we need oil in our every days life to life and survive.

I agree with everything you've stated thus far; I would like to add that if we can lessen our oil use while focusing on innovation, we will have more time to find a solution. By driving less and cutting back on unused heating, we can help preserve our environment for longer.

This statement from jaydo is agreeable; If we use cars every day that our oil powered it might not slow down. However there could be possible solutions. car company's could slowly change all there cars to electric then all the old gas powered cars need to be exchanged so they will by the new electric car.

Probably not cause we need oil much more than most people think.

I totally agree what with what you all are saying, like it's highly unlikely that we can completely cut off oil, but through innovation we can use other materials alongside it to cut it's consumption.

I agree with you. I think it would be extremely difficult to stop using oil all together. The sad fact is that some people just don't care. I think the best case scenario is that instead of cutting off oil use entirely we start to ween off it. Everyone can start doing their part by using less oil and fossil fuels, and slowly but surely we one day can stop altogether.

I agree with all of you that it would be hard to cut off oil because you use it to charge cars or the factory's. I think that we could use less oil by using eletric cars or have more eco friendly factory's.

I agree with sopwin, it would be easier to start to gradually lessen the use of oil then to cut it off entirely, but I also agree that with innovation, we could stop using oil gradually. It is really hard to make people care, and I really want to help with oil reduction in the world! I know this isn't my post, but I'm really curious: Do any of you all have ideas on how we could make people more notified about climate change?

Climate change disproportionately effects marginalized communities particularly within the black community  “ Black or African Americans are 40% more likely than non-Black Americans and non-African Americans to currently live in areas with the highest projected increases in mortality rates due to climate-driven changes in extreme temperatures.” -EPA When we are talking about the effects of Climate change we need to talk about who it is effecting the most, and sadly it will often not be the people that have cause the most environmental harm. In order to make real social change we need to make environmental change as well, to neglect climate change as an issue will effect minorities disproportionately so if you are about social change you must work on  environmental change as well.

I think that this is very valuable information. I didn't know this before but I do now, and very much agree with you. We should be taught about this and i'm glad you're bringing this to the attention me and many others.

Nuclear energy has an almost net zero impact on the environment in a way most other alternatives to natural gas and oil do not. Reactors generate power through fission, which is the name for the process of splitting uranium atoms and using the resulting heat to create steam. The steam spins a turbine that generates electricity. According to the US Nuclear Energy Institute, through nuclear power the United States avoided 471 million metric tons of harmful emissions. Nuclear energy also is a very land-efficient way of producing power; a 1,000 megawatt facility requires less than one square mile of land to operate, opposed to wind farms which reportedly require 360 times more space. This almost insignificant footprint is just another reason why more reactors are being built in higher populated areas, this is just a short list of reasons why I believe further investment in nuclear power can only lead to the benefit and meet humanity’s growing needs for further power sources.

https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/fiss … difference
https://www.nei.org/resources/statistic … r-industry
https://www.nei.org/news/2015/land-need … ear-plants

I agree that it is a good, clean energy source. I think that some of the reasons for it not being as widespread are that it can be expensive and dangerous. Reactors can have meltdowns and cause widespread damage. I think that it can be a viable option to have, but should not be our main or only source of energy.
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/nuclear-power-101

Major company’s such as Zara, Starbucks, Coca Cola etc. claim to be more environmentally friendly than they in fact are. In order to avoid facing repercussions for their negligence. This creates a false narrative that they are not causing as much damage to the environment as originally thought. Even in my community we see green washing within what our schools invest in for scholarship money. So a small group of students including myself have started a discussion about divestment, and making sure the company’s we invest in are environmentally friendly. In order to enact true change we need to know what we are dealing with first, and Green washing is preventing that.

Greenwashing is a huge issue, especially for big companies who want to flaunt being environmentally friendly so people will be more willing to buy from them. The Federal Trade Commision website has a great guide for criteria for consumers who are looking to buy from a genuinely green company. It also makes it easy for companies to understand what practices they need to change in order to be more friendly to the planet. If anyone is interested in this info, it can be found at: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/ … een-guides

I totally agree with this. I think its so sad how companies such as the ones you mentioned above are lying to people. It also sucks that people think they are doing good by supporting those brands that are claiming to be green but instead of helping make the CO2 levels better, its just getting worse. I am glad that there has been something created that lets people know what companies really are green. Even though websites like this exist, so many people still do not realize that they are being lied to and may go on forever buying from these brands. I hope that your websites as well as others can continue to have awareness being spread about them so that as many people as possible can help limit their CO2 levels.

Over the past semester, I have learned a lot about what contributes to global warming. I learned what greenhouse gases actually are and what the greenhouse effect is. Most importantly I learned how this all connects back to me. During this assignment, I saw how each individual decision I make even if it is only choosing between a plastic or glass bottle makes an impact on our environment.

The average human will produce less carbon during their entire lifetime than a large company produces every day. The capitalistic society we live in is the cause of our pollution, the system needs to change if we want to keep our planet.

It may not be the system to change but how we run it. Government laws can be used to force companies to abide by strict protocols for emictions, waste, and the materials that products are made up of.

ddoust25, I don't think you realize how much our society relies on the large companies of the world, the computer you used to make that statement is in your hand because of large companies. if all large companies where abolished it would send the world into a spiral, there would be no easy fashion of transferring knowledge without internet, planes, cars or motorized boats all being produced by large companies. I agree that large companies are a large part of pollution but there are other waysto reduce help their environmental footprint then what you are suggesting. if you want the world to go back to the dark ages then by all means end capitalism.

Not all of the Carbon in the atmosphere is human caused. Animals respirate and die, which is the natural cycle of life, volcanoes erupt, and carbon leaks in through cracks in the earth, however, before the industrial revolution, there was a balance of plants taking in carbon and animals respirating carbon/dying. We as humans, for the last ~150 years, have totally disrupted the carbon cycle, rendering it unbalanced and causing the temperatures to heat up. Animal agriculture is the leading cause of emissions, followed by vehicular and household emissions.

Because of the Carbon in the atmosphere, we have dodged an Ice Age which should have happened, and because of that the earth has avoided the "ice age extinction", but we have caused our own extinction for the plentitude of species of the world.

Developing countries need to build up, and thus they must find the cheapest way of generating energy and means of construction. Concrete accounts for ~8% of the global CO2 emissions, which countries use for construction.

At the end of the day, unless some big political change or a new ground-breaking discovery happens overnight, then it won't be over just yet.

It is already too late to get back what we have lost, but we can still save the future.

Please refer and watch this video by Kurzgesagt to learn more.

Thank you for taking your time to read this and feel free to criticize me in the comments.

Thank you very much for this information, I never knew that the built-up carbon prevented an Ice Age. CO2 emissions have helped us of course, but the amount that has built up means that all the radiation coming from the troposphere is causing some pretty horrible environmental changes. Global warming has gone too far, and while we do need greenhouse gasses to survive in a hospitable environment, it has just become too much.

Thank you so much for this information! I was under the impression that humans nearly 100% of the time were the leading cause for climate change, air pollution, global warming, etc., but now I see that animals and other living organisms are also fairly prominent causes to the global CO2 emissions.

I knew that humans had disrupted the cycle of climate change, but I had no idea that we had dodged an ice age because of it. Do you have the source for the information of the ice age? I would also like to thank you for your incredibly informative and well put together post if you do end up reading this comment after 2 years since your posted. I also would like to know more about how concrete contributes so much and if switching to roman concrete would make a difference, you have inspired me to search for more information. Thank you for the amazing and thought provoking post; also I am also a big fan of Kurzgesagt, so its cool to interact with someone else who knows who they are.

Nature must be protected so that we can breathe fresh air, drink and swim in clean water, enjoy the beauty of filelds, meadows and forests. We must protect it not only for ourselves, but also for future generations, foe animals, birds, and fish living on our planet. Nature must not perish.

I agree that people should protect nature so that other living creatures can survive. Moreover, I think that a lot of people don’t realize just how much nature affects us, too. Nature is the beginning of all things we need to survive. Like you said, it allows us to breathe, but it also gives us the food we eat, the water we drink, and it provides us with numerous mental health benefits.

I agree that protecting nature is important because they play a big role in supporting our ecosystem. It provides the basic things we use to survive, like the air we breath, the food we eat, and the water we drink.

this is so well said! if it weren't for nature, life here on earth wouldn't exist to begin with. all these gifts nature has provided for us make the planet worth living, and not only us humans, but almost every living organism here relies entirely on nature. .

Yes! Very well said! Nature is very important, it brings life to this planet and it helps us live and thrive. Without nature, we wouldn't be here living and breathing. There's so much to learn on this planet, we must do everything we can to preserve it for future generations.

I agree with you! More often than not people overlook the effects that their actions have on the world around them. When it comes to innovation, we instead look at the ways that things could benefit and make things easier for us as opposed to how making our lives easier can make other lives harder. I also agree with you on the fact that we also need to protect nature for ourselves, in negatively impacting nature, we can negatively affect ourselves just the same.

I agree! We must protect nature! We depend on nature. Nature provides us with food and everything needed to live healthy lives. We protect wildlife and biodiversity by protecting nature also. I believe that we must also preserve the beauty of nature.

Nature is very important because it provides us with food, water and everything else needed to live healthy lives. Even the air we breathe is part of nature. We need to protect nature in order to protect wildlife and biodiversity. We need to reduce, reuse, and recycle. We can also take action by going to volunteer in cleanups such as beach cleanups. We can also plant trees to increase biodiversity. Furthermore, I believe that we need to educate more people to take similar actions to protect nature.

I agree with you completely, nature is important and we have to protect it otherwise we will all die,

I agree, it is very important to protect nature because it is the base for all living things, and without a healthy environment, nothing can be alive.

I believe it is quite obvious that nature is important, and all of you commenting 'I agree, nature is very important', followed by the reasoning for nature being important, is quite irritating. All you're doing is saying 'I care too!'. It doesn't do a damned thing. Another thing you are doing is wasting your time writing why you care, instead of ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING TO SAVE NATURE!!!

camden so real for that one, it's a total echo chamber.  Thread should be titled "how to protect nature" so that we'd get some ideas with actual substance.  The problem is I feel like our whole system is promoting this fake treehugging culture and saying "stop climate change" because that's sexy and trendy, meanwhile people putting actual conservation efforts that deserve funding forward are getting overshadowed by bigger voices.  I also think the best way to separate those two demographics is to stop pushing and forcing people to care, like how the people from my school are being forced to type and respond in this forum.  Most, if not all of us are going to turn around tomorrow and forget about everything we said because we don't actually care about the environment, we care about following instructions.  It's admirable that these people want our generation to care about the issue because of how dire it is but at the same time if the climate change discussion gets too overcrowded it all just turns into a wall of noise and we don't accomplish anything, we waste time and resources and we all die anyway because we were too busy talking instead of taking action.  I don't know if you're aware that earth is gonna be pretty much all out of top soil in 60 years or less.  It's already the beginning of the end.

Camden2005, I think you need to calm down because if you really, genuinely think that a bunch of high schoolers are going go out and do something to save nature, when most of us don't have cars, money, or any of the other resources to do this, you have to be actually crazy. People don't have time to do anything because of homework, sports, and clubs that take up their whole days, don't get mad at them for that.

Takoyama, This activity was supposed to be about sharing your perspective to other people. Yes all of us care about our grades, but that doesn't mean at least some of us care about the environment too.

Greenwashing is a false claim that deceives consumers into believing that a company's products are environmentally friendly. I have started to recognize this more in society. Numerous fast fashion companies such as H&M, Zara, Forever 21, and others give people the illusion that they are shopping sustainably. However, this is simply a marketing tactic created so that people would not feel guilty purchasing items from these companies. They say that they are ethical when it comes to the production of low-cost fashion items. However,  that is far from the truth. Fast fashion brands seem to only care about profit. They exploit cheap laborers in developing countries, use large amounts of water and oil and dump extra toxic waste in local rivers ad streams, disturbing thousands of people's water sources. The concept of greenwashing also occurs quite a lot in the food industry. Many processed, packaged foods are labeled "healthy and ethically produced."  These are also exemplification unsustainable claims.

As an employee of a Grocery Store, I can confirm greenwashing in the food industry. Many labels such as Fair trade and certified naturally grown often mislead consumers. Fair trade is supposed to show a product that was produced without child labor but often you see product from India and China with those labels (Which are notorious for using child labor). As well, Naturally Grown only requires 75% of a grocery product to be organic which can also be misleading.

I was looking for something on greenwashing cause I think it's a really overlooked issue that should be taken more seriously, unfortunately it doesn't look like this post from almost 3 years ago got very much attention.  Somehow we need to hold these corporations accountable for blatantly lying about something with such serious repercussions.

Over time the human population has been increasing drastically.  100 years ago the population was only at 2 Billion or less. Now in 2023 the current population of the earth is at 8 billion people! That is 4x more people than 100 years ago. This is how the population has changed over the century. We will never know when we will hit our carrying capacity but for now our world will still grow exponentially. Eventually we will have to see a decline in our population.

I feel that the habitable space on earth is slowly shrinking by the day and we should try to manage or expand it. I suggest that our trash should be sent towards the sun via newton's law of inertia so that the landfills can be emptied and repurposed into habitable space.

Over the past few hundred years, our population has increased almost tenfold. in 1800, there was around 1 billion people on earth. now, just over 200 years later, we have 8 billion. this is the largest curve of growth among any large species, and it has not ended yet. we are expected to reach 10 billion by 2058, which is only 35 years away, and even then we arent expected to stop. if we keep going the way we are, the planet will not be able to sustain all of us, and our numbers will come at the cost of other species, as we take more and more space, we will end up weeding them out of their homes and, ultimately, killing them all off. how can we, as a species, keep going the way we are and not end up killing off all other species?

It is commonly known that electric cars are better for the environment than gasoline powered cars. What some people may not know is that electric cars actually emit more carbon dioxide in production than gas powered cars do. However, this has a benefit, as electric powered cars tend to release about 60-68% less greenhouse gas emissions than gas powered cars.

In my biology class an experiment of sorts was conducted where everybody who took the class calculated their carbon footprint and recorded them on a shared document for everyone to see. I myself found that I had a relatively high carbon footprint compared to my classmates, the biggest contributor being transportation. After discussing with some of my classmates with similar results we debated how we affected our environment and how it affected us. I myself have a large family, some of which live across the country. My family and I want to see our family, however, what cost does this have? Some of my other classmates with large transportation emissions discussed how they have families that live in a whole different continent and visit them near annually, facing the same dilemma. No matter what mode of transportation there is, whether it be flight, driving, or some other way, it produces many greenhouse gases. Do we sacrifice ourselves for our impact? How can we reduce our carbon footprint?

How could you go about changing your carbon footprint.

Some quick ways to change your carbon footprint would be to stop buying water in plastic, walk or ride a bike for some short distances, to turn off lights when not in use, use cold water cycle for washing clothes, keep stuff out of a landfill by selling stuff to thrift stores, and to carpool or use public transport

Many businesses get away with decisions that are ultimately bad for the environment because they still get money from it. This is because there are consumers that are still buying their products. How can consumers make decisions about what they buy in order to minimize their effect on the environment?

To reduce the impact on the environment, consumers could buy food with recyclable packaging. For example, they can buy food with cardboard and glass packaging, instead of plastic ones. Thus, they can reduce plastic consumption and learn how to make efficient and environmentally friendly purchases.

I agree, with the amount of plastic packaging out there it all adds up and eventually will be too much. We have control over what we are buying and we can take even more control by buying things that are packaged with glass and or cardboard.

As the solutions are listed, the implementation of the solutions need to be listed as well. How would we get people to look for products with recyclable packaging? How would we get people to actually recycle the recyclable products? Solving the problem is not simply coming up with solutions, rather finding ways to implement said solutions.

A study has been shown noting that what you eat heavily correlates to your emissions. Researchers at the University of Sheffield tested the Co2 Emissions of 60,000 Japanese households and came to the conclusion that "the more sweets, alcohol, and food from restaurants, the higher the household carbon footprint." Additionally, livestock produces 14.5% of greenhouse gas emissions. Taking all this data into account is quite important since the direct effects of human carbon emissions have caused heavy climate change. If humans were to indulge in less red meat, candy, and alcohol, this could help take a step towards reducing the carbon footprint. The next time you eat, take this into account! Change is necessary to reduce this warming world.

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2020 … ouseholds/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/cow-b … hange-that

I find your statement quite interesting. Pertaining to humans eating an abundance of red meat, I recently watched a documentary on how red meat used to be considered a delicacy during the time of hunter gatherers, and how in today's society the amount of red meat being consumed is correlates with the deteriorating human condition and climate change.

The study's findings underscore the undeniable link between our dietary choices and carbon emissions, emphasizing the significance of personal decisions in the fight against climate change. It's a stark reminder that what we eat isn't just about personal health but has far-reaching environmental implications. The statistics regarding the livestock industry's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions serve as a wake-up call. To make a real impact on reducing our carbon footprint and addressing the challenges posed by climate change, we should all seriously consider making more sustainable food choices and support broader systemic changes. It's a shared responsibility, and this study highlights the urgency of taking action to combat the warming world we face.

Recycling is the action of converting wastes such as plastics, glass bottles, and jars, into reusable material. The act of recycling is portrayed as a practice that works and helps out the environment, but in actuality, the method of recycling is only partly successful. With this post I seek to prove that recycling isn't an efficient method of helping our polluted environment, and we must find a better way of dealing with our plastic problem.   

Contention One: Waste Sorting
According to a U.C. Santa Barbera study, only 34% of recyclable material is correctly sorted in the United States. Through that same study it was found that over 74% of material, regardless of categorization, was dumped into landfill. These statistics show that despite the ability to recycle, there aren't enough people who are correctly sorting their waste correctly to allow the processes of recycling to work. Of that 34% of correctly sorted recyclable material, 25% has been contaminated according to a Columbia Study. With all of these obstructions in place, only a small amount of material that is placed in the recycling bin is truly put through the process of recycling.

Contention Two : The Recycling Process
Energy plants in the United States are a contributor to pollution and air contamination. According to a Human Rights Watch study on how recycling plants impact the environment, they found that "Untreated wastewater from recycling facilities are likely contaminated with toxic pollutants that can harm people and biodiversity. Plastic melting facilities emit volatile organic compounds . . . Toxic chemicals, including carcinogens and VOCs, pollute air both inside facilities and in areas near recycling facilities" (Human Rights Watch 2022, See Sources for Link). Further research shows that these practices happen not only in the United States, but in other countries, showing that the damage that recycling plants cause is worldwide.

Contention Three : Remnants of Recycling
Despite recycling plants breaking down plastics and metals, only a minor part of recyclable wastes are truly repurposed. For example, an NPR funded research study, only 5% of recyclable plastics are reused. The rest of these plastics are thrown into landfill by recycling companies such Waste Management (WM). That 5% of recycled plastic is turned into plastic bags that further taint our environment, and can no longer be recycled.

Sources:
U.C. Santa Barbera Study https://www.dfss.ucsb.edu/sites/default … ctices.pdf

Colombia Study
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/ … g-america/

Human Rights Watch on Climate Change
https://www.hrw.org/report/2022/09/21/i … odiversity.

NPR Study on Results of Recycling
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/11311310 … 20landfill.

Very Interesting, and I mostly agree with what you wrote. You briefly mentioned that the process for recycling plastics is not infinite, and I would like to further explain. A majority of plastics that are technically classified as ‘recyclable’ aren’t fully recyclable. For example, polystyrene (plastic #6), better known as foam, isn’t recyclable at many major recycling facilities (https://sanjoserecycles.org/guide/foam- … lystyrene/), and even when it can, the recycling process is very inefficient. It can also very easily blow into the environment where it leeches harmful chemicals that damages wildlife and the environment. Additionally, PET plastic (plastic #1) has many unique categories that can’t be recycled together, and requires more plastic to be added each time it is recycled, meaning that more plastic is being produced, completely defeating the supposed purpose of recycling. Only 9% of waste enters the recycling process, and even less ends up actually being recycled. In my opinion, the only solution is to stop the companies that produce this plastic, either via a boycott, governmental regulations, or some other means.

Sources: A brief read-through of the sources listed in the previous post and; https://www.rainbowrecycling.org/what-p … 20recycled.  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi … al/661141/  https://sanjoserecycles.org/guide/1-plastic-pet/ https://sanjoserecycles.org/guide/foam- … lystyrene/

Hello -

I recently completed the Carbon Footprint Calculator and found that my yearly output is extremely high (around 28000kg). For context - I flew a total of 16 plane trips last calendar year, this is because my father has been traveling around the world for long periods of time and thus I have been visiting him. I understand that the obvious solution would be to reduce the amount of trips I take, yet I already stretch them quite far apart (5-7 Months, yet I have included layovers in my calculation along with a few trips from 2021.). Does anyone have an idea that would help reduce my carbon footprint while still haven’t the opportunity to visit my Dad?

Thanks .

Hello fellow student. I am extremely concerned by your carbon footprint. Since planes are so bad maybe try riding a horse instead of flying.

?

I think traveling in planes in definitely a big contributor to climate change and our carbon emissions. I unfortunately, will be traveling a couple times this year and i wish there were other ways to travel the world without creating more carbon. I think since multiple people travel together, it makes the amount of carbon were putting into the environment more justified.

Hello fellow student, While your carbon footprint is higher than most it is important to put everything into perspective. You should certainly make an effort to reduce travel and to take more direct routes if possible, but in then end in our highly industrialized world there is little you can do when it becomes necessary for you to travel internationally. And remember where most of the emissions come from, 100 of the largest corporations create over 70% of a the carbon emissions in the world, so if there is truly nothing you can do to avoid the travel in the first place there is no need to feel too guilty.

Recently I have chosen to buy peanut butter that is packaged in glass jars instead of plastic ones. With the plastic jar I usually recycled it. With the glass jar I can reuse it to drink out of.

Hello, I completely agree with you, we must now promote the use of glass or wood so that we can leave future generations a clean and safe planet. Indeed, plastics pollute the fauna and flora which has a direct impact on our lives but also on those of our animals. Thus, there are several alternatives including the use of glass as you said or other biodegradable materials which will allow us to do recycling. In my case, I prefer to take a gourd to go to school instead of every day buy a new bottle of water.

Hello, I also agree and I use metal straws when drinking coffee in the morning, and I also try my best to not use a plastic water bottle every day and reuse them for 2 days.

Hello! I love this idea! As someone that eats a lot of peanut butter and is passionate about the environment, this is a great idea. I also believe it is important to bring your own portable mug or bottle to coffee shops. Opposed to continually getting a plastic cup that will end up in a landfill.

This is a great idea! Coming from a family that is highly against using plastic containers (even if we do we try to reuse those too) i think the peanut butter from glass jars would be a great idea. It also help with purchasing like cups or containers because you could turn the jars into those things easily. Just takes a quick wash. I also feel like we could change many other things from plastic to glass, or even metal if you’re worried about glass breaking too often.

This is such a cool thread! Personally, at my house, we use those Mason jars to drink out of. Those things survive a long time and you can reuse them for virtually forever. But we also use them as storage containers. For example, instead of buying granola from the store, we bake it and then store it in one of the giant Mason jars.

Great idea I'm glad there are so many people in the world who care about the environment

Same, I use my glass jars as small birdhouses that the birds can make a nest in,

Swapping plastic containers with glass ones is a really good step into becoming more eco-friendly and it doesn't even require that much effort, so almost everyone should be able to do that. Moreover, glass containers are more hygienic, and easier to reuse or recycle into something better, something that you will get more use out of.

I agree that we should limit the amount of plastic items we buy, and try to buy glass ones instead, as they are much better for the environment! We can also stop buying plastic water bottles and use our glass or metal water bottles instead And, we can replace plastic straws with paper or metal straws.

My family often keeps the jars we get for jam, and use it for storing other things. The stuff that we usually end up putting in there is generally spices of some kind. Glass jars also make good containers for water when you paint, so that’s often a use. I saw someone here saying that they made birdhouses out of jars, which is a really cool idea! It sounds interesting to try.

I agree that glass containers are better for the environment than plastic ones, for many reasons. It is much easier to recycle them, they tend to be more durable and therefore better sorted to reuse, and they do not break down into micro plastics that harm sea animals. My family always tries to buy packaged food in glass whenever we can, but sometimes it just isn’t possible. Either there is no option in glass, or the sustainable option is much more expensive. It’s the system that needs changing in this case, for example the rules in place surrounding food packaging. Otherwise, the situation will not significantly improve.

There's an entire subforum on here about ocean acidification and the ramifactions that has, but equally important and significantly less talked about is the decline of insect populations. Maybe it's because we just don't like bugs as much as we like sea turtles, but the ecological impact is going to be severe.

Personally, the contrast between my childhood memories and what I see now is astonishing. A few years after I moved to the house I live in now, around 2007-2008, I can remember huge amounts of black swallowtail and cloudless sulphur butterflies, and keeping some of the caterpillars in a jar inside to watch them pupate and hatch. But this year I can only remember seeing maybe three or four swallowtails, and only a couple of the cloudless sulphurs. We would get swarms of lovebugs in October, literally thousands in the air and of every available surface, but I only saw a few handfuls last year. I have only seen one carpenter bee so far this spring. We don't have to clean the windsheilds or grills of our car anymore. There are even fewer roaches and palmetto bugs at night.

I know this is a global issue, but the personal impact is just so stark.

Here's an article without a paywall if anyone isn't acquainted with this already: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/201 … -look.html

I'm in a subtropical region of the US, what is it like elsewhere?

You make a really good point about the impact on the insects. They’re a really important part of ecosystems, so the effect that their decline will have spans even larger. I personally am not as interested in insects as I am in other organisms, but they play a huge role in food chains and things like pollination. The decrease in diversity you’ve mentioned also sounds really concerning too, with much less of the insects that you were used to seeing before.

When I was calculating my carbon footprint thru the advanced carbon footprint calculator, there was a question about how much data do you use in a month on your phone and that intrigued me because I never thought of data affecting my carbon footprint? Like does the amount of energy it takes to “make” a gb of data affects your carbon footprint? A source I found “Honey Mobile” said this about mobile data, “using 1GB of data uses 0.3kg of CO2”

That's really interesting, this is the first time I myself though about how our daily data usage could unknowingly contribute to our carbon footprint. I think this widens the conversation about how we could be even more sustainable in our day to day lives.

Since the beginning of the conflict currently afflicting Ukraine began I have been concerned about the ecological ramifications of another meltdown occurring at one of Ukraine's few remaining nuclear power plants. It should be apparent that this is not a good thing environmentally speaking.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.market … 1646352432

A delegation of the International Atomic Energy Agency led by Rafael Grossi, director general of the agency, left today for the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. I hope it will change the situation for the better

That could pose a significant threat, however, it is a very unlikely scenario given today's circumstances, contact a team of experts among your local professionals to make sure you get fast help

Nuclear power plant meltdown is damaging, but there are many preparations in place in the scenario it does melt down. If one did go down, it would likely be due to an attack by Russia, which is unlikely since it would put them in international trouble.

We all know that Biodiversity contributes a lot to the formation of our natural system, but how is this related to the emission of Carbon Dioxide and other Greenhouse gases? I remember that I used to read a report about chain effects in ecosystems. An Invasive species of algae occupied a major water body and emerged as a prevailing species here. It consumes most of the oxygen contained within the water. This led to the suffocation of many fish and waterborne animals. The water also became acid because too much CO2 emitted by the algae dissolved into it and reduced the capacity for it to absorb greenhouse gasses, which indirectly led to global warming. Are there other examples of this kind of event?

When you think of the people mainly responsible for climate change, who do you think of? I think of the big companies that extract fossil fuels from the ground, or cut down forests to make more space for cattle and other agriculture; But we can’t put all the blame on them. It is also on us, whether we want to accept it or not. Without us, these companies would have no power because no one would be buying their products and therefore they wouldn’t be making any money. All these companies care about is how much money they make, so if we stop supporting them they will stop. We have hit a point where small things like recycling aren't going to be enough to make a big enough change to stop the Impacts of climate change. We need to change the big things, we are in more control of them than we realize. As much as I wish they would, we all know that these companies aren’t going to take responsibility for their actions, which is why we need to take responsibility for ours. Before we fight against these companies and blame them for what they are doing wrong, we need to think about how our actions tie in. I’m not trying to defend them, because what they’re doing is wrong and they should admit that instead of denying it; but how can you protest against deforestation, and fossil fuel extraction, but still use gas to fuel your car, electricity in your home or continue to eat meat at every meal? I know that we won't be able to change right away, it will take time and it won't be easy, but we need to start looking for more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives to our everyday lifestyle. When we have done that then we will hold all the power against these companies.

K-Gauthier, I totally share your frustration and agree that we need to simultaneously think about how our own actions contribute to climate change, how companies have an especially large impact here (much laerger than  any individual) and that we need to put all kinds of pressure on these companies to change their ways.  Yes, this starts with making sure that we vote with our wallets, as it were, by not buying things from companies we support.  And then expanding these actions to others (e.g., sharing our views like you are doing here on this website!), and actions that might influence policies of local governments on up to national and international decision making.  We are the only ones who can make a difference here, so we can't give up.  Best, Jason

This is a very in-depth and educated analysis! I definitely agree that the power of the consumer is much greater than that of the business as long as we can work together. A company’s main goal is to make money, so as long as they’re doing that, they won’t stop. The only way to stop these types of companies is to show that doing this won’t make them money. The only way to do that is to not give them our business.

That's a great analysis of the current situation, and I think that we are already on the path towards this future. We have several renewable resources, such as wind, solar, and hydro, and we aren't there yet, but we are getting there with solar increasing it's efficiency, and new technology to put wind in the ocean and coastal regions so that there is constant wind blowing, I think that we can all look forward to a better future. However, there should be something that we as the consumer, and that the government can do. The government should hand out subsides, and have tax cuts for the companies that have renewable energy sources. Along with that I think that there should be more choice for consumers, so that instead of how it is today, where each neighborhood has just one supplier of gas and electricity, we should have more than one company, so that the consumer can select the one that is using renewables, as renewable energy is often cheaper than traditional coal powerplants as well. I know that this cannot all happen at once, and that it is easier said than done, but it is possible, and with government and consumer backing it could very well happen in newer communities.

I agree, humans actions have a big affection to climate change and how companies have a large impact as well. Humans can stop certain habits and that can help putting an end to the non-eco-friendly companies. Reducing energy consumption, choosing sustainable supplies, reducing waste, are all sorts of actions that can help fight climate change. If everyone does these things, the world could make a difference and that is what we want.

One of the major contributors to global warming is excess methane from livestock. Besides eating less meat, what are some other ways we can reduce methane emissions from livestock?

Greenhouse gases and carbon emissions can come from both individual houses and company-owned factories. While companies generally have a greater impact, the individual can generally control their own carbon footprint better than they can that of large corporations. What is the level of responsibility of each? Should there be a balance between individual and corporate responsibility? Should an individual focus more on their own carbon footprint or work to bring down that of bigger contributors?