Students from around the world calculated their class mean and standard deviations for their footprints and posted them on our world map.
Do you see differences across the globe? If so, why do you think those differences exist?
Did you use the calculator to try to reduce your footprint down to the average from a citizen of another country? What changes would you have to make to lower your footprint in this way? Are you going to try and take some of these actions in your daily life?
Student Footprints >
Carbon Foot Print SJRState / The Policies and The Farmer
I strongly advocate for the preservation of a sustainable ecosystem. However, I'm troubled by the notion that this noble goal must be achieved at the cost of those who are economically disadvantaged. It appears that we must reevaluate the policies in effect on a global scale, or else there's a risk that people may not wholeheartedly embrace the cause. Here, I express my concerns, supported by various articles for your consideration.
Addressing climate change in developing countries without stressing the poor is not just a matter of fairness; it's a moral imperative. Climate change is a global issue, and its consequences disproportionately affect vulnerable and disadvantaged populations. Failing to consider the well-being of the poor when implementing climate solutions would be both unfair and ethically problematic.
It's essential to recognize that many developing countries have contributed significantly less to historical carbon emissions compared to developed nations. Therefore, imposing the same burdens on these countries without providing support and considering their specific circumstances can be seen as unjust.
The concept of climate justice emphasizes that climate action should be fair and equitable. This includes acknowledging historical responsibilities and ensuring that the transition to a low-carbon economy doesn't exacerbate poverty or inequality. Fair and inclusive climate policies can contribute to a more sustainable and just world for everyone, regardless of their economic circumstances.
Here is a good example:
For the Dutch Government, the decision to close farms recently as part of environmental and climate change mitigation efforts still is a complex and controversial issue. While the goal of reducing emissions to combat climate change is important and necessary, it's essential to approach such actions with consideration for the livelihoods and well-being of affected farmers and rural communities.
The Dutch government's plan to buy out "The Peak Polluter" farms and major industrial polluters as a means to reduce ammonia and nitrogen oxide emissions has raised significant concerns and generated controversy. The move is aimed at addressing emissions that are illegal under EU law. However, the plan has sparked criticisms and protests, particularly from the farming community.
The Problem: “ The Farmers were Demonized by the Government showing that a Government program never works in their eyes." “Some Farmers who gave in, Were not Paid” and " Farmers who did not give in, are in litigation right now with the Dutch Government"
The potential negative impact of shutting down farms on the livelihoods of families and communities is a valid concern and should be taken seriously. Access to food and the ability to earn a living are fundamental human rights. Governments and policymakers should consider these concerns when implementing environmental policies and work to find solutions that do not infringe upon these rights. Taking an individual's "Will" away to Quickly fix a solution seems hardly a way to do things.
What are your thoughts on this these Actions and could we do something different?
Articles:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00842-z