Urbanization & population growth

Throughout time, mankind has evolved and grown in numbers. However, very recently, our numbers have been increasing at an alarming rate and we have also been able to develop methods to increase our life span. This had created many problems such as urbanization on a vast scale and population growth.

Some countries have already begun to take action; but we have not. Now is the time to re-evaluate our choices in life and to think of new and efficient ways to overcome this ordeal; after all, this planet can only support so-many people.

Take China for instance. This country has one of the largest populations in the world. What have they done to keep their numbers from rising even higher? The answer lies with their "one child policy".

To prevent their numbers from overwhelming us, this policy was put in motion in hopes of slowing down population growth; and it has. But, of course, this is nothing more than a temporary solution. Our numbers aren't the only thing that have increased throughout the years. Our technology has also suffered a similar fate. Through more advanced technology, we have been able to rougly double the average life expectancy of a human being; from 40 years to 80. With such a significant milestone as this, how could our numbers not rise? To top things off, it's only a matter of time before we devellop new procedures and medication that will continue to keep us alive. This is the sad truth explaining why China's policy, although effective, can only serve as temporary relief from this problem.

Interestingly enough, India has also taken action and attempt to solve this problem. They attempted to use propaganda and monetary incentives in order to comvince people to get sterilized. Despite the theoredical effectiveness of this solution, it is seen as morally wrong and is debated, on whether it should or shouldn't, be an acceptable solution.

However, out of all of the ideas and policies that have been attempted, this next one is, without question, my favorite one.

Kerala is a state in southern India suffering from poor living conditions and being highly dependant on agriculture. These people were actually able to manage to come up with a method allowing them to solve their overpopulation dilemma without having to resort to any controversial alternatives. Seeing that women would get married early in life and begin to make families almost immediately, they decided to allow women to pursue their fantasized careers by giving them one of the greatest treasures humanity posesses; knowledge.

It was seen that through providing these women with education, they became more concerned with their careers, and thus, decided to marry and bear children much later in life; not to mention the fact that they would bear very few children as a result.

This solution is by far my favorite due to the fact that no contrevertial methods are being employed, lives are being enriched and filled with success, along with the fact that it even gives these places a chance to prosper and to become a more significant economical factor. It is made clear that the pros of this solution heavily outweigh the cons; and this is why I believe that this is the most effective solution of the three.

Despite all of this however, it is quite obvious that our planet faces a very serious problem despite our attempts to stun our population growth. Our planet can only hold so-many people confortably and this is why today and tomorrow our struggles will be based on finding sufficient food, water, energy and living space.

One of the solutions that I propose would be to expand our cities upward. With most of our planet being covered in water, our land is limited; and , as such, we should use it as effectively as possible to be able to accomodate our, ever growing, population. With more skyscrapers being around, more people will be able to live in an adequate living space.

My second proposition is also connected to the first. With so many tall buildings, more and more energy will be needed. To help offset this problem, I propose the construction of green roofs. If any building tall enough to catch sunlight contains a green roof, with either vegetation or solar panels, we would be able to save money through better insulation, less energy use, and the creation of energy for us through a renewable energy source; solar energy.

Although the problem at hand is a serious one, we have the tools at our disposal to over come it. All that matters now is our conviction and determination to overcome it, and how we use the tools that are at our disposal.

Food INC.

Earlier this week, I watched, for the second time, the movie entitled "Food INC." The first time I saw it, I was repulsed by the images that appeared before my eyes. However, now that I saw it a second time, although I was still disgusted, I was able to look at it in a different way and realise certain things.

The first thing that came to my attention was that farmers are actually bound, in a certain way, to the companies that employ them. Farmers who are bound by contract to certain corporations lose their right to think for themselves. The reason for this is that these corporations set up demands for them to follow and threaten to cut the contract if they don't. Because farmers are already in debt, and that their contracts are the only way they can actually make a bit of money, abiding by the demands set up by these corporations is the only way for them to pay their bills and survive.

Second of all, the main problems depicted by this movie are: G.M.O.'s, mass production, and power struggles. The reason why the mass production of food and animals are a problem is because this implies that the materials for them will be treated poorly and identically; this means that plants will be genetically modified to resist certain diseases, animals will be fed cheap, fatening, and poorly digestible food, and that bacteria and diseases will eventually become immunt to them, which could be dangerous for everyone's health.

Farmers, and many people in general, want organic food to become the norm. They want carrots and apples to be cheaper than the mass produced bag of chips. When I look at this goal, all I can think of is "how can they be this naive?" All these unhealthy foods are so bad for us because they are the norm. When our eating habits become virtually identical, our health is at risk. The reason why organic food is so good for us is because it differs form the rest; and that it is given so much individual attention. The world population is around seven billion people. Although organic products are healthy for us, we live in an industrial society and there is not way for a method that is this time and space consuming will be able to feed so many people.

Finally, "Food INC." is a very enlightening movie that depicts the many problems that are found  behind the food that we buy. There are actually many more problems other than those I spoke of, however, the bulk of this situation rests with what I spoke of; and chances are that if we settle the problems of the power struggle between the farmers and the corporations that, so far, control them, improve the quality of the cattle and various other things that we consume, and prohibit the employment of cheap and unsafe work while nullifying the corrupt influence that corporations have in politics that, as a result, allow them to get away unscaved by their despicable acts of taking in illegal immigrants for cheap labour and shifting the blame onto them, we should be capable of making significant change in the world we live in by changing these things one at a time.

Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement between certain countries to reduce their carbon emissions by a certain percent below their 1990 carbon emission levels before a certain time. To ensure that the countries will stick to their goal, the Protocol makes use of a credit system. The carbon credit system. Every year that a country is above the acceptable levels of carbon emissions, they must pay a fine to offset their excess emissions. To increase the acceptable level of carbon emissions within that country, they must use some of their own money to pay for a program to offset the carbon emissions within their country or within a certain other country. Should they stay below their set limit of carbon emissions, that country would have the right to sell their excess credits to another country that went over the acceptable limit of carbon emissions. The idea behind this is to promote and create the desire to reduce the emissions of carbon credits and to reward those who succeed in doing so.

For the Kyoto Protocol to be approved, they needed to meet to main criteria.

The first was that they needed at least fifty countries to sign in approval of the protocol.

However the Second main criteria was that, of the countries who signed in approval, they needed to total a minimum of 50% of the world's carbon emissions. With Canada now leaving the protocol, the influence that the Kyoto Protocol once had is now greatly diminished due to the fact that three of the largest contributors to the world's carbon emissions have decided not to participate in this movement. Canada not only failed to meet the desired expectations of the protocol for the longest time, but has also increased their total emissions, much less set an example as one of the largest contributors to the world's total greenhouse gas emissions, this proving to be a costly mistake with over 14 billion dollars to pay in fine for exceeding the limit set my the protocol. As a result Canada has decided to no longer take part in the movement as all of this money could prove to be of use to them and has only decided to re-join the protocol once they will be in better condition to do so.

I personally agree with Canada's decision in backing out of the protocol because it would be, financially speaking, unwise for them to continue to take part in the Kyoto Protocol if they are not yet ready to do so. Why should they be throwing away billions of dollars every year simply because they are not making an effort to help out in the protocol that they agreed to take part in? They'd might as well just accept the fact that they are not yet ready to face such a challenge, cut their losses and back out while they still have money in their name. Canada presently has more important things to deal with and, one day, when they will be ready to take on such a challenge, then, and only then, will they manage to  make progress and achieve something great. However, that day has not yet come and, although the Kyoto Protocol is infact a good idea, perhaps this is simply the way things should be for now. Maybe it would prove to be more beneficial for Canada to simply follow their own agenda and, in time, progress far beyond what they expected to accomplish. I never saw Canada as a country that would follow the lead of someone else. I always saw this country as one who would lead others; not being led be others. Perhaps this may be the chance that we're looking for. This may be our chance to actually set an example in our own way when the time will finally come.