Hihi, put up your group presentations here, remembering to indicate your names. Feel free to post comments about other groups' work. Just remember to address them, e.g. To: Tze Wei's group.
Q1) What is the world doing about global warming? Ans: Countries such as Europe and Japan have shown their commitment to reducing global warming by imposing costs on themselves and their producers, even if it places them at a competitive disadvantage. U.S. has introduced a policy that entails draining America’s oil supply.
Q2) What are the things the scientists miscalculated? Ans: Scientists underestimated the pace at which global warming was occurring.
Q3) Ans: - Policy that entails draining America’s limited oil supply. Market base incentive for the Americans - America’s firms with access to cheap energy are given a big competitive advantage over firms in Europe and elsewhere.
Q4) What does the writer mean by “coalition of the willing”? Ans: It means gathering/union of countries that are willing to help.
Q5) What are the solutions mentioned in the article? - Kyoto Protocol - Forgo building coal-fired plants - Increase cars’ fuel efficiency - Provide targeted assistance to developing countries to enhance their energy efficiency and reduce emissions. - Provide stronger incentives to their country own producers - Impose taxes on products from other countries – Including the U.S.
Q6) Feasibility of the solutions: Kyoto protocol: It will not help to solve the problem of global warming since U.S. and other developed countries are not involved in this policy. These countries are more concerned about their countries economic development and increasing productivities. Thus, they are not interested in the Kyoto Protocol policy and will continue to emit more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and increase global warming.
Coalition of the willing: It will help to solve the problem of global warming. It is because when more countries are gathered together, each country can help to play a small part in solving the problem and these countries can think of more solutions to curb the problem of global warming.
Q7) Rationale of the solutions provided: - To reduce emission of carbon dioxide to curb the problem of global warming. - To encourage countries not involved in Kyoto Protocol to join in the policy.
by: Joyce, Felicia, Huishan, Huiting, Shin Yun, Si Jia
1) Who presented this plan? Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
2) What are your views on this plan? Empty talk Just a plan, not action. If all these are carried out, it will bring great benefits.
3) Do you think it can be enforced by the UN? Is it feasible? Are their any possible obstacles? Does technology allow? Can people accept?
Reduce Global Warming
1) Improve efficiency in transport sector: Long term: will work as there will be rebate taxes, consumers may find it more worthwhile to purchase alternative fuel vehicles. Create awareness among the people and encourage people to accept such mode of transport.
2) Improve design and efficiency of buildings: Plant plants inside, outside of buildings and on rooftop. Put solar panels on the top of buildings. Water cooling method: Freeze water at night, ice melts in the day to keep buildings cool. Long term solution: although technology implemented will be costly but it’s worthwhile because electricity will be saved.
3) Biofuel becomes cellulose Feasibility questionable! Not able to produce cellulose at such large amount. May not have the technology.
4) Use only coal-fired power plants that can be retrofitted to capture and sequester (store) CO2 emissions: Feasible as not much cost will be involved hence people can accept.
Cope with Change
1) Improve management of natural resources: Feasible, and acceptable. Obstacle: Require cooperation from the government, industries and the people.
2) Address the future needs of the poorest and most vulnerable nations: Feasible but it is not likely that it will implement soon, as the richer countries must give money to the poorer countries.
3) Build more climate-resilient cities: Not feasibility as the current technology does not allow. A more possible solution is to build eco-cities. Eg Dongtan, an eco-city in China that is proposed. Dongtan will be completed by 2010.
4) Strengthen international, national and regional institutions to cope with weather-related disasters and an increasing number of climate change refugees: Feasible as environmentalists are studying the effects of global warming now.
Implement global policy
1) Help poorer countries and those in transition use energy efficient and new technologies: Same as above - Not likely that this will be implemented soon as the only way to help is to give money.
2) Accelerate negotiations: Feasible and acceptable. Plans already carried out now - Kyoto Protocol. Obstacle – Countries might insist not to cooperate eg. US
3) Educate people: Feasible, but people might not change if they do not take them seriously.
Definition of Sustainable Development: Sustainable development should take into consideration the social and economic aspect of the society before implementing environmental solutions/proposals/polices. The way to go about measuring a policy’s feasibility is by employing cost-benefit analysis of the proposals.
Solutions presented in the article: 1) Use of cost benefit analysis of significant proposals to as to be clear of the benefits and consequences or even the practicality of the project.
2) Pursue of clean technology; thinking is focused on the long run effects.
3) Explore and expand the use of the market solutions by providing the right incentives for pollution control; allow greater flexibility and lower overall cost.
4) Understand and be aware of multi stakeholders in environmental management.
5) Urgent need for societies to establish for themselves acceptable air, water and noise quality levels and to be cognizant to the fact that these baseline levels will change over time as expectations on quality of life changes.
6) Access the use of these non-market valuation techniques and apply these in project evaluation.
7) Invest in conflict-resolution methods, whether they involve compensation in money or in kind.
Feasibility of solutions presented in article:
1) Use of cost benefit analysis of significant proposals to as to be clear of the benefits and consequences or even the practicality of the project.-
The use of cost benefit analysis would be one of the more feasible solutions as it allows us to access a proposed solution before we implement it, seeing if its social benefits would out weight the social cost of the project. In this way, we are seeing if the project would be practical enough to implement it, rather than wasting resources on projects that would not benefit us. This is also a good solution as it would provide good justification to the society using resources devoted to the development of the project.
2) Pursue of clean technology; thinking is focused on the long run effects.
This solution is feasible in a sense that it makes us focus on the long term effects rather than the short term and immediate effects forgetting about the long term one. This is also one of the more useful solutions as it takes into consideration that changes take time and the time can be used for adjustments for the society or industries affected by the plan, slowly allowing them to get used to the change, rather than an immediate change that would catch everybody surprised.
3) Explore and expand the use of the market solutions by providing the right incentives for pollution control; allow greater flexibility and lower overall cost.
This solution is already used in several industries, and it is proving to be an effective way to cut down pollutions. Programs such as the pollution prevention act in the USA are one of the few examples. This allows the industries to be more willing to cut down on their emissions and at the same time, achieve the main purpose of the supposedly imposed project. Also,
4) Understand and be aware of multi stakeholders in environmental management.
Indeed one could argue an individual cannot do much. This idea is thus able to go along that line and thus focus on what multiple stakeholders can do together and the change they could bring about if they worked together as they are the main players in the specific industry, and thus should be able to monopolize the actions in the industry.
5) Urgent need for societies to establish for themselves acceptable air, water and noise quality levels and to be cognizant (knowledgeable of something especially through personal experience) to the fact that these baseline levels will change over time as expectations on quality of life changes.
This solution is portrayed by the use of an example in the article. “Where underdeveloped land, pristine forest and beaches continue to be used up over time, the remaining resources would thus be valued more and this itself provides a strong insurance for protection of the environment.” This is true. The article also mentions the need for the society, from time to time, to take stock of what’s left of its natural resources. However, doing this would be a waste of much energy and time. Also, this solution is not very feasible. For example, should country A have a lot of coal, the value of coal in that country would not be high and people would use it. This does not consider the long term effects of overusing the resource.
6) Access the use of these non-market valuation techniques and apply these in project evaluation.
The use of the 6th is to access a particular project on the various benefits it would bring. At the end of the day, it would be clear that any project we would be doing or carrying out would have a negative harm on the environment. Therefore this technique would suggest the measurement of the dollars and cents the project would bring in against the negative effects it would have on the environment, to see if the project is feasible or not.
7) Invest in conflict-resolution methods, whether they involve compensation in money or in kind.
This strategy is not very feasible for the fact it only uses compensation in forms as an incentive or benefit to forego the negative effects caused by a certain strategy/policy/plan that has been implemented. At the end of the day only one party would be able to enjoy the benefits of the plan and another suffer, therefore it’s not a feasible solution by itself.
Newspaper article: Personal Carbon Credits on the Cards
What is the solution proposed?: - individual carbon allowance - if one exceeds allowance, have to buy more credit,hence pay more - if one has unused credits, they can be sold back to the system
Why is it proposed? any rationales?: - having a population of 6 billion in the world, the total carbon emmision sums up to be quite a significant amount - therefore, issuing personal carbon credits will curb the problem of high carbon emmisions in the world - this will help to solve other problems such as global warming
Feasibility: - quite feasible if one is actually able to measure each individual's carbon emission - it still quite a tedious process as countries have to cover their total population - also different quotas have to be set for different countries (developed vs developing)
Obstacles and what is needed for it to work: - will people agree to the system? (mistrust between countries) - who is to enforce all this? (governments? ministries? ASEAN? UN? WHO?)
Other comments: - instead of measuring each indvidual's carbon emission, it wouldbe better to measure each household's carbon emmision. - this will be less tedious
What are you going to deal with the developed countries? They only have 10% of the World's population but they emit more than half of the World's carbon dioxide. China and India --- as they become rich they start to emit more...
1) What is the significance of the "Coalition of the willing"? How are they different from other groupings?
2) How would you assess the individual suggested solution? It is too general to lump them all under the answer for the "coalition of the willing".Is it possible to forgo coal-fired plants? How can we increase cars' fuel efficiency? Who should be targeted for "targeted assistance"? What areas should be targetted? What kind of incentivces would be considered strong incentives? Is it possible to impose taxes on USA for products made in ways that contribute to global warming? Ask ask ask & answer answer answer.
The plan outlined in your handout is by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). What is the significance of this committee?
It is indeed to win the people around, but any plan proposed will have little currency unless it is backed by the people. How can we persuade a mindset change?
Q1)What are the solutions proposed? Ans:-create financial incentives to protect forests and romote tree planting -Afforestation and reforestation projects -Kyoto Protocol,to cut greenhouse gas emission
Q2)Why are they proposed? Ans:-To cut down on greenhouse gases emmision
Q3)Do you think they'll work? Ans: Yes, because the financial incentives offered would be attractive not only to poor nations , but also to American companies and farmers, giving the US government a potent political reason to get involved in international climate policy
Q4)Any obstacles involved? Ans: One major obstacle preventing American participation in an international climate regime is the lack of binding commitments on the part of developing countries.
Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare Qn 1. What are the solution proposed? - Indonesia Government has suspended palm oil subsidies. - The government environmental groups and some of the Netherlands' "green energy" are trying to develop programmes to trace the origin of imported palm oil to certify the operation produced the oil in a responsible manner. - Use other types of biofuels such as ethanol(corn and sugar) and sunflower oil. - Biofuel should not be classed as renewable energy automatically. - Wetlands is backing the certification system for palm oil imports.
Qn 2. Why are they proposed? - High demand of palm oil results in clearing of rainforests, overuse of chemical fertiliser, draining and burning peatlands. - Thus, increase carbon emission which is responsible for GW.
Qn 3. Do you think they will work? - Yes. Increasing no of ctries understand the importance of reducing carbon emission. - With assistance of dev. ctries and UN, the carbon emission will be reduced.
Qn 4. Any obstacles involved? - Most of the ctries are profit-driven so ppl will choose the cheap palm oil despite tt it is harmful to the environment.
Qn 5. What are biofuels? - Fuels derived from plants.
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
You said: "This solution is feasible in a sense that it makes us focus on the long term effects rather than the short term and immediate effects forgetting about the long term one." - Feasilbility is not due to whether a project is long term or short term. Feasilbility is about the possibility of carrying out the plan.
You said that the pollutiuon prevention act in USA makes "industries more willing to cut down on their emissions and at the same time, achieve the main purpose of the supposedly imposed project." How does this work? Explain.
Add on to the article entitled: Act now on Global Warming
Futher elaborations on feasibility of solutions:
1) Forgo building coal-fired plants: Not feasible. It is not possible to forgo building coal-fired plants totally. Coal is a very important energy source for developing countries as it is cheap and can be easily obtained.
2) Increase cars' fuel efficiency: Feasible. With improved technology, cars will emit less harmful gases, such as carbon dioxide.
3) Provide targeted assistance to developing countries to enhance their energy efficiency and reduce emission: Not feasible. These countries are more concerned about developing their countries than reducing CO2 emission, as this might affect their industries, thus affecting their economy.
4) Provide stronger incentives to their own producers, through either more stringent caps on emissions or higher taxes on pollution: Feasible. With higher taxes, countries will be more willing to reduce pollution as they are profit-oriented.
5) Impose txes on products from other countries - including the US - that are produced in ways that unnecessarily add substantially to global warming: Feasible. As countries are profit-orientated, with higher taxes, the price of the goods will be higher, and so consumers are less likely to purchase them. This will reduce demand of the goods, and thus reduce the supply as it is no longer as profitable.
If you are the president of a developed country like United States, would you want to give up economic advantages over the poorer countries through relenting pressures by other countries who use the excuse of "environmental responsibility" to cut the edge in economical progresses in your country? (A George Bush's supporter's view) So how can a rich government gives money to the poor when doing so means reducing the economic benefits and increasing others' economies? I forgot o add that United States and many developed countries now run on a deep fiscal deficit, thanks to JK Keynes... I'll give more elaborations later!
To Our Dearest Teacher Ms Chong
IPCC is a task group headed by scientists to think of strategies to combat global warming.
A mindset change is to be directed by the people themselves. By what? Creative works like plays or movies or books or television shows by people who experienced the impact of global warming, sharing the truest experiences!
What happens if firms are willing to spend money to buy more carbon credits as their profits will be able to cover up the expenses used to buy the credits? So.. the level of carbon emissions will not decrease significantly as these are the companies producing loads of pollution..
1) How do they drain US' oil supply? The US imposes a tariff of more than 50 US cents per gallon on sugar-based ethanol from Brazil, but subsidises inefficent corn-based Americal ethanol.
2) What is 'competitive advantage'? American firms have an upper hand over access to cheap energy sources.
to Maii: Are you sure measuring the cabon emission for each household will be less tedious? In our group opinion, it will be more tedious since there are quite a number of households in each country. Furthermore, how do you measure carbon emission in each household?
A blog for work and play, "happy dogs and everything else" is a platform to encourage conversations and provoke discussions. Fav topics are dogs (naturally), food, movies and current hot topics. Naturally, the stars of Happy Dogs are my two lovely girls, Huey & Shiroii. To find out more, check out them out in the pictures!
A blog for work and play, "happy dogs and everything else" is a platform to encourage conversations and provoke discussions. Fav topics are dogs (naturally), food, movies and current hot topics. Naturally, the stars of Happy Dogs are my two lovely girls, Huey & Shiroii. To find out more, check out them out in the pictures!
27 comments:
Title: Act now on global warming
Q1) What is the world doing about global warming?
Ans: Countries such as Europe and Japan have shown their commitment to reducing global warming by imposing costs on themselves and their producers, even if it places them at a competitive disadvantage.
U.S. has introduced a policy that entails draining America’s oil supply.
Q2) What are the things the scientists miscalculated?
Ans: Scientists underestimated the pace at which global warming was occurring.
Q3)
Ans: - Policy that entails draining America’s limited oil supply. Market base incentive for the Americans
- America’s firms with access to cheap energy are given a big competitive advantage over firms in Europe and elsewhere.
Q4) What does the writer mean by “coalition of the willing”?
Ans: It means gathering/union of countries that are willing to help.
Q5) What are the solutions mentioned in the article?
- Kyoto Protocol
- Forgo building coal-fired plants
- Increase cars’ fuel efficiency
- Provide targeted assistance to developing countries to enhance their energy efficiency and reduce emissions.
- Provide stronger incentives to their country own producers
- Impose taxes on products from other countries – Including the U.S.
Q6) Feasibility of the solutions:
Kyoto protocol: It will not help to solve the problem of global warming since U.S. and other developed countries are not involved in this policy. These countries are more concerned about their countries economic development and increasing productivities. Thus, they are not interested in the Kyoto Protocol policy and will continue to emit more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and increase global warming.
Coalition of the willing: It will help to solve the problem of global warming. It is because when more countries are gathered together, each country can help to play a small part in solving the problem and these countries can think of more solutions to curb the problem of global warming.
Q7) Rationale of the solutions provided:
- To reduce emission of carbon dioxide to curb the problem of global warming.
- To encourage countries not involved in Kyoto Protocol to join in the policy.
by: Joyce, Felicia, Huishan, Huiting, Shin Yun, Si Jia
Plan to combat climate change presented to UN
1) Who presented this plan?
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
2) What are your views on this plan?
Empty talk Just a plan, not action. If all these are carried out, it will bring great benefits.
3) Do you think it can be enforced by the UN? Is it feasible? Are their any possible obstacles?
Does technology allow? Can people accept?
Reduce Global Warming
1) Improve efficiency in transport sector: Long term: will work as there will be rebate taxes, consumers may find it more worthwhile to purchase alternative fuel vehicles. Create awareness among the people and encourage people to accept such mode of transport.
2) Improve design and efficiency of buildings: Plant plants inside, outside of buildings and on rooftop. Put solar panels on the top of buildings.
Water cooling method: Freeze water at night, ice melts in the day to keep buildings cool.
Long term solution: although technology implemented will be costly but it’s worthwhile because electricity will be saved.
3) Biofuel becomes cellulose
Feasibility questionable! Not able to produce cellulose at such large amount. May not have the technology.
4) Use only coal-fired power plants that can be retrofitted to capture and sequester (store) CO2 emissions: Feasible as not much cost will be involved hence people can accept.
Cope with Change
1) Improve management of natural resources: Feasible, and acceptable. Obstacle: Require cooperation from the government, industries and the people.
2) Address the future needs of the poorest and most vulnerable nations: Feasible but it is not likely that it will implement soon, as the richer countries must give money to the poorer countries.
3) Build more climate-resilient cities: Not feasibility as the current technology does not allow. A more possible solution is to build eco-cities. Eg Dongtan, an eco-city in China that is proposed. Dongtan will be completed by 2010.
4) Strengthen international, national and regional institutions to cope with weather-related disasters and an increasing number of climate change refugees: Feasible as environmentalists are studying the effects of global warming now.
Implement global policy
1) Help poorer countries and those in transition use energy efficient and new technologies: Same as above - Not likely that this will be implemented soon as the only way to help is to give money.
2) Accelerate negotiations: Feasible and acceptable. Plans already carried out now - Kyoto Protocol. Obstacle – Countries might insist not to cooperate eg. US
3) Educate people: Feasible, but people might not change if they do not take them seriously.
Article: Success Begins at Home
Definition of Sustainable Development: Sustainable development should take into consideration the social and economic aspect of the society before implementing environmental solutions/proposals/polices. The way to go about measuring a policy’s feasibility is by employing cost-benefit analysis of the proposals.
Solutions presented in the article:
1) Use of cost benefit analysis of significant proposals to as to be clear of the benefits and consequences or even the practicality of the project.
2) Pursue of clean technology; thinking is focused on the long run effects.
3) Explore and expand the use of the market solutions by providing the right incentives for pollution control; allow greater flexibility and lower overall cost.
4) Understand and be aware of multi stakeholders in environmental management.
5) Urgent need for societies to establish for themselves acceptable air, water and noise quality levels and to be cognizant to the fact that these baseline levels will change over time as expectations on quality of life changes.
6) Access the use of these non-market valuation techniques and apply these in project evaluation.
7) Invest in conflict-resolution methods, whether they involve compensation in money or in kind.
Feasibility of solutions presented in article:
1) Use of cost benefit analysis of significant proposals to as to be clear of the benefits and consequences or even the practicality of the project.-
The use of cost benefit analysis would be one of the more feasible solutions as it allows us to access a proposed solution before we implement it, seeing if its social benefits would out weight the social cost of the project. In this way, we are seeing if the project would be practical enough to implement it, rather than wasting resources on projects that would not benefit us. This is also a good solution as it would provide good justification to the society using resources devoted to the development of the project.
2) Pursue of clean technology; thinking is focused on the long run effects.
This solution is feasible in a sense that it makes us focus on the long term effects rather than the short term and immediate effects forgetting about the long term one. This is also one of the more useful solutions as it takes into consideration that changes take time and the time can be used for adjustments for the society or industries affected by the plan, slowly allowing them to get used to the change, rather than an immediate change that would catch everybody surprised.
3) Explore and expand the use of the market solutions by providing the right incentives for pollution control; allow greater flexibility and lower overall cost.
This solution is already used in several industries, and it is proving to be an effective way to cut down pollutions. Programs such as the pollution prevention act in the USA are one of the few examples. This allows the industries to be more willing to cut down on their emissions and at the same time, achieve the main purpose of the supposedly imposed project. Also,
4) Understand and be aware of multi stakeholders in environmental management.
Indeed one could argue an individual cannot do much. This idea is thus able to go along that line and thus focus on what multiple stakeholders can do together and the change they could bring about if they worked together as they are the main players in the specific industry, and thus should be able to monopolize the actions in the industry.
5) Urgent need for societies to establish for themselves acceptable air, water and noise quality levels and to be cognizant (knowledgeable of something especially through personal experience) to the fact that these baseline levels will change over time as expectations on quality of life changes.
This solution is portrayed by the use of an example in the article. “Where underdeveloped land, pristine forest and beaches continue to be used up over time, the remaining resources would thus be valued more and this itself provides a strong insurance for protection of the environment.” This is true. The article also mentions the need for the society, from time to time, to take stock of what’s left of its natural resources. However, doing this would be a waste of much energy and time. Also, this solution is not very feasible. For example, should country A have a lot of coal, the value of coal in that country would not be high and people would use it. This does not consider the long term effects of overusing the resource.
6) Access the use of these non-market valuation techniques and apply these in project evaluation.
The use of the 6th is to access a particular project on the various benefits it would bring. At the end of the day, it would be clear that any project we would be doing or carrying out would have a negative harm on the environment. Therefore this technique would suggest the measurement of the dollars and cents the project would bring in against the negative effects it would have on the environment, to see if the project is feasible or not.
7) Invest in conflict-resolution methods, whether they involve compensation in money or in kind.
This strategy is not very feasible for the fact it only uses compensation in forms as an incentive or benefit to forego the negative effects caused by a certain strategy/policy/plan that has been implemented. At the end of the day only one party would be able to enjoy the benefits of the plan and another suffer, therefore it’s not a feasible solution by itself.
Qn 3: What did the writer suggest is the key principle that will motivate the Americans?
Newspaper article: Personal Carbon Credits on the Cards
What is the solution proposed?:
- individual carbon allowance
- if one exceeds allowance, have to buy more credit,hence pay more
- if one has unused credits, they can be sold back to the system
Why is it proposed? any rationales?:
- having a population of 6 billion in the world, the total carbon emmision sums up to be quite a significant amount
- therefore, issuing personal carbon credits will curb the problem of high carbon emmisions in the world
- this will help to solve other problems such as global warming
Feasibility:
- quite feasible if one is actually able to measure each individual's carbon emission
- it still quite a tedious process as countries have to cover their total population
- also different quotas have to be set for different countries (developed vs developing)
Obstacles and what is needed for it to work:
- will people agree to the system? (mistrust between countries)
- who is to enforce all this? (governments? ministries? ASEAN? UN? WHO?)
Other comments:
- instead of measuring each indvidual's carbon emission, it wouldbe better to measure each household's carbon emmision.
- this will be less tedious
Ms Chong your blog rules:)
What are you going to deal with the developed countries? They only have 10% of the World's population but they emit more than half of the World's carbon dioxide. China and India --- as they become rich they start to emit more...
Article: Personal Carbon Credits on the Cards
Done by: Maisarah, Pallavi, Tresa, Eileen
To Joyce's group:
2 qns:
1) What is the significance of the "Coalition of the willing"? How are they different from other groupings?
2) How would you assess the individual suggested solution? It is too general to lump them all under the answer for the "coalition of the willing".Is it possible to forgo coal-fired plants? How can we increase cars' fuel efficiency? Who should be targeted for "targeted assistance"? What areas should be targetted? What kind of incentivces would be considered strong incentives? Is it possible to impose taxes on USA for products made in ways that contribute to global warming? Ask ask ask & answer answer answer.
To kelkellykelkel:
- how do they drain US' oil supply???
- what is 'competitive disadvantage'
to ruenn shengs group:
why is a solution not feasible if developed countries need to give money to the poorer and less developed countries?
To Ruenn Sheng's group:
The plan outlined in your handout is by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). What is the significance of this committee?
It is indeed to win the people around, but any plan proposed will have little currency unless it is backed by the people. How can we persuade a mindset change?
Title:Seeing the climate policies for the trees
Q1)What are the solutions proposed?
Ans:-create financial incentives to protect forests and romote tree planting
-Afforestation and reforestation projects
-Kyoto Protocol,to cut greenhouse gas emission
Q2)Why are they proposed?
Ans:-To cut down on greenhouse gases emmision
Q3)Do you think they'll work?
Ans: Yes, because the financial incentives offered would be attractive not only to poor nations , but also to American companies and farmers, giving the US government a potent political reason to get involved in international climate policy
Q4)Any obstacles involved?
Ans: One major obstacle preventing American participation in an international climate regime is the lack of binding commitments on the part of developing countries.
by:Michelle,Hui Qi,Shi Hui,Chiao Ting,Pei Qi
Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare
Qn 1. What are the solution proposed?
- Indonesia Government has suspended palm oil subsidies.
- The government environmental groups and some of the Netherlands' "green energy" are trying to develop programmes to trace the origin of imported palm oil to certify the operation produced the oil in a responsible manner.
- Use other types of biofuels such as ethanol(corn and sugar) and sunflower oil.
- Biofuel should not be classed as renewable energy automatically.
- Wetlands is backing the certification system for palm oil imports.
Qn 2. Why are they proposed?
- High demand of palm oil results in clearing of rainforests, overuse of chemical fertiliser, draining and burning peatlands.
- Thus, increase carbon emission which is responsible for GW.
Qn 3. Do you think they will work?
- Yes. Increasing no of ctries understand the importance of reducing carbon emission.
- With assistance of dev. ctries and UN, the carbon emission will be reduced.
Qn 4. Any obstacles involved?
- Most of the ctries are profit-driven so ppl will choose the cheap palm oil despite tt it is harmful to the environment.
Qn 5. What are biofuels?
- Fuels derived from plants.
To Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
To Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
To Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare
There has been a report stating that with the use of biofuels as an alternative source of energy, it will result in a competition with the food industries for the use of ethanol. This will cause the demand for ethanol to rise greatly, since the production of energy from ethanol requires huge amount of ethanol. So, will it be feasible to use ethanol as an alternative method, considering the effects it will have on the food industries which currently already demand for much ethanol?
To Tze Wei's group:
You said: "This solution is feasible in a sense that it makes us focus on the long term effects rather than the short term and immediate effects forgetting about the long term one."
- Feasilbility is not due to whether a project is long term or short term. Feasilbility is about the possibility of carrying out the plan.
You said that the pollutiuon prevention act in USA makes "industries more willing to cut down on their emissions and at the same time, achieve the main purpose of the supposedly imposed project." How does this work? Explain.
Add on to the article entitled:
Act now on Global Warming
Futher elaborations on feasibility of solutions:
1) Forgo building coal-fired plants: Not feasible. It is not possible to forgo building coal-fired plants totally. Coal is a very important energy source for developing countries as it is cheap and can be easily obtained.
2) Increase cars' fuel efficiency:
Feasible. With improved technology, cars will emit less harmful gases, such as carbon dioxide.
3) Provide targeted assistance to developing countries to enhance their energy efficiency and reduce emission: Not feasible. These countries are more concerned about developing their countries than reducing CO2 emission, as this might affect their industries, thus affecting their economy.
4) Provide stronger incentives to their own producers, through either more stringent caps on emissions or higher taxes on pollution: Feasible. With higher taxes, countries will be more willing to reduce pollution as they are profit-oriented.
5) Impose txes on products from other countries - including the US - that are produced in ways that unnecessarily add substantially to global warming: Feasible. As countries are profit-orientated, with higher taxes, the price of the goods will be higher, and so consumers are less likely to purchase them. This will reduce demand of the goods, and thus reduce the supply as it is no longer as profitable.
Addressing to Ling's article on Success Begins at Home.
1) What are the long run effects as mentioned in solution 2?
2) Is it really possible to correctly determine the ''right incentives'' for each country? Thus, is the solution really feasible?
To Anonymous on Palm oil: Dream biofuel or eco nightmare,
Must we use the few crops that China prize to make ethanol? Cna we use toher crops?
If we really have no other sources, what would you choose - to feed your people now or to plan for the future and let your people starve?
To "Ling" aka Tze Wei's group
If you are the president of a developed country like United States, would you want to give up economic advantages over the poorer countries through relenting pressures by other countries who use the excuse of "environmental responsibility" to cut the edge in economical progresses in your country? (A George Bush's supporter's view) So how can a rich government gives money to the poor when doing so means reducing the economic benefits and increasing others' economies? I forgot o add that United States and many developed countries now run on a deep fiscal deficit, thanks to JK Keynes... I'll give more elaborations later!
To Our Dearest Teacher Ms Chong
IPCC is a task group headed by scientists to think of strategies to combat global warming.
A mindset change is to be directed by the people themselves. By what? Creative works like plays or movies or books or television shows by people who experienced the impact of global warming, sharing the truest experiences!
To Mai's Grp:
What happens if firms are willing to spend money to buy more carbon credits as their profits will be able to cover up the expenses used to buy the credits? So.. the level of carbon emissions will not decrease significantly as these are the companies producing loads of pollution..
What happens if ppl dont abide to the rules?
Regarding maii's attacks,
1) How do they drain US' oil supply?
The US imposes a tariff of more than 50 US cents per gallon on sugar-based ethanol from Brazil, but subsidises inefficent corn-based Americal ethanol.
2) What is 'competitive advantage'?
American firms have an upper hand over access to cheap energy sources.
to Maii:
Are you sure measuring the cabon emission for each household will be less tedious?
In our group opinion, it will be more tedious since there are quite a number of households in each country. Furthermore, how do you measure carbon emission in each household?
wow its so interesting
This is when you are brainwashed by George Herbert Walker Bush.
Post a Comment