The Right to Food

By Noor Ali Noorani

Most of us living in big and action-packed metropolises have a similar life pattern. All through our lives, we use the assets and gifts with which the Almighty Has blessed us without giving anything a second thought. Perhaps, we have taken everything for granted. Living in our air-conditioned rooms, we avoid a wrenching reality that 60% people around the world live below the poverty line with absolutely no concept of housing and electricity what so ever. With education easily accessible to us, we never realize that only 1 out of 8 children in the world ever gets to see a school. With our refrigerator and food supplies at just some steps, we tend to forget an eye opening and heart shattering fact that it's just a game of destiny that we are born in the right part of the world and into the right social class. If we hadn't, then we might have gone hungry all our short life, as 800 million people do, who were born in the wrong place or wrong conditions or into the wrong social class. This has to change. With caring and nourishing our own selves, we need to know and develop a better understanding of Human Rights and when do we actually start misusing them.

According to the Declaration of the United Nations, "Human rights are those basic standards without which people cannot live in dignity. To violate someone's human rights is to treat that person as though she or he were not a human being. To advocate human rights is to demand that the human dignity of all people be respected." It also refers to a concept that all human beings are free and have universal rights, or status, regardless of legal jurisdiction, and likewise other localizing factors, such as ethnicity and nationality, race, color and family background. This concept is not very new. The Theory of human rights is based on the dogma of "Moral Universalism", initially put forward by Greek philosopher Aristotle. In "Nicomachean Ethics," Aristotle presents his argument in support of the existence of "a natural moral order" and says that such a "natural" order should be the basis for all truly rational systems of justice. This concept of moral universalism implies that morality is not dependent on social and historical conditions and applies to all human beings regardless of place and time, and forms the basis of human rights. Roman Stoic philosophers such as Cicero and Seneca, also supported 'moral universalism' and argued that all moral laws originated in the rational will of God and the authority of such moral law transcended all local legal codes. Christianity, which emerged later, maintained the belief of a universal moral code in the ensuing centuries. Islam, one of the most believed and fastest growing religion of the world also makes a resounding effort to ensure equal rights to all people. Standing on these strong historical and religious grounds, much has been done to date to ensure rights to every individual living on this planet. United Nations along with its associate agencies in collaboration with hundreds and thousands of NGOs is trying to make this possible. At the same time, a great emphasis has been given to the fact that all the rights are inter related and solving one problem at a time would need to tackle all the other issues. While U.N.E.S.C.O is working for education and U.N.I.C.E.F for children, agencies like W.H.O, F.A.O and W.F.P are dealing with one of the most intense issues of our world and going every length to ensure one of the most basic rights to all humanity.

The Right to Food.

The Center for Economic and Social Right states "The right to food guarantees all people the ability to feed themselves. It also obligates states to cooperate in the equitable distribution of world food supplies. As part of the more general right to an "adequate standard of living," the right to food contributes to a broader question of whether people live in basic dignity. People have a right to the basic amount of food necessary for survival, but they also have a right to food of high enough quality and quantity to live in adequate dignity". This generalizes that hunger, malnutrition and inaccessibility of food is not only violation of a very basic human right but is also an obstacle for attaining social, political and economic stability and harmony. It stresses towards a fact that irrespective of all social, political, economic and geographical differences, every human being has a birth right to lead a life with access to adequate supply of food and water.

Providing adequate food and work has always been seen as prime moral obligation for the kings and monarchs with large empires and those ruling the common men. The only basic difference between these moral responsibilities and human rights is that the human rights give the poor and unprivileged people a claim, which principally is enforceable.

In those times of monarchy, people had no option other than to revolt against the king or state that failed to meet this obligation and responsibility to feed its citizens.

This signifies a fact that the idea of human right to food is to establish a practical and legal channel for fulfillment of this basic right and to seek remedies against authorities which fail to guarantee access to food. This idea is barely 200 years old-and not yet legally implemented in most states even today.

The right to adequate food is a human right and is well established and recognized on several premises under the international laws. Just after three years of the World War II, On December 10, 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 25 of this declaration states that everyone has a right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food. This universal declaration of human rights sets a common and realistic standard of achievement for all people and nations. Keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, states and nations shall strive to achieve the common global goal and emancipate their respective people from the curse of hunger, malnutrition and starvation. Nearly 20 years later, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) developed these concepts more fully, stressing "the right of everyone to adequate food" and specifying "the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger". The Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition (1974) and the World Employment Conference (1976) also pressed to this fact asking for an inalienable right of food for all humans in order to develop their physical and mental faculties. Conferences and declarations such as The International Conference on Nutrition (ICN), World Declaration on Nutrition (1992), the Rome Declaration on World Food Security (1996) and the Plan of Action of the World Food Summit (1996) all stressed up to ensure right to food throughout the world. Agencies working under the United Nations such as Food and Agriculture Organization (F.A.O), World Health Organization (W.H.O) and World Food Program (W.F.P) are taking all considerable and necessary steps to eradicate the nuisance of hunger and starvation from the entire humanity. "Achieving food security for all" is the main point of focus of F.A.O's efforts. And to make sure people have regular access to enough high-quality food to lead active, healthy lives. F.A.O's mandate is to raise levels of nutrition, improve agricultural productivity, better the lives of rural populations and contribute to the growth of the world economy. They also provide assistance to those nations who need to increase their crop yields but lacks technical skills. With a staggering budget of $765.7 million, F.A.O aims to achieve its goals on community, national and international levels. On the other hand, the largest international food aid organization, World Food Program, combats hunger in underdeveloped nations of the world with severe shortage of food. This hard and strenuous fight has been carried out through plan action of Rescue, Rapid Reaction and Rehabilitation. Expanding its activities into 78 countries around the world and with direct expenditure of US$ 2.9 billion, W.F.P is distributing food to 87.8 million poor people in the world which is the largest relief and aid operation of its kind ever since the dawn of human history. Most recent relief operations of W.F.P include earth quakes of Pakistan in 2005, floods in Bangladesh of 2004 and recent famine in Saharan and sub-Saharan Africa. Moreover, every year on 16th October, World Food day is celebrated to re-think and re-plan the strategies for present and future.

But despite the fact that the international community and UN has frequently reaffirmed the importance for the right to adequate food and launched multitudes of operational projects, a disturbing gap still exists between the standards set and the situation prevailing in many parts of the world. The target of reducing world hunger by the year 2015 which was set in World Food Summit in 1996 still appears a far cry. Statistics show that since 1990, the number of hungry and underfeed people is constantly and unceasingly increasing. In developing countries spread across 5 continents, it has started to increase at a rate of almost four million per year. By the advent of 21st century, the total number of undernourished people worldwide has risen to 854 million (14% of the world's total population): 820 million in developing countries, 25 million in countries in transition and nine million in industrialized countries. Today, only one out of seven people do not get enough food to lead an active and healthy life which is the birth right of everyone. According to a research conducted by F.A.O about the state of food insecurity in the world in 2006, 25,000 lives are lost everyday due to poverty and hunger. In the developing world, every second a child dies due to hunger and malnutrition. Moreover, 27 percent of children under 5 are moderately to severely underweight. In 2005, about 10.1 million children died before they reached their fifth birthday. Almost all of these deaths occurred in developing countries, 3/4 of them in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, the two regions that also suffer from the highest rates of hunger and malnutrition. Today, one in nearly seven people does not get enough food to lead an active and healthy life which is the birth right of everyone. Adding to this, malnutrition and undernourishment leads to many chronics and deficiencies leading to physical and mental restraints which they effected carry all through their lives. All these numbers and statistics lead us to the loop poles in international working bodies and their incomplete strategies and approach in dealing with these intense issues. At the same time, it indicates the presence of many other factors and causes that are still making hunger, malnutrition and violence of right of food the number one risk to health worldwide with greater number of victims annually than AIDS, malaria and cancer combined.
In order to understand the factors of this prevailing state of hunger and violence of the right to food, one needs to understand that inadequate food access can be due to two prime reasons: There is absolutely no food available, or the food is available but far from the access of deprived and unprivileged people. Stereotypically all importance and emphasis has been given by the states and the welfare organizations on the overall food availability and it has been thought that mainly through increasing food production and quality, hunger and malnutrition can be overcome and target of ensuring food rights to all can be achieved. Such a strong emphasis is only reasonable when the production of food by the poor is for themselves. But there is another view point to this situation. According to different experts, adequate quantity of food is available or can be produced with the current resources almost in every country of the world. Many of the countries considered poor, produce food enough for not only their domestic markets but for export as well. Nonetheless, hunger and malnutrition still persists. It may surprise us but according to the annual report presented by F.A.O in 2004, only 10% of the total hunger death is due to famine and malnutrition. This leads us to re-examine and arrive at some more obvious causes. Lack of food isn't the only cause of malnutrition and hunger but is also due to social injustice and political, economic and social segregations. There are almost one billion people around the world who earn less than $1 a day. These poor people are deprived of the rights to have their resources while the rich and those in power monopolize these resources for their own luxury and comfort. Billions of people all around the globe in their respective countries are never given opportunity to have a secure economic life and hence have food security. This statement is well proved by the facts like the total assets of the three wealthiest men in the world constitute 47% of the world's total monetary assets, and all three of them belong to the United States of America. On the other side, most food productions whether agricultural products or food obtained from oceans or rivers, goes towards feeding livestock whose meat and by-products are consumed mainly in the countries of the industrialized North.

The other reason for this number of deaths is global debt-trap. The World Bank has admitted that today, the developing countries pay $13 in debt as repayment for every $1 it receives in grants. Due to this, tens of billions of dollars which can be used to improve infrastructure, development of rural communities, education and health care are just being wasted in paying those debts to the World Bank. Thus, it would be rational to say that "Global Capitalism" and "Unequal distribution of resources" are the main monsters under the disguise of hunger and food shortage which are responsible for the massacre of human lives on such a massive scale.

Today, in order to bring hunger and malnutrition to an end and make access to food possible for all, long term attempts should be made on International, National and Individual grounds. Globally, the world has to re-realize a fact that right to adequate food is inherently linked to the dignity of humanity and is inseparable from the fulfillment of all human rights for all. Eradication of poverty, ensuring equal rights, education, employment, better and fast ways of transportations and better facilities for health would also improve food security. Necessary steps should be taken to ensure economic democracy and micro- finance should be made available on local level to reduce the global dominance of big industries on agriculture sector.

Internationally, accumulation of wealth should be reduced by massive redistribution of wealth and other resources. This also includes cancellation of debts to the Western banks and increased investment in rural and under-developed sectors. The West and those belonging to the industrialized and developed world should join hands today and try to improve the infrahuman conditions in many parts of the world such as Africa, South America and South Asia. At the time of a natural calamity, the welfare organizations and NGOs should establish a check and balance system to make sure that all the aids go to the deserving and those in need. As declared by the Economic and Social Council, "The role of the United Nations agencies, including through the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) at the country level, in promoting the realization of the right to food is of special importance. Coordinated efforts for the realization of the right to food should be maintained to enhance coherence and interaction among all the actors concerned, including the various components of civil society. The food organizations, FAO, WFP and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in conjunction with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), UNICEF, the World Bank and the regional development banks, should cooperate more effectively, building on their respective expertise, on the implementation of the right to food at the national level, with due respect to their individual mandates."

On national level, the state government should design and adapt a national strategy based on human rights principles to ensure food security for all its citizens. It should formulate policies and take all necessary steps to make sure that everyone is free from hunger and can enjoy his right to adequate food. It should also identify the resources available to meet the objectives and the most cost-effective way of using them. The national strategy should give particular attention to prevent discrimination in access to food on different aspects such as color, caste, creed, gender, financial standing and geographical location. Moreover, the state government should take all necessary measure to ensure transparency and accountability in all aspects of food system including production, processing, distribution, marketing, food safety and nutritional value. Adding to this, those who suffer the violation of the right to food should have full access to the judicial system of the country and all necessary steps for compensation and prevention for any further cases should be taken.

Last but not the least, every one of us who has got sufficient amount of resources to feed ourselves, must thank the Almighty for His blessings and should take small steps on individual and community basis to help those millions of our brothers and sisters who suffer from famine, hunger and malnutrition and are deprived of their right to food. We all must try not to waste the food and should contribute through our money, time and knowledge in ensuring the right to food to every human being on our mother Earth.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Noor_Ali_Noorani
http://EzineArticles.com/?The-Right-to-Food&id=1162112

Read More

Ways of Protecting Your Home From Noise

By Andrew Marshall

Do you live by a busy road or near a railway line? You might be wondering if there are things you can do to block out the noise. One way of doing this is to use earplugs but you might find they are not particularly comfortable or that they irritate your ears. There are, though, a number of things that can be done to limit the amount of external noise that comes into a room.

It is important to identify the noise first and, more importantly, where it is coming from, meaning you will be better placed to prevent it. In the case of road traffic, for example, it will be easily identifiable, but sometimes it isn't so simple. Some people believe they are hearing external noises when it is internal; that is to say problems in their ears such as tinnitus. Assuming this is not the case, below are some ways of protecting against noise coming into a home or room.

Double Glazing Windows

The majority of noise that comes into a home is through windows and doors rather than through walls which are thicker and more solid. In regard to windows, upgrading from single glazing to double glazing can make a big difference in the amount of noise coming through, as well as keeping warmth in.

Window Shutters

Window shutters can have much the same benefit as double glazing by providing an extra level of noise protection. Whether you have single or double glazing there is still a small amount of space between the frame and the opening of a window. Wooden window shutters are particularly effective at keeping this noise out, with solid shutters being preferable if the sole purpose of them is to keep the noise to a minimum. Wood is very effective in keeping out noise and investing in double glazing (if you don't have it already) as well as window shutters will significantly reduce noise.

Insulation

If noise is consistently a major problem then you may wish to go as far as to improve the insulation of your home or certain rooms. At the extreme end is professional sound proofing, which is fairly expensive. Other things that can be done include adding dry wall between the two boards that typically make up a wall in modern homes or to use foam-like insulation as you usually find in lofts.

Towel Under the Door

If noise through a door is the problem, for example in an apartment block, then simply placing a towel at the bottom of the door will deaden the noise coming through the gap at the bottom. This could prevent low level noise from coming through or simply quieten the noise you can here. This might be sufficient to make the difference between getting a good night's sleep and lying awake.

Carpet

For those living in flats where noise from the flat below is a problem, having carpet is much more effective at preventing you from hearing noise than wooden flooring is. Even using a mat can help a little, although that is unlikely to completely block noise out.

External noise is something that many find a problem. There are things you can do to prevent this being an issue though. If it is unrealistic for you to keep noise out you could use other sounds to prevent external noise from frustrating you. You can use a fan or music for this effect.

Andrew Marshall �

Double Glazing and Window Shtters are two things that can be used to reduce noise.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Andrew_Marshall
http://EzineArticles.com/?Ways-of-Protecting-Your-Home-From-Noise&id=7371071

Read More

The 10 Worst Mistakes Leading to Global Warming

By Stephen P Latham

The build up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and resulting global warming is the result of centuries old habits and ill thought out policies that may do more harm than good. Here are listed the ten worst mistakes which have either led us to the present situation, or appear incapable of solving it.

1) Economic growth

The New Economics Foundation recently said "We urgently need to change our economy to live within its environmental budget since there is no global, environmental central bank to bail us out if we become ecologically bankrupt"

Economic growth has become a cultural obsession. To achieve this, consumer products are designed with either a physical or psychological obsolescence to increase sales and profits and provide the illusion of wealth. This leads to waste, resource depletion, and profligate energy use resulting in widespread environmental damage at both a local and global level.

It is still widely believed that we can continue to expand economically yet reduce carbon emissions at the same time without a revolutionary technological fix. This myth has been heavily marketed through the catchphrase 'sustainable growth', but despite almost half of a century of effort to dissociate growth from increases in fossil fuel use these factors are still inextricably linked.

The scale of the problem should not be underestimated. We continue to live in a society where extravagance is still envied rather than frowned on. Introducing more sustainable economic policies will be politically difficult without a paradigm change in our values.

2) World population explosion

Whereas the political right wing abhors restricting economic growth, many in the left wing are crippled with their own ideological dogma; the opposition to population control. Their argument revolves around tenuous claims that poor developing countries, which generally have the greatest increases in population, contribute little to global warming. However, this doesn't tie with the evidence.

NASA recently estimated that black carbon emissions (such as smoke) from biomass burning is the second greatest contributor to net radiative forcing after transport, and significant quantities of this originates from cooking and heating in open wood fires, a common practice in developing countries. However, more importantly all global residents will aspire to high living standards exacerbated through blanket advertising. China's middle classes already number several hundred million people due to the countries earlier population explosion and more recent economic success fuelled from high carbon coal. China is now the world highest emitter of greenhouse gases and Indonesia the third highest highest, although much of this is still driven by industrial exports to developed countries.

It seems therefore that even people with a low carbon lifestyle could store up an environmental time bomb for the future. In fact calculations show that population control is nearly five times more cost effective in mitigating global warming emissions than green energy technologies like wind and solar power.

3) Non-global carbon trading schemes

While emission trading schemes are not inherently bad, regional ones with arbitrary limits such as the European emissions trading system are a recipe for disaster. In theory this scheme places a limit on the total allowable carbon emitted from the major industries within these countries. However, many sectors of the economy and imports are excluded. International transport for example has been difficult to include until now, partly due to the difficulty allocating emissions to specific countries.

Of the businesses that are involved, these subject governments to intense politically lobbying which then over-subscribe free carbon allowances to them which have led to windfall profits. Worse still, participants are allowed to import goods and outsource labour from non-complaint countries that do not subscribe to carbon limits at all. They are also allowed to offset their emissions there, effectively paying developing countries to reduce emissions so they can increase theirs, but this sometimes results in payments for projects that might had happened anyway! The net effect is an increase of consumer energy prices within the EU while having virtually no influence on reducing the rate of increase in global carbon emissions.

Other market-based schemes are claimed to be superior to the EU trading system. However, any scheme is only as effective as the loopholes. Any successful mechanism must be global in scope, with the limits or tax levels dictated by the environmental objectives free from business lobbying or political pressure.

Unofficial offsetting schemes are a microcosm of the same problem. These typically allow smaller organisations to offset their carbon emissions using conservation projects such as reforestation without having to reduce emissions directly. This effectively provides them with environmental credentials which they can advertise to customers while continuing with a business as usual approach. However, once again it is difficult to be sure that these projects are truly additional.

There are many other problems with offsetting, especially with forestry projects. Forestry in high latitudes are less effective at absorbing carbon and reducing temperatures than in the more politically unstable tropical regions, so it is difficult to guarantee that the forests in these later areas will be managed well into the future. This is critical since that beside preventing illegal logging activities, the climate may change leading to drought and forest fires. Another problem is that preventing deforestation in one area may also simply drive loggers elsewhere, so once again there is necessary for national and global monitoring.

4) Feed in tariffs and micro-generation

Feed-in tariffs used in several EU countries oblige electricity companies to pay private consumers a premium rate for any excess renewable micro-energy they produce at home, although this payment is gradually reduced over time. To cover the up front costs of installing the technology the initial premium has to be extortionately high which will be passed on by the electricity companies to the rest of their customers, as higher bills.

Feed-in tariffs are supposed to accelerate the development of renewable technologies and provide producers with enough initial sales to achieve economies of scale and become market competitive without a subsidy. However the qualifying projects, which usually consist of photovoltaic panels, are far less inefficient than if they were scaled up into energy parks located in the sunniest regions such as Southern European and southwest United States. Instead they have been mostly installed on house roofs in Germany.

Ten years ago the German government offered generous feed-in tariffs costing E1.2bn. Their total contribution to the country's electricity supply was 0.4%, however even these meagre savings allowed other industries to raise their emissions by the same amount due to the EU Emissions Trading scheme (see item3). Estimates also suggest that Germany's solar programme destroyed more local jobs than it created, and many of the panels installed were manufactured abroad in the Far East

The UK government is about to repeat the mistake. It is estimated that feed in tariffs will cost �8.6bn to save 20m tonnes of CO2 by 2030. This means it will cost around �430 to save one tonne of carbon dioxide compared with �8 per tonne by building a nuclear power plant, or a net saving using energy conservation measures.

5) Poor design and build quality of properties

Building homes with high levels of insulation and passive solar heating always seemed like a sensible precaution even before the more recent energy and climate crisis since it helped to prioritise fuel supplies for industry during times of war or industrial action. However, residential planners and house-builders throughout most of the last century largely overlooked even these basic measures. As a consequence much of our older housing is grossly energy inefficient, which is now difficult and expensive to retrofit with energy conservation measures. Three million properties in the UK still fall into the lowest two categories of energy efficiency, which are often occupied by low-income occupants. Many of these buildings are solid-walled, with a pitched roof, single glazing, with virtually no insulation and may be still heated by electricity.

While most properties in the UK are of a potentially higher standard, in 2005 there were still over nine million homes with uninsulated cavity walls and 6.3 million lofts that have either no or poor insulation in England alone. These types of property are easy and cheap to retrofit with insulation and this could save a third of the heat lost; yet progress carrying out these measures are still slow.

While new homes are designed to conform to much higher thermal standards, many are still not built to an adequate quality, with 57% of houses and a third of all properties failing a standard pressure test. These leaks result in air ingress compromising the effectiveness of the insulation. These low quality standards are thought to be partially the result of a lack of building inspectors and the privatisation of building controls.

6) Food waste and meat

The UN says that Food production must double by 2050 to meet the demand of the world's growing population. However, most of the worlds farming land is already in use, so increased food production will require extending intensive farming methods with greater use of pesticides and fertilisers leading to the increased release of greenhouse gases.

Paradoxically, the UK government policy is attempting to deal with both of these problems simultaneously with plans to "boost food production in Britain and reduce its impact on the environment". However, it is estimated that only about 45% of the food actually produced at the farming stage that is used, is really necessary for adequate nutrition, and most of the remaining 55% of waste is preventable. This amounts to about 10% of the total UK carbon output, almost as much as its entire transport system! No doubt this situation is repeated elsewhere throughout the developed world.

Much of the food production in the world is also used for animal feed to produce meat. Together with the emissions these animals produce directly, meat is responsible for a substantial proportion of the world greenhouse gas emissions. The recent increase in food prices has been partially driven by higher meat demand due to a more affluent world population, as well as the demand for biofuels which competes with food for land use (see item 10). One study found that grain-fed beef is responsible for 13.82g of CO2 equivalent emissions per Kcal of energy, compared with 1.67g for an intensively reared chicken, and only 0.14g for the average vegetable.

Without more sustainable farming practices and the reduction of waste by the affluent, the future looks bleak for food availability as well as for the environment.

7) Automotive biofuels

The environmental principles behind the use of biofuels appear simple enough. The carbon absorbed by the feedstock plant from the atmosphere during growth is supposed to compensate for carbon emissions of the fuel produced from it. However, there are numerous other energy inputs required to refine biofuels, and this energy is sourced mainly from fossil fuel power stations. Intensive farming of the biomass feedstock also requires fertilisers that release Nitrous oxide, another powerful greenhouse gas.

Worse still, new land allocated for growing biofuels can release substantial carbon to the environment due to the tilling of soils and deforestation. For example, it has been calculated that biofuels sourced from food crop-based plants in Brazil, Southeast Asia, and the United States on land that was rainforest, peatlands, savannah, or grassland releases between 17 to 420 times more carbon than if fossil fuels were used instead. Along with cattle farming, the rush to produce biofuels is one main reason for deforestation and associated ecological damage.

Although more expensive, it is possible to produce relatively low carbon sources of biofuel from plant wastes and 2nd generation biofuel technologies which use the whole plant material, but little is produced at present. The European Union has set targets to source 5.75% and 10% of transport fuels from renewable's by 2010 and 2020 respectively without excluding unsustainable sources. Surely this is an appalling oversight.

8) Public transport using large buses and trains

It is often claimed that to reduce transport carbon emissions we need to introduce more public transport to entice people out of their cars. This may work well in metropolitan areas, especially if the infrastructure is adapted to support them. However, outside areas of high population density public transport is used by a diminishing number of people, and is largely reliant on customers who either cannot drive or afford a car, which will continue to reduce. This low demand for public transport results in either a reduced service, or under-utilised vehicles requiring enormous subsidies from the taxpayer and generating high emissions per passenger carried.

The US Transportation Energy Data Book estimates that transit buses and commuter trains carried only 8.8 and 31.2 passengers on average so these vehicles are operated mostly empty and spend much of their time carrying mainly their own weight around. As a consequence, cars use 17% less energy per passenger than transit buses and 17% more energy per passenger than commuter trains!

It is therefore necessary to rethink radically of how to adapt and operate our public transport system to meet the needs of a dispersed modern society, and if possible make it financially self supporting while retaining a low environmental impact.

9) Large carr

While the improved structural safety of cars has required some weight increases, there has also been strong consumer marketing to bolster demand for larger and higher performance cars. These provide greater prestige value for the owner and greater profit margins and turnover for the motor industry than much smaller cars which are inherently more efficient.

While cars have been getting heavier, demographic changes are leading to either smaller families or single occupant households. As a result, the number of occupants per car is decreasing and cars are getting significantly heavier relative to the people they carry. A typical vehicle in Europe will need to carry about 20 times the weight and 100 times the volume of the driver it carries. This is a grossly inefficient way of transporting people around.

Due to the limited scope of reducing energy while increasing the size of vehicles at the same time, manufacturers have considered using exotic technologies and fuels instead. The biggest white elephant of all has been hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which has diverted attention away from more viable technologies. Fuel cells are extortionately expensive and generally require low-density hydrogen that is difficult to transport and store. In practice it is not even carbon free, since the most economic method of producing hydrogen is by steam reforming of natural gas that results in the release of carbon dioxide. Yet despite all this effort, a recent European trial of fuel cell buses showed that they emitted more carbon than their Diesel engine equivalents despite costing �1 million each!

10) Travelling to business meetings

Modern telecommunication technologies offer immense opportunities for reducing air and land based travel especially within the business sector, since there are few of these activities which cannot be performed by teleconferencing and teleworking. However, there is scant evidence that these simple solutions are being taken seriously. While many corporations enthusiastically embrace high profile projects which present an environmentally concerned image, they are content to let their employees spend valuable time travelling to meetings and conferences which could be more efficiently served by teleconferencing. No doubt they perceive a marketing advantage using direct interpersonal communication, or perhaps the allure of the free foreign trip is overwhelming and used most by those in executive positions who dictate corporate policy.

Whilst there is no single solution to the problem of global warming, it can be mitigated through a variety of innovative, coordinated and practical solutions combined with well thought out policies.

link to referenced article

Environmental Transport Systems (ENTRANS) Environmental Sustainability through the use of Integrated Transport Technologies - A rational approach to building a sustainable transport system. A non-commercial greenwash free Site - http://www.entrans.co.uk/

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Stephen_P_Latham


http://EzineArticles.com/?The-10-Worst-Mistakes-Leading-to-Global-Warming&id=3938386

Read More

Effects of Global Warming on Agriculture and Food Supply

By Christophe Catesson

For a long time it has been believed that the effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply is going to be a positive one. This is because the rising level of carbon-dioxide resulted for global warming will help the greeneries for photosynthesis.



Thus there will be a rise of agricultural production and food supply. The theorem received a boost after the evidence of a sharp rise of barley production as one of the effects of global warming in Iceland which was quite impossible even few years ago.



But more recent experiments and researches have revealed that the effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply are not that good after all. AN UNEP 2001 report on the global warming has predicted that USA is going to have more droughts, floods, landslides and storms.



Winter will gradually be shortened and sobered down, while summer will rise in expansion and severity. Along with this heavy rain, big storm, heavy snowfall, high sea level, increasing coastal erosion and other problems will occur.



Though as one of the effects of global warming, the overall food supply and production level is supposed to rise in USA, but the Great Plains will suffer with more droughts resulting for global warming.



Even now many effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply have been perceived. The popular maple syrup production of North east USA has diminished by 10%, moving its production zone to farther north for shorter and warmer winter.



On the other hand as one of the effects of global warming the south west USA is suffering from a water shortage which will increase in coming days. The zone has become dry for any standard agricultural production with an apprehension of resettling Dust Bowl of 1930s’ by the year 2030 for global warming.



Following a report of IPCC on the global warming, California’s snow covered Sierra Mountains can reduce in near future by up to 60-90%. This will create dire water shortage in summer, making the Central Valley area unsuitable for agricultural production for global warming. The State University of Colorado has declared that the area is going to be less productive due to effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply.



As the effects of global warming, the food supply production in Florida is going to suffer a lot due to frequent and large scale floods. Also one of the most profitable agricultural products of USA – corn will suffer a bad condition due to dry and hot atmosphere for global warming.



As another example of the effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply - with the rise of temperature by 3 to 11 degrees in this century, the production rate of the main crops – the rice, corn, wheat, barley, soybeans and sorghum – will be cut down by 3-5% for each point rise of temperature for global warming.



However with all these effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply, new attempts have been made to adjust the agricultural and food production method according to the changing atmosphere. So to fight the effects of global warming, the researchers have established new methods of production with continuous revision of models. But still the best possible process to reduce the effects of global warming on agriculture and food supply is to be established.



About the Author: For more similar articles, visit http://www.theglobalwarmingoverview.com and read about facts, maps, news and myths.



Source: www.isnare.com

Permanent Link: http://www.isnare.com/?aid=355551&ca=World+Affairs

Read More

Exploding The Global Warming Myths

By Paula Barton

Are you a believer of Global warming or not? Or are you one of the cynics yet to be convinced? Well both have a part to play in the Global Warming arena debate. The whole issue is surrounded by facts and figures but when these facts and figures are looked at it is very difficult to prove them with science, so you end up with hearsay.

Global warming from our point of view is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans.

When paying attention to all the different global warming myths that are published in various publications, online, TV, and radio you will understand the issue with conflicting information. Because of these global warming myths come in many forms it is essential to understand the causes of global warming, and the facts attached to those myths.

MYTH: Water vapour is the most important, abundant greenhouse gas. So if we're going to control a greenhouse gas, why don't we control it instead of carbon dioxide?

FACT: Water vapour does trap more heat than carbon dioxide (CO2), but as CO2 levels increase in the atmosphere, they lead to warmer conditions, which lead to more water vapour in the air, which leads to even warmer conditions, thus a never ending cycle. Because of this relationship between CO2, water vapour and climate, to fight global warming nations must focus on controlling CO2.

MYTH: Global warming reduces as the ozone hole shrinks.

FACT: Global warming and the ozone hole are two separate issues.

MYTH: Global warming is not occurring due to some glaciers and ice sheets are expanding and not shrinking.

FACT: In most parts of the world, the shrinking of glaciers and ice caps have been dramatic. The best available scientific data indicate that Greenland's massive ice sheet is shrinking.

MYTH: So what if global warming is a problem, trying to fix it will affect American industry and workers.

FACT: A well thought out trading program will harness American ingenuity to decrease heat-trapping pollution cost-effectively, jumpstarting a new carbon economy.

MYTH: The cold winters and cool summers that have been happening of late are not the effects of global warming, and are infrequent events.

FACT: While it is true that different areas of country's have experienced some colder winters here and there, between them the average temperature has ben on the up.

MYTH: We can adapt to climate change. Civilizations have survived droughts and temperature shifts in the past.

FACT: Although it is true that the human race has survived an onslaught of drought and prolonged warmth along with the bitter cold and more, entire societies have collapsed from dramatic climatic shifts.

MYTH: Global warming along with extra CO2 will be beneficial, they reduce cold related deaths and stimulate crop growth.

FACT: Any beneficial effects will be far outweighed by damage and disruption.

MYTH: Global warming is just part of the worlds natural cycle. The Arctic has warmed up in the past as it is doing now.

FACT: The global warming we are experiencing is not natural. People are causing it.

While the global warming myth story is interesting, it does reduce the impact of the facts. But as they say "Truth is stranger than fiction." The many myths on global warming doing the rounds are based on global warming statistics, just with a different view point.

It is always best, as with everything, to look at the global warming myth with an open mind. There is always two sides to every coin, so explore both before making your full opinion.

Perhaps this article on global warming myth with strike a chord with you and will inspire further reading into the subject.

Global Warming reference site, challenging the common perceptions of Global Warming and aiming to give you facts supporting global warming

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Paula_Barton


http://EzineArticles.com/?Exploding-The-Global-Warming-Myths&id=928004

Read More

Facts about Global Warming You Should Know

By Nathalie Fiset

Global warming is not a 20th century phenomenon. It has, in fact, occurred in the past more than once, along with periods of extreme cold known as the ice ages. With so much written and reported about global warming, sometimes it's difficult to detect which is fact and which is just part of scientific scare tactics. Here are some facts about global warming that might help:

What exactly is global warming?

Global warming is basically the increase in the temperatures of the Earth's atmosphere, land masses and oceans. The Earth's surface temperature is at an average of 59F and over the last hundred years, this figure has risen to about 1F. By the year 2100, the average change in the temperature of the Earth could range from 2.5F to about 10F, enough to melt glaciers and polar ice caps.

The cause of global warming

Global warming has and will always occur naturally. Why it has become such a concern in our lifetime is due to the fact that human activities and practices have contributed significantly to its occurrence and severity. With the advent of industrialization and careless environmental practices, we have caused the increase in the average global temperatures by contributing negatively to the greenhouse effect.

This began about 240 years ago, when the Industrial Revolution was born. As more and more fossil fuels in the form of oil were mined and burned, gases as the by-product of that process began to be released in the atmosphere. Currently, it is estimated that 75% of the increase in the carbon dioxide content of the Earth's atmosphere is caused by the burning of these fossil fuels.

Global warming and the greenhouse effect

Global warming is related to changes in the Earth's greenhouse effect. Gases naturally occur in the Earth's atmosphere and act both to protect and retain heat. These gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and water vapor. Of these, water vapor is the most dominant and abundant greenhouse gas.

Global warming and the greenhouse effect are not the same thing. The greenhouse effect refers to a natural process that occurs in the Earth's atmosphere. If this process is disrupted, then it could contribute to global warming.

As the sun's rays hit the Earth, heat is bounced back to the atmosphere where these gases contain the heat and keep it there to warm the planet. This is an important natural process and allows life forms to flourish and survive. Problems only occur when these gases multiply and build-up, containing heat too efficiently and thus warming the Earth's atmosphere.

As the Earth's average temperature rises, effects in its landmasses and sea water level become apparent. Polar ice caps melt along with glaciers, contributing to higher and warmer sea levels. By the end of the century, it is estimated that sea levels can increase from 4 inches to a high of about 40 inches if global warming continues unabated.

Global warming can also affect the behavior of the winds and can also contribute to a harsher and drier climate, with frequent visitings of strong hurricanes. Water from heavier rainfall will not stay long to irrigate the land, however because with a warmer climate, water on the Earth's surface will evaporate quickly. This has a significant effect on agricultural practices not only in the US but also for the rest of the world.

Another phenomenon that is equated with global warming is the El Nino. The El Nino phenomenon has occurred for possibly thousands of years and is not caused directly by global warming. However, changes in the average temperature of the planet can contribute to its severity and frequency.

Other human practices that contribute to global warming

The agricultural revolution has also contributed to global warming. As more and more communities need lands converted from forests to residential and commercial areas, biomass is reduced, contributing to the increase in the presence of carbon dioxide in those regions. Since carbon dioxide is processed by plants and trees, their absence contributes to its increase.

It is estimated that about 25% of the annual increase in the carbon dioxide found in the Earth's atmosphere is caused by extreme changes and usage of the Earth's natural resources. Other practices also include deforestation, salinization, desertification and overgrazing also contribute to global warming. However, many scientists surmise and agree that the contribution is slight and indirect.

Facing the facts of global warming

Countries all over the world have just begun to acknowledge the negative effects of global warming not only to the world's politics and economy but also to humankind in general. Many of the world's governments have encouraged implementation of measures to try to counteract the problem of global warming through careful measures and practices designed to protect and respect the environment.

How these measures will fare and contribute to the long-term maintenance of our planet, though, remains to be seen.

For more information now go to: [http://www.solutionstoearthdestruction.com] [http://www.stopearthdestruction.com/index.html]

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Nathalie_Fiset


http://EzineArticles.com/?Facts-about-Global-Warming-You-Should-Know&id=526229

Read More