Friday, October 14, 2016

Quiz Oct 18

AH 3-4 [Short chapters today, giving us more time to prepare for the group report on divestment (etc.) - see the material below*...]

1. What was the purpose of the Biosphere 2 experiment, and what did it teach us?

2. What has huge potential to reduce ocean acidification and global warming?

3. How was Flannery naive a decade ago?

4. Whose polar bear comments are given disproportionate weight by the media? Why?

5. What may be the first mammals to become extinct in the US due to climate change?

DQ

  • Should we be planning to colonize other worlds before we figure out how not to poison our own?
  • Have we been tricked into thinking that polar bears and other "cute" species are at greater risk than they really are?
  • If we're concerned about the "cute" species, how can we guard against indifference or hostility to the "ugly" or scary ones?
  • Do you think we've embarked on a 6th extinction? How can the average person be made to care about that?



 * 
Over 650 schools have joined the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC). This breakthrough program is reshaping institutions and communities while training the future political, business, and scientific leaders who will help solve climate change.
ACUPCC signatories commit to measure and report their greenhouse gas emissions, take immediate actions to reduce them, and develop and implement a plan to go climate neutral.
Dates: Launched May 2007, ongoing
Audience: 17 million+ college Presidents, students faculty, staff, and communities
Strategy: Presidential leadership appeal to mission, prosperity, quality of life and competitive advantage
Impact: 665 schools have signed the commitment. 465 schools have submitted climate action plans pledging neutrality as soon as possible -- 30% of signatories have set a target climate neutrality date within 20 years. In the first five years, ACUPCC institutions reduced gross greenhouse gas emissions by 10.2 MtCo2e (metric tons of carbon dioxide).



==
Bill McKibben (@billmckibben)
The question I get asked the most: What can I do to make a difference? It's almost the right questionecowatch.com/bill-mckibben-…

Divestment: 350.org

A Beginner's Guide to fossil fuel divestment-

What is fossil fuel divestment?

Divestment is the opposite of investment – it is the removal of your investment capital from stocks, bonds or funds. The global movement for fossil fuel divestment (sometimes also called disinvestment) is asking institutions to move their money out of oil, coal and gas companies for both moral and financial reasons. These institutions include universities, religious institutions, pension funds, local authorities and charitable foundations.
It is the fastest-growing divestment campaign in history and could cause significant damage to coal, gas and oil companies, according to a study by Oxford University. Previous divestment campaigns have targeted the tobacco and gambling industries and companies funding the violence in Darfur. Divestment is perhaps most well known for its role in the fight against apartheid in South Africa.

What is the case for divestment?

Almost all of the arguments in favour of fossil fuel divestment fit into two categories: moral and financial.
First, the moral argument, which is rooted in basic maths. Scientific researchshows that in order to keep to international targets to limit global warming to a 2C rise and thus prevent catastrophic levels of climate change, between two-thirds and four-fifths of fossil fuels need to remain in the ground. But fossil fuel companies are currently banking on these targets not being met so are extracting these reserves and selling them – and are actively prospecting for more. In doing so they are setting the human race on a route to irreversible climate change that will cause rising seas, flooding, droughts, rising disease, increased conflicts and refugee crises.





Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%

Mute
Pinterest
 What is fossil fuel divestment and why does it matter?

The UN has lent its “moral authority” to the divestment campaign, while Desmond Tutu has said that “people of conscience need to break their ties with corporations financing the injustice of climate change”. 
Second is the financial argument, which rests on the premise that if international agreements on climate change are met, the investments will become worthless. The theory that these “stranded assets” are creating a trillion dollar “carbon bubble” that could plunge the world into another economic crisis is now the subject of an investigation by the Bank of England, after Governor Mark Carney said publicly that “the vast majority of reserves are unburnable.”
The World Bank has come out in support of the financial argument for divestment, with president Jim Yong Kim stating that: “every company, investor and bank that screens new and existing investments for climate risk is simply being pragmatic”.
Although the impact of divestment on share prices may be relatively small, the reputational damage can have serious financial consequences.
Further reading:
==

The Climate Leadership Commitments

Bold commitments by leaders in the higher education sector yield big changes at the institution that those leaders manage, in the sector at large, and beyond. These commitments require strong leadership, tangible outcomes, and the ability to track progress.

Higher Education presidents and chancellors can join the Climate Leadership Network by signing either the Carbon or the Resilience Commitment, or the integrated Climate Commitment. An institution can transition to the Climate Commitment at any time.

Between October 5,2015 and April 22, 2016, 91 institutions became Charter Signatories of the Climate Commitment. See a full list of the Charter Signatories. To see all signatories, view our Climate Leadership Network map.

Second Nature Welcomes Climate Commitment Charter Signatories

By: Gabriela Boscio
In celebration of Earth Month, Second Nature is proud to announce that 93 colleges and universities across the United States have signed the Climate Commitment, expanding their carbon neutrality work by adding resilience targets. These institutions are now the Charter Signatories of the Climate Commitment.
“We are proud to be one of the early signatories of the Climate Commitment”– said Lacey Raak, Sustainability Director at California State University Monterey Bay– “and [we] look forward to supporting and working with other campuses and community partners to advance the goals of the Commitment.”
Second Nature launched the Climate Commitment on October 5 2015, along with the Resilience Commitment and the Carbon Commitment, the latter being a update and expansion of the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC).

Congratulations to our Charter Climate Commitment Signatories:

Agnes Scott College
Alamo Colleges
Allegheny College
American University
Appalachian State University
Arizona State University
Ball State University
Bennington College
Bowie State University
Bristol Community College
California Lutheran University
California Polytechnic State University-San Luis Obispo
California State University-Chico
California State University-Long Beach
California State University-Los Angeles
California State University-Monterey Bay
California State University-Northridge
Cedar Valley College
Central Community College
Chandler-Gilbert Community College
Chatham University
Clarkson University
Coe College
College of Lake County
College of Saint Benedict
Eastern Connecticut State University
Eastern Kentucky University
Eastfield College
Elizabeth City State University
Emory & Henry College
Estrella Mountain Community College
Frostburg State University
Gateway Community College (AZ)
Gateway Technical College
George Washington University
Glendale Community College
Goddard College
Green Mountain College
Hampshire College
Humboldt State University
Huston-Tillotson University
Lane Community College
Lebanon Valley College
Maricopa County Community College District
Mesa Community College
Millersville University of Pennsylvania
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Mountain View College
Mt. Hood Community College
New York University
North Lake College
Northeast Lakeview College
Northland College
Northwest Vista College
Oberlin College
Palo Alto College
Paradise Valley Community College
Phoenix College
Portland State University
Rio Salado College
Rochester Institute of Technology
Salisbury University
San Antonio College
Santa Fe Community College (NM)
Scottsdale Community College
South Mountain Community College
Southern Connecticut State University
Southern Oregon University
St. Philip’s College
State University of New York at Albany
State University of New York College at Cortland
State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry
SUNY Rockland Community College
SUNY Sullivan
Temple University
Tufts University
University of Arizona
University of Arkansas Main Campus
University of California, Los Angeles
University of Illinois at Chicago
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Maryland Baltimore
University of Maryland Baltimore County
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science
University of Massachusetts Boston
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
University of Massachusetts Lowell
University of Minnesota-Morris
University of New Hampshire
Virginia Wesleyan College
Wells College
Western Michigan University
Western Technical College
Posted by at

5 comments:

  1. UnknownOctober 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM

    "If we're concerned about the "cute" species, how can we guard against indifference or hostility to the "ugly" or scary ones?"

    I can understand why individuals have chosen to focus on the "cuter" species, because humans tend to focus on things that are more aesthetically pleasing to the eye than other more possibly obnoxious looking things. However, I believe this is due to what is portrayed as being more important. If we continue to focus on the attractive species being important enough to want to save from endangerment, then that is the only progress we can make. If we focus on all endangered species and give them all equal importance in the media, while showing the benefits as to why we should save these endangered species, then we may see some different results.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kevin BibbyOctober 18, 2016 at 3:02 PM

    Should we be planning to colonize other worlds before we figure out how not to poison our own?

    I think that is a tough question to answer. Sure it would be cool and an amazing feat of science and whatnot if we could colonize other planets but should that also come at the expense of trying to correct the problems we face on this planet that are totally correctable so that we can also continue to prosper here?

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownOctober 18, 2016 at 3:39 PM

    "Should we be planning to colonize other worlds before we figure out how not to poison our own?"

    Maybe we should consider solutions to both issues. While trying to come up with viable solutions to reducing or preventing further destruction to our home planet, we should also perhaps consider the idea that, if worse comes to worst, we should have a sort of exit strategy. Working on both plans at the same time could prove to be more valuable that prioritizing one over the other.

    ReplyDelete
  4. UnknownOctober 18, 2016 at 3:45 PM

    "Have we been tricked into thinking that polar bears and other 'cute' species are at greater risk than they really are?"

    I believe that the species, despite their aesthetic appeal, are in equal amounts of danger in regards to climate change. The media is simple focusing on the more "cute" species to dredge up some sympathy from the average person in hopes to bring about more awareness to the species' situation. However, this does not belittle the severity of their situation. These species are very much threatened by global climate change. I don't believe that the media paints too severe a picture of the endangerment of these organisms.

    ReplyDelete
  5. UnknownOctober 18, 2016 at 3:51 PM

    "Do you think we've embarked on a 6th extinction? How can the average person be made to care about that?"

    Yes I believe that the sixth extinction is well underway. As Flannery discusses, biodiversity has significantly decreased in the past fifty years and will not be able to recover. Species sensitive to environmental changes are unable to cope with the severe global climate changes and so they die, resulting in a chain reaction that causes more species to die due to overpopulation and starvation. As is referenced by the 2014 study regarding this mass extinction, habitat loss due to intense environmental alterations is the primary cause of extinction.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)