Scientist and governments say they want to fix the environment....?

Question

but they have to study the environment first and how it is affected by this and that. That is what it always remains -- a "study". Are there any steps out there to actually fix with what is wrong or is it just talk. because while all this talk is going on, the environment is getting worst.

Answer 1

People who support the theory of global warming like to use phrases like "they can be no doubt", "the evidence is overwhelming", "all the experts agree" etc to try to get the debate away from science. If all the experts agree, it must be right ,you should therefore also agree, and above all YOU DO NOT HAVE TO QUESTION THE SCIENCE.

The truth of the matter is there is doubt, and the evidence is not overwhelming. Here is a link to a house of lords committee in England. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeconaf/12/1202.htm

Despite saying that the majority of scientists interviewed expressed support, the minority were able to pose some questions that the majority were not able to answer. Mainly,
* concerns that changes in ice-core record CO2 concentrations might have followed temperature rise rather than the other way round;
* the poor nature of the data used to compute the long run historical record, or alleged misinterpretation of the long-run historical temperature record;
* the GCMs fail to "reconstruct" the long term historical record;
* the view of some that the relative importance of the natural factors affecting climate variability, e.g. variation in solar output, is underplayed in the IPCC assessments;
* apparent divergences between land-based temperature records and satellite-based measurements, the latter showing some cooling rather than warming in recent years;
* the manner in which the GCMs are adjusted until they align with the observed data;
* the uncertain role of cloud cover. Professor Lindzen argued that clouds generate a negative feedback effect (cooling) rather than the positive feedback effect assumed in the GCMs; and that
* the models fail to predict sudden weather events.

The above are important because it means the projected temperature increases that the models predict are flawed, and biased to the up temperatures. One study shows that the models show a temperature increase of three degrees Celsius during the past 150 years when we only had 0.6 degrees.

A lot of people say there is no harm on siding with caution. Others disagree. Reducing co2 means reducing energy. That is going to have an impact on the economy. Many people are going to lose their jobs, and people are going to go through hardships.

We should be looking for alternative sources of energy. But only when the technology advances and it becomes a reliable one.

Answer 2

There are all sorts of things you can do (small and large). For example, make recycling a part of your everyday life. That would not only include the usual (cans, glass, paper), but also other items as well. For example, eBay is a huge recycler! If you don't want something, it's a great way to pass that item on to someone who does!

Another idea: when you buy your next car, try to buy one with the greatest fuel efficiency possible. This benefits the environment and your bank account! (You'll be spending less at the pump.)

If you see energy waste at your workplace or school, you could lead an effort to reduce waste (shutting off lights and computers etc. to save energy).

I've listed one website below that might have other ideas. I'm sure if you search this topic in google, you'd find many more websites with all sorts of ideas.

It's good to go green!!

Answer 3

Actually the beauty of this is that there is much that can be done now without having to have all the absolute answers.

Some times very good is good enough, it doesn't always have to be the very best if you spend too much time waiting around.

Many things are being done and there are many that individual people can do in the meanwhile such as reducing their consumption of energy, water, and other resources, planting trees, reduce the size of your lawn and encourage natural plants and shrubs over grass, mow less often, drive less often, eat locally grown foods, and much more.

Most of these are just good sense and they have a wide range of safe and positive effects that you don't need to know every last detail about to get a positive result.

You should contact Crusader_Magnus who is on here and in my contacts. He deals with this stuff for a living and runs a company called Applied Ecotechnical Innovations.

Answer 4

Being an Environmental Scientist, I feel your pain. It is unfortunate that there is such a disconnect between science and policy/law making. Even after these "studies" are released it is ultimately up to the politicians to do some thing about it. Global Warming is a perfect example. Look how long George W. Bush and many Republicans have denied that Global Warming exists in any form or fashion. Basically, the answer is there isn't a solution to the dilemma you speak of besides voting people in to office that actually care about the environment and dont come from industries that profit from environmental destruction.

Answer 5

You are exactly right. While there is nothing to be gained from running around to save the planet without first studying the problem to find worthwhile and effective ways of doing so, I am afraid that many environmental 'studies' are just another way to distract attention from a subject that is going to make certain industries very unhappy and to postpone government from taking action to solve a problem that is going to make it hard for politicians to get money for re-election from those unhappy industries.

The point is, if you are going to wait for industry scientists and politicians to do something on your own you're in for a very long wait!

Past successes in the environmental movement - like stopping nuclear power plant construction, getting the lead out of gasoline and reducing damage to the ozone layer all came from individual people just like you asking questions and than, armed with the answers, pressuring their elected officials to do something rather than commissioning another study.

Joining environmental groups from large international to local grassroots is one thing to do. Writing letters - not just one or tow but many and regular - to the media or your elected officials is another. Don't give up if you don;t get published. You might have to change an editor's or chief of staff's mind first, but persistence pays.

Answer 6

People are studying all of the time. There are a lot of good studies out there. The trend right now seems to be to discredit scientific findings that fail to support people's need to be in denial. I am an environmental anthropologist working to examine the human social attributes that contribute to sustainable livelihood practices. I'm looking at how legal and regulatory and economic discourses (ways of talking and thinking and writing) make community solidarity toward environmental sustainability difficult. There are many many more people trying to answer a lot of questions. Hopefully you'll become involved too and add your problem-solving abilities to the mix. We need people like you who feel that finding answers is important.

Answer 7

Pequen, we have been fixing the environment since the late 1950's. Since you are a young whippersnapper you probably have no perspective that would enable you to see this. So, your premise that the "environment is getting worse" is false but understandable: Every generation over the past 50 years has sincerely believed that the "environment is getting worse". Trust me, its not.

Sleep tight knowing that the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland, Ohio can no longer catch fire.

Answer 8

You can't fix something if you do not understand the cuase of the problem.

The "just do something" attitude bumps into the law of unintended consequences. Just doing something can be as bad or worse than doing nothing. That is why it takes so long to fix things, especially complicated things like ecosystems.

Answer 9

There are always steps being taken to reduce pollution. That is why we have catalytic converters on cars for example. It is also why billions of dollars are being spent on fusion power research and many other energy and environmental projects.

Answer 10

No one knows what is exactly "wrong". It could be carbon dioxide, it could be that the sun is heating up which it is. The suns output has gone up .15% in the last 30 years and mars is heating up. Fixing the problem when you don't know what it is can create a larger problem sometimes.