‘Changing minds’- the real cure.

“Protecting our environment” has been a big topic of people all over the world since decades ago. Since the early to mid-1970s, concern for the environment quality of our planet has generated a tremendous body of research in the environmental and social sciences, and the active involvement of social and behavioral scientists in efforts to develop techniques for measuring responsible environmental behavior ( Scott & Willits,1990). If we can bring people’s attention to the environment, we might figure out methods that lead people to protect the environment.

Recently, many researches on environmental behavioral has focused on the assumption that knowledge is linked to attitudes, and attitudes to behavior, in a linear model. This thinking suggests that if people become more “knowledgeable about the environment and it associated issues…they will, in turn, become more aware of the environment and its problems and, thus, be more motivated to act toward the environment in more responsible ways”(Hungerford & Volk, 1990,p.9). This thinking reveals why only some people are involved when the environment is concerned. The fact is that not everybody is concerned with the environmental issues because of the lack of awareness of environment.

Nowadays, “green” is often used for people who deeply care about the environment. However, “non-green” people seem to be a larger pool than that of the green. The green people have an opposite attitude toward consumption with that of non-green. For example, the greens try not to drive to places but take buses instead. To them such behavior can help to reduce the gas emissions, whereas non greens do not think this way. They just enjoy driving their private cars. Another example is that the greens like to use their pre-prepared ‘shopping’ bags when they go to shop in order to minimize the usage of the non-biodegradable plastic bags. Again, non-green people will not do so. They enjoy the convenience of being given free plastic bags so that they just need to bring cash or credit cards while shopping.

The question is why they behave so differently? Obviously, the greens know that our environment is fragile and it is right thing to do to protect our environment because both our generation and the future generations will benefit from good environment definitely.
One certain thing we can say about the non-greens is that they do things in the other way which is opposite what the greens is not because they are evil but they lack concern with the environment or they do not know how bad the condition of the real current environment is. If they know that “about 33% of U.S. carbon dioxide emission comes from the burning of gasoline in internal-combustion engines of cars and light trucks(minivans, sport utility vehicles, pick-up trucks, and jeeps)”(US Emissions Inventory,2006), or that “only one percent of plastic bags are recycled worldwide and the rest, when discarded, can persist for centuries”(K. Mieszkowski, n.d.), I believe, lots of them would have become the greens.

In fact, we cannot depend on only the few apparent means to solve the environment problems. The best way to change the non-greens to the greens is to change their minds and concepts towards the environment. Simply laws that restrict their behaviors will only solve the problems apparently. Thus, education and propaganda must be in line with laws to control people’s behavior. Only when more and more people become green, the environmental situation can turn good.


References

Hungerford, H. R. & Volk, T. (1990). Changing learner behavior

Through Environmental Education. Journal of Environmental

Education, p, 9.


Mieszkowksi, K. (n.d.). Plastic bags are killing us.

Retrieved March 24, 2008, from

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/10/plastic_bags/

index.html


Scott, D. & Willits, F. K. (1990). University Environmental attitudes

and Behavior. A Pennsylvania Survey (n.d.)


U.S. Emissions inventory 2006. (2006, April). Inventory of U.S.

Greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-2004.

Retrieved March 24, 2008, from

http://yosemite.epa.gov//OAP/globalwarming.nsf/content/

ResourceCenterPublicationsGHGEmissionUSEmissions

Inventory2006.html

How about 'zero waste'?

Waste disposal has always been a serious problem of almost every government. Different countries adopt their own different methods to deal with waste disposal. Singapore, for example, is using a combination of methods of land-filling and incineration in dealing with waste disposal. However, there is another new way of waste disposal to us-“zero waste” currently. In my opinion, zero waste is the most suitable way to Singapore to solve disposing problem.
The premise of zero waste is that everything we buy is, or eventually will be, made from materials that can be repaired, reused or recycled. This is essential to Singapore because Singapore has too little resources and lands to use for land-filling. The large population density also implies that we cannot find a suitable place on this tiny island to burn the waste without affecting people’s normal life. If we could build up factories which are pollution-free to resolve the waste and reuse the materials to make new products, that will be ideal to Singapore. On the other hand, this method is somehow a capital intensive work. Fortunately, Singapore is capable to do this as it is a rich and small nation.
Furthermore, Singapore’s economy relies much on tourism industry. The country cannot do things like big ones where government can transfer the waste to rural areas to burn or bury without affecting the city and thus remain its travel destinations clear. However, zero waste is, actually, trying to help the government to achieve this-we can dispose of our waste clearly through zero waste scheme.
Lastly, zero waste is an environment-friendly scheme. In term of environment protection, this scheme has been seen as a possible, sustainable one in future. It is worth us to put money on it and to run it for a long time.
In all, zero waste is much more meaningful to Singapore to adopt in dealing with waste disposal instead of current methods.

Problem Solution-Measures might be adopted to save the Giant Panda.

As forests in the world are being logged, many animals face extinction. The first species come to my mind is the Giant Panda. One of the most valuable animals in China and also, it is the one who is facing the most serious extinction problem. The population of the Giant Panda dropped sharply in the past century mainly due to the lack of living environment and illegal catches and kills. On the other hand, pandas are very captious to its food, which puts them in great danger of food shortage. Normally, they live on a diet of 99% bamboo, occasionally eating the new leaves and fruits of other plants. However, the bamboo they eat is not normal one but china-cane which is very few. That is why most of the panda are living in Sichuan Province, China where abounds of such bamboo. In fact, most of the bamboos in the area bloomed and died in the 70’s and 80’s of the last century. Actually, the worldwide endeavor to save the Giant Panda from this crisis is still a fresh memory. Since the middle of last century, a series of effective measures have been taken by the Chinese government to save and protect the Giant Panda, which is not only the national treasure of China but also loved and cared about by people around the world. In 1957, a decision was made at a conference of the 3rd National Party Convention (NPC) to set up nature reserves, launching a ban on hunting and capturing of Giant Panda. Until now, 32 nature reserves have been established in Sichuan and nearby provinces mainly for the protection of the Giant Panda. They cover an area of 10,500 square kilometers, which is 81% of the panda distribution area. Besides these nature reserves, scientists in China also help panda to reproduce artificially. Personally, I think putting Giant Panda in the zoos might be another good means even though the zoo may not provide the best living environment for them. The fact is that, being in the zoo, the pandas would not be hunted. Objectively, the artificial environment can help them live safely. Furthermore, the visits from tourists all over the world could help to improve people’s awareness of the Giant Panda. The Giant Panda will have to chance to survive only when most people understand the situation that they are facing and take actions to help them.

Cause Effect- Potential negative effects that climate change could have on China.

China along with India and Brazil will be one of the most important players in future international climate change negotiations. Experts agree that climate change will affect China, and China will affect climate change. Climate change will make China more vulnerable to damage caused by rising sea levels, drought, flooding, tropical cyclones, sand storms, and heat waves. Already, in 2004 alone, drought and floods damaged more than 37 million hectares of arable crops, leaving more than four million of them barren. Further instance would be the recent heavy snow that have been suffered by southern provinces since December in 2007, causing serious nation-wide traffic jam which stopped many people from going back home before China’s traditional lunar new year. As a big country, China has several climatic zones and a varied physical environment. North-west China is a largely arid and semi-arid, fragile environment that is highly vulnerable to climate change. In north-east China, a warmer climate might increase agricultural production, but extreme weather events, such as storms and flooding, would probably cause serious damage. In central and eastern China, winters are cold and summers are hot. The building industry in these regions is using more and more energy. Furthermore, Coastal areas in the south and east are densely populated, and a rise in sea levels due to global warming could greatly damage the economically dynamic and prosperous Zhujiang and Yangtze deltas which are giant manufacturing hubs that have helped earn China the nickname "the workshop of the world." Any large problem for these regions has much wider implications on China’s economy. Thus, insurance costs and taxes are likely to rise and there will be interruptions to power supply and transport as the effects of global warming are felt.

Untitled!

Finally, I have a chance to write something I like. Thanks EG1471 for giving me the chance to have to write articles in English. I know I would not have written anything without such a push.

Year 2008 is a special year to me. I have changed my life style since the beginning of the year. I've suddenly grown up ,feeling the importance of studying. I have set out a ruthless schedule for myself since then and set off in a ruthless pace.
Knowing many new friends like Shi Yi, Mr. Blackstone and other Chinese scholars have made me more positive towards my University life which I was not used to. Now,I feel confident of the way ahead and I am ready to put 100% of my energy in studying.
According to Chinese tradition, this year is a 'rat' year.I hope the 'rat' could bring every friend of mine luck and happiness. I hope i could get a Cap of 4.5 or above at the end of this Sememster and ,hopefully, I could find a girlfriend. lol.... That sounds stupid, isn't it? But that is really my hope for this year.

Which is more urgent, economy or environment?

The question I posted is ,basically, asking about the priority between the economy and the environment for the Chinese government.

I think the Chinese government is facing a dilemma right now. There is no doubt that solving the basic problems of food and clothing for 1.3 billion Chinese people should be the first objective of the Chinese government. This objective has almost been done recent years even though it may not be nationwide. Nowadays, I think our government is tring to generate more wealth for both the country and her people. However , this process is being done in the cost of the environment. We may say every generation is doing things in order to benefit both themselves and their descendants. However, I wonder how far do they concern about the next generation. I think people always leave the environmental subjects out of consideration ,especially when the subject is on behalf of their far far generation. It should be obvious it is our descendants who will suffer if we over use our fragile natural resources no matter how much wealth we have given them. So we must be considerate while developing.

As the question says, we are having aging problems. That means we could have not enough working force when we have less youth. However , what I want to stress is that working force can be improved if we could train more high-quality people. In this competitive world, we need efficiency more than quantity. Thus, I don't think change our "one-child"policy is the ideal means to solve the aging problem. That how to provide good education, proving a productive working team would be more practical in my opinion.
In all, to deal with this problem of environment and people, we need to paint a picture with two brushes. That means we need to re-construct our nature while train more talents instead of just chaging policies.

Environmental problems China is facing.

We have read lots of articles about environmental problems that our people are having. I just come out with a question.

China has seen rapid economic growth since the start of the reform era in 1979.In fact,China is the only country in the world which may feature all of the world's ecosystems. However,unfortunately, every one of these ecosystems is suffering. The economy has grown, but the environment has suffered. At the same time, China is also having aging problem on the other hand. The government is planning to change her 'one-child' policy to 'two-child'. As the largest nation in population, we have over used our land,causing the destruction of forest and ecosystem.

So the question is "should the Chinese government still commence to change its population policy in order to deal with the potential aging problem or we should still restrict our population so that we could have more space to re-construct our forest and ecosystem?"