Download
1 / 51
E N D
KEY CONCEPT 1.1 Environmental science draws from science and nonscience disciplines to understand and address environmental problems.
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO SCIENCE HAVE DIFFERENT GOALS AND OUTCOMES Environmental science is used to systematically collect and analyze data to draw conclusions and use these conclusions to propose reasonable courses of action.
KEY CONCEPT 1.3 Environmental problems are difficult to solve because there are multiple causes and consequences and because potential solutions come with trade-offs.
Understanding Environmental Problems The ability to understand environmental problems is referred to as environmental literacy. Such literacy is crucial to helping us become better stewards of Earth.
KEY CONCEPT 1.2 Wicked Problems Wicked problems are difficult to address because, in many cases, each stakeholder hopes for a different solution. Solutions that address wicked problems usually involve trade-offs, so there is no clear “winner.”
Triple Bottom Line for “Wicked Problems” To confront these complex problems, their environmental, economic and social causes and consequences must be considered. This trifecta is referred as the triple bottom line.
The Greenland Vikings’ demise was caused by natural events and human choices.
ICE CORE ANALYSIS Levels of oxygen-18 and deuterium in the ice revealed that temperatures were unusually warm at te arrival of Vikings. By the time the Vikings disappeared, temperatures had dropped significantly, leading to the Little Ice Age, with colder seasons and harsh winters “The combination of lower temperatures and environmental damage likely contributed to the Vikings' downfall, as livestock would have struggled to survive the long, cold winters due to a lack of hay.” Diamond’s 1st factor- natural Climate Change • A team of scientists and engineers selected an accessible part of the ice sheet near Viking settlements. • They drilled down to the bedrock, extracting a long, narrow ice core, 12 centimeters wide and 3,000 meters long. • This ice core was divided and distributed to several labs worldwide, including Jim White’s stable isotope lab at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
MUD CORE ANALYSIS Mud samples from lakes, contained significant amounts of soil blown in during Viking times - indicating soil erosion The Vikings overgrazed the land, leaving it bare, which allowed the wind to carry away the unanchored soil, similar to how soil erosion happens today. According to Danish scientist Bent Fredskild: the problem was not due to climate but was self-inflicted owing overgrazing Diamond’s 2nd factor- Self Inflicted Damage • Danish scientist Bent Fredskild, studied the mud core taken from lake bed. • the problem was not due to climate but was self-inflicted.
KEY CONCEPT 1.3 Living sustainably means living within the means of one’s environment in a way that does not diminish the environment’s ability to support life in the future.
ANIMAL BONES’ ANALYSIS McGovern analyzes hundreds of animal bones collected from Greenland middens to understand what the Vikings ate and how their diets changed over time. By examining these bones and noting the layers they were found in, he can trace dietary patterns. The bones include cattle imported from Europe, as well as sheep, goats, and local wildlife like caribou. A notable absence fish bones, despite Greenland's coastal location was observed in their diet, Diamond’s 3rd factor- Failure to properly respond to environmental changes, Adapting to environmental challenges is crucial for a society's resilience and survival, as it enables them to navigate changes and sustain their way of life effectively.
Comparison with Icelanders McGovern points out that the bones from Norwegian settlers in Iceland show a different dietary pattern compared to the Greenland Vikings. Icelandic settlers' remains include a variety of fish, bird, and whale bones—predominantly fish like cod—the Greenland Diamond’s 3rd factor- Failure to properly respond to environmental changes, Vikings did not incorporate these resources into their diet. This indicates that the Vikings in Greenland failed to respond effectively to their natural environment, unlike their Icelandic counterparts.
Icelanders’ Response to Environmental Changes As the landscape resembled that of Norwagien initially believed their new land could support their traditional cow-farming and wood-dependent lifestyle. After clearing about 80% of Iceland’s forests and recognizing that their old ways were unsustainable. They adapted by switching from beef to fish, conserving wood, and abandoning the fragile highlands. Icelandic settlers' remains include a variety of fish, bird, and whale bones—predominantly fish like cod—the Greenland Icelandic Vikings survive and thrive, demonstrating a response to environmental limitations that aligns with the principles of sustainable development, ensuring their needs were met without compromising future generations.
Norse and Inuits The demise of the Greenland Vikings also stemmed from the competition with the nearby Inuit, who had settled in the Arctic centuries earlier. • Skilled hunters of ringed seals- plentiful food source, seal blubber for heating and lighting their homes . • Expertise contribute to their resilience in the harsh environment. Archaeological evidence indicates that very few Inuit artifacts were found in Viking settlements. Historical records reveal a deep-seated disdain among the Norse for the Inuit, they referred to as "skraelings," meaning "wretches," Diamond’s 4th factor- Hostile neighbors Vikings refused to seek friendship or advice from them
The Impact of Lost Trade on Greenland Vikings Vikings depended on the European connections for essential supplies like iron and timber and and other essential supplies. As the productivity of their colonies declined, visits from European ships became increasingly rare As weather conditions worsened and food supplies diminished, they found themselves without any sources of assistance. Diamond’s 5th factor- Loss of friendly neighbors Greenland Vikings could no longer rely on trade
KEY CONCEPT 1.4 Modern humans inflict tremendous environmental impact by virtue of our sheer numbers and the high per-person impact of some societies.
Humans are an environmental force that impacts Earth’s ecosystems
Challenges of Modern Societies Some of the best lessons about how we can do this comefrom the natural environment itself.
Impact of Population on Environment Carrying capacity refers to the maximum population size of a species that an environment can support indefinitely, given the availability of resources such as food, water, and shelter, as well as the ability to absorb waste. When a population exceeds its carrying capacity, the environment can become degraded, leading to a decrease in the available resources and, ultimately, a population decline. Ecological footprintis a measure of the environmental impact of an individual, community, or population, based on the amount of natural resources consumed and the waste produced. It is typically expressed in terms of the amount of land and water required to support that consumption and absorb the waste. A larger ecological footprint indicates greater pressure on Earth's ecosystems, while a smaller footprint suggests a more sustainable use of resources.
KEY CONCEPT 1.5 Natural ecosystems are sustainable because of the way they acquire energy, use matter, control population sizes, and depend on local biodiversity to meet these needs.
Ecosystems An ecosystem is a structural and functional unit of ecology where the living organisms interact with each other and the surrounding environment. In other words, an ecosystem is a chain of interactions between organisms and their environment. The term “Ecosystem” was first coined by A.G.Tansley, an English botanist, in 1935.
KEY CONCEPT 1.6 Human societies can become more sustainable by mimicking the way natural ecosystems operate.
Human societies can become more sustainable by mimicking the way natural ecosystems operate.
Sustainable Ecosystems Can be a Useful Model for Human Societies
KEY CONCEPT 1.7 Environmental literacy helps us understand and respond to environmental problems. Impediments to solving environmental problems include social traps, wealth inequities, and conflicting worldviews.
Education is seen as a crucial tool for avoiding social traps. Awareness of the long-term consequences of actions could help people make more sustainable choices. Environmental laws like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act in the U.S. aim to mitigate such traps, though enforcing them remains difficult.
SOCIAL TRAP-Social traps are decisions that seem good at the time and produce a short-term benefit but that hurt society (usually in the long run). TRAGEDY OF COMMONS- When resources aren’t “owned” by anyone (they are commonly held), individuals who try to maximize their own benefit end up harming the resource itself.
TIME DELAY- Actions that produce a benefi t today set into motion events that cause problems later on.
SLIDING REINFORCER- Actions that are benefi cial at fi rst may change conditions such that their benefi t declines over time.
CONFLICTING WORLDVIEWS Conflicting worldviews also present a challenge, as different cultures and societies have varying perspectives on environmental ethics. These differences impact how people interact with nature and respond to environmental crises, making it difficult to find unified solutions.
CONFLICTING WORLDVIEWS Anthropocentric worldview Ahuman-centered view thatassigns intrinsic value only to humans. Instrumental value The valueor worth of an object, an organism, or a species, based on its usefulness to humans. Biocentric worldview A lifecentered approach that viewsall life as having intrinsic value, regardless of its usefulness to humans. Intrinsic value The value or worth of an object, anorganism, or a species, based on its mere existence. Ecocentric worldview A system-centered view thatvalues intact ecosystems, not just the individual parts.
![[PDF] Free Download Warhammer 40,000: Chapter Approved 2018 Edition By Games Workshop](https://cdn4.slideserve.com/8114078/slide1-dt.jpg)
