Friday, February 6, 2009

portfolio 3

I find that the three guests invited for the lecture actually mentioned most of the points covered in the video “An Inconvenient Truth”. So, I will just give a brief summary on their talks and discuss some issues that I find interesting.

First on the list, Prof Andrew Palmer gave the first talk which concentrates more on ways in which government and individuals are able to slow down the rate of global warming. I find what the lecturer said is very true, the politicians would usually place the short term problems at higher priority compared to environmental issues which does not pose a serious threat at the moment. Moreover, when we compare environmental issues to improving the economic state of the country or fighting famine in rural areas across the globe, many may prefer to spent more resources on the latter. Next, something I found interesting about the talk is the storage of carbon dioxide down at the seabed. Initially proposed to store them in pressurized liquid form, it was later rejected as it will affect the acidity of the ocean. The next feasible plan was to store them within membrane which I find is more absurd. I wouldn’t think that this membrane is tough enough to prevent penetration from sea creatures and I believe the consequences of all the giant “bubbles” of carbon dioxide bursting simultaneously will definitely be more disastrous to the oceanic life.

The second lecturer bombarded us with terminology and issues that I find rather foreign but he raised an interesting case study on electric cars. Disregarding power, electric cars certainly possess more benefits than gasoline cars. It is a pity that industrialisation favoured the production of more gasoline cars instead of the more environmental-friendly electric cars and subsequently, exhausts produced from gasoline cars resulted in the increased amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Lastly, the 3rd speaker, Prof Bala mentioned almost the same points as Prof Andrew Palmer. He mentioned the government roles in reducing greenhouse gases such as carbon taxes and subsidises in energy-efficient technologies. Ultimately, I feel that the government will only take up measures which would not affect its economy. For example, the government might not implement high carbon taxing since it will discourage firms from setting up factories in Singapore. Saving the earth is a very slow process, it is important for every country to make its first move to help address these environmental issues and put a stop to them.

2 comments:

  1. I like the way your blog proceeds.I would like to point out that its not obligatory that the government will discourage a technology unless there is economic benefit.Although I agree that it might not support technologies which degrade the economy

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is an opinionated response, Royden. However, be careful to avoid words that sound unfairly negative. The words "absurd" (paragraph 2) and "bombarded" (paragraph 3) have negative connotations in the context you used them. Maintain a more balanced tone in academic writing.

    ReplyDelete