Our instructor asked us to go to the site http://footprint.wwt.org.uk where we should measure our carbon footprint and showed it to me as an integer which is the number of planets that I need to live in. The site guided me through a wizard which had a series of questions about what I do in my daily life. What I got was 2.69 planets which is not possible because we only have one planet.
The carbon footprint is a measure of the impact of what we do on the environment in the subjects of the amount of greenhouse gases produced which is measured in units of carbon dioxide. The students in my class has carbon footprint of 3.98 planets which is bad because we have one planet and there are 20 students. The highest rate in the class was 5.10 which is very high and the student who got it needs to work on what he does daily to reduce it. In my carbon footprint the thing I dominate in is driving my car which was 47% of my carbon footprint. And I got 27% on the stuff I buy which I also need to work on. I also got 14% for my usage of electronics A/C in my home other stuff. Finally I got 12% on the food which is a pretty good segment. Although my carbon footprint is low I will work harder to reduce it.
People have got to be more careful about how they live their life because we have only one planet and we have to work to keep it clean and healthy for our next generations. And governments need some laws to protect the environment so that the earth will last longer.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
An Inconvenient Truth: Part 2
An Inconvenient Truth is a great documentary that explains what is happening to the environment and what will happen for us if we continue in this same lifestyle. Some people made reviews and commented on the documentary. Some of the reviews were positive and some were negative.
A positive review that I have read is by Roger Ebert. Roger Ebert Agrees with Al Gore in his documentary. He says that it is caused by human activities which Al Gore talked about in the documentary. And if the world governments start doing something about it, it might reverse the situation. This point was agreed on by both Roger Ebert and Al Gore. Roger Ebert does not only agree with Al Gore but he also says that he is a concerned man and that the speech was developed six years ago. Roger Ebert is a critic who usually criticizes movies but he says that in his career he never wrote as good a review for any movie as he wrote for this one. After watching the movie he suggested some points we can do in order to help, like switching to alternative energy such as solar, wind, tidal, and nuclear if possible.
Link to the Review
On the other hand another review that I have read is by Amy Taubin. And as Amy said it’s a horror movie made by Al Gore which is basically entertainment. And she also pointed out that Davis Guggenheim's movie explains an unsure fact by its clear simple presentation that global warming is unarguable. Also Al Gore refers to himself in the movie as the man who used to be the next president of the United States and he is trying to convince the people that global warming is a big problem that will affect our lives.
Link to the Review
In my opinion, Roger Ebert is right; I think he has a point and that global warming is caused by us. Amy Taubin really didn’t give Al Gore a chance; she said that his movie was a horror movie which is a basic entertainment and it was an offensive criticism and that’s why I don’t agree with her. Al Gore really tried his best in this movie and he made some people think in a better way and that’s why I think his documentary is great. It’s hard to change one’s lifestyle but since I watched the movie I’m trying my best to change it.
Bibliography
1. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060601/REVIEWS/60517002
2. http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/3361
A positive review that I have read is by Roger Ebert. Roger Ebert Agrees with Al Gore in his documentary. He says that it is caused by human activities which Al Gore talked about in the documentary. And if the world governments start doing something about it, it might reverse the situation. This point was agreed on by both Roger Ebert and Al Gore. Roger Ebert does not only agree with Al Gore but he also says that he is a concerned man and that the speech was developed six years ago. Roger Ebert is a critic who usually criticizes movies but he says that in his career he never wrote as good a review for any movie as he wrote for this one. After watching the movie he suggested some points we can do in order to help, like switching to alternative energy such as solar, wind, tidal, and nuclear if possible.
Link to the Review
On the other hand another review that I have read is by Amy Taubin. And as Amy said it’s a horror movie made by Al Gore which is basically entertainment. And she also pointed out that Davis Guggenheim's movie explains an unsure fact by its clear simple presentation that global warming is unarguable. Also Al Gore refers to himself in the movie as the man who used to be the next president of the United States and he is trying to convince the people that global warming is a big problem that will affect our lives.
Link to the Review
In my opinion, Roger Ebert is right; I think he has a point and that global warming is caused by us. Amy Taubin really didn’t give Al Gore a chance; she said that his movie was a horror movie which is a basic entertainment and it was an offensive criticism and that’s why I don’t agree with her. Al Gore really tried his best in this movie and he made some people think in a better way and that’s why I think his documentary is great. It’s hard to change one’s lifestyle but since I watched the movie I’m trying my best to change it.
Bibliography
1. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060601/REVIEWS/60517002
2. http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/3361
Monday, April 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
