Article #1: Caves point to thawing of Siberia: Thaw in Siberia's Permafrost may accelerate global warming

University of Oxford. "Caves point to thawing of Siberia: Thaw in Siberia's permafrost may accelerate global warming." ScienceDaily, 21 Feb. 2013. Web. 21 Feb. 2013.

In this article, the author focuses on the environmental issue of global warming and the effects it has on Siberian permafrost. From research that was conducted on some of Siberia’s southern caves, scientists have evidence that if the earth’s global temperature rises 1.5 degrees Celsius there is a possibility that massive areas of Siberia could thaw out.  This evidence was found by research conducted on the caves stalagmites and stalactites.  Since stalagmites and stalactites only form by the melting of snow/dripping of water in caves, scientists can use these formations to learn about other periods in history that had these same events occurring.  After conducting their research, they had found that there was only one other time in history when events like we are seeing today have occurred.  (This time in history was 400,000 years ago).  From this study, they have concluded that if the temperature rises 1.5 degrees Celsius, parts of Siberia could see massive thawing in its permafrost.

I think this is a very interesting article about global warming and it gives its readers a better idea of other areas in the world that are being affected by this environmental issue.    This article is pretty similar to the events occurring to the arctic ice caps but I think that the stalagmites and the stalactites in the caves in Siberia could better show how high our temperatures have risen and how much more they have to rise to cause more problems in the environment. If these formations in the caves in Siberia can show what the temperature was 400,000 years ago, and they show that the environment then is like it is today, then isn’t this little increase in temperature normal? This rise in temperature has occurred before so it’s not totally out of the ordinary, but I guess if you look at what happened to all other living things during that time because of the rise in temperature it could bring up concern.  When you think about it, there was nothing 400,000 years ago that could cause what we are calling global warming today.  Nowadays, our cars and pollution are putting high amounts of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, but what would have done these things 400,000 years ago to this extent? If you really think about it, these events are somewhat natural if they have occurred before without human impacts, so the events occurring today could be occurring naturally with extra help from our higher carbon dioxide emissions. 

Views on Environmental Issues



Polar bears are one of many species being affected by global warming

Throughout the past couple of years, many environmental issues have become growing concerns throughout the world.  The issue of global warming and the threat it has to all living species is an issue that is currently and will continue to affect us all if we don’t make a change. Throughout the past couple of years this issue has risen as a widely talked about topic, yet some people are skeptical on whether or not this idea of the world's global temperatures increasing is really that big of a threat.  I understand that pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have caused our atmosphere to hold in more heat than it has in the past, but if global warming were occurring on a severe level wouldn't we be experiencing warmer winters and extremely hot summers? To me it doesn't seem like an incredibly big issue if our climate hasn’t changed dramatically, but I understand the many downsides that this little change in temperature is having on habitats and ecosystems around the world.  Under the issue of global warming, I think we should be most concerned about the loss of many species that inhabit the environments being affected by this issue.  If we start to lose one species, we will begin to lose or have an overpopulated number of another species.  Each species relies on another species in some way or another, whether it’s as a food source or to just keep our ecosystems at proper levels/populations to maintain life.   Take the polar bear for example (since that’s a well-known species related to this issue).  One of the polar bears main food sources are seals, if we lose the polar bear to global warming that could potentially make the seal population rise to an unhealthy level.  This would then lead to an overpopulated population of seals, and with a higher population of seals they are going to need a higher population of their food source which may or may not be enough.  The loss of one of our species in an ecosystem could start a chain reaction to all of the other species throughout the world.  This issue has to continue to be noticed and something has to change or this issue could potentially change the world.  The thought that our actions are causing this increase in temperature and the threat of potentially losing some of our earths many species should be an issue everyone would want to change. 

Under the thought of helping to improve the environment, many options have arisen that have allowed us to lessen our carbon dioxide emissions and use renewable energy.  Some of these options would include wind turbines, solar energy, geothermal energy, hydro energy, and electric cars. Though many of these options would help to decrease the negative impacts we apply to the environment they all have their disadvantages.  First off, they are all fairly expensive and some only work under certain circumstances.  For example, solar energy will only be effective during the day and wind turbines will only be effective when it’s windy.  If these alternative energy sources weren’t as expensive as they are and if more people knew the benefits to utilizing them I think more people would begin to use them (on a smaller scale, like on individual houses). If we begin to use more renewable energy sources, renewable energy could help to save the environment one step at a time.