Case studies per topic

2.5: Studying the Effects of Deforestation

effects of deforestation

  • to have an effective comparison between the two different ecosystems, both pristine and logged areas of a forest should be analyzed

  • by using a grid, samples can be taken from the two areas of the forest

    • collect sufficient data points from each of the sections in order to make the data set valid

8.1: Human Population Dynamics

national level anti-natalist policy: China

  • in 1979, China introduced the one child policy, which aimed at limiting families to only having one child, those who have more than one were often punished, through paying more taxes, sterilizing the mothers, or forcing women to have an abortion

  • China saw a gender imbalance starting to form in 2003 with 117 boys being born for every 100 girls born

    • in rural areas, the ratio was larger, with the ratio being 130:100 (boys:girls)

  • a reason for this gender imbalance was primarily because several people preferred to have male heirs, so having girls weren’t usually favored among the population

  • statistically speaking, the one child policy was a success, as it prevented approximately 400 million births, which helped combat the government’s aims in ensuring that China’s rural areas could fully develop before being able to sustain a larger population

2013 reforms

  • this reform was initiated in 2013, which allowed couples to have more than one child, if one of the parents was an only child

  • party conservatives still feared loosing control of the population

  • successes of the one-child policy reduced the country’s risk of developing food scarcity

  • however, since the child policy laws have relaxed, it is unlikely that there will be a population boom

8.3: Solid Domestic Waste

plastic waste in the Thames

  • Scientists from London collected rubbish over a 3-month period at the end of 2012 from seven locations along the Thames estuary. They collected over 8400 items including plastic cups, food wrapping, and cigarette packaging.

  • The two most contaminated sites were close to sewage treatment works, and could suggest that plants were not filtering out larger waste, or were letting sewage overflow when heavy rains created extra waste. However, the scientists were unable to estimate the volume of litter that was actually entering the North Sea.

  • The potential impacts this could have for wildlife are far-reaching: not only are the species that live in and around rivers affected, but also those in seas that rivers feed into.

disposable dipers

  • Some waste material is more problematic than others. Nappies are a particular problem. Nappy waste is harmful and expensive. It costs £40 million a year to dispose of an estimated 1 million tonnes of nappy waste, of which 75 per cent is urine and faeces. Most nappy waste is taken to landfill sites, where nappies can take an estimated 500 years to break down, and add to the build-up of methane gas. Environmentalists say that using washable nappies would represent a saving of £500 per baby.

  • About 1 million tonnes of absorbent hygiene products are generated in the UK each year. In 2011, Knowaste set up the UK’s first recycling facility for absorbent hygiene products such as disposable nappies. In its first 2 years of operation, the facility recycled over 77 million nappies. The company isolates plastics and fibres from the products, separating them from human waste so that the nappy or incontinence pad can be recycled. The recycled material can be used as an additive for concrete, plastic sheets, flood defence systems, and containers used for disposable nappies.

8.4: Carrying Capacity and Ecological Footprints

canada v peru

  • ecological footprint of an average canadian:

    • housing

      • energy: 0.5

      • agricultural land: 0.0

      • forest: 1.0

      • built environment: 0.1

      • total: 1.6

    • food

      • energy: 0.4

      • agricultural land: 0.9

      • forest: 0.0

      • built environment: 0.1

      • total: 1.1

    • transport

      • energy: 1.0

      • agricultural land: 0.0

      • forest: 0.0

      • built environment: 0.1

      • total: 1.1

    • consumer goods

      • energy: 0.6

      • agricultural land: 0.2

      • forest: 0.2

      • built environment: 0.0

      • total: 0.4

    • resources in services

      • energy: 0.4

      • agricultural land: 0.0

      • forest: 0.0

      • built environment: 0.0

      • total: 0.4

    • total

      • energy: 2.9

      • agricultural land: 1.1

      • forest: 1.2

      • built environment: 0.2

      • total: 5.4