The debate over the importance of nature verses the importance of nurture, has been going on since the beginning of modern science. Both sides of the argument have undeniably good points proving that one is superior to the other. But after reviewing the facts you can see that both nature and nurture have a great impact in shaping our personality.

             Of course, nature can only go so far, because it is unalterable. The environment around a person, on the other hand, is ever-changing offering more opportunity for growth and variation. Eventhough the environment is ever-changing, and we are constantly being exposed to new learning tools, one cannot deny our genetic makeup and how it determines are physical and mental capabilities. Our heredity plays an important role in which we become. For example, if a child has the genetic makeup to excel in athletics, then the child will excel more than that of a child that does not have the genetic makeup to excel in athletics. Then again, if a child’s parents or ‘nurture’ supports the child that does not have an genetic makeup to excel in athletics then it is possible for the child with the superior genetic makeup in athletics to fall behind the child that does not. Just as nature may give us an edge in a particular area, without nurture, that particular area will never be performed to its greatest ability. So despite the obvious influence that genes take on our ability to perform some task, the parental guidance has an unbelievable influence.
             The environment surrounding a person is a very real and very important factor in a child’s personality and views. The same baby raised in two different environments will turn into two extremely different people. Sometimes the environment is downplayed a lot, because some assume that once a ‘bad seed’ is born it cannot be changed.

 The environment is an extremely important factor in determaing the developement of a civilization. It can help advance a civilisation or impede it. In ancient Africa, the environment affected the different civilivations, such as the Sahel, the Wagado Empire and the Mbuti of the Ituri Forest. The environment uopn many aspects of these and other civilisations, such as agriculture, technology, trade, daily life and even sometimes the physical appearence of the people in the civilisation were greatly affected by their environment.

             The Sahel, which was located in West Africa and south of the Sahara Desert, was affected by its environment. In ancient times, the climate of the climate of the Sahel was not so hot and dry, it allowed the people of the civilisation to cultivate the land and gro crops. There was a wet season, most of the crops would grow and a dry season, when the winter crops would grow. The lands of the Shael were covered with natural grasses, which was great for raising cattle, sheep and goats. the manure that was produced by these animals would then help enrich the soil. Some of the lands of Sahel had iron deposits, which helped advanced their technology. Iron spears ,swords ans hoes were developed. The iron weapons helped the Sahel protect itself and the tools helped with agriculture. Iron objects were alos valueable, so they were used to of retrading and helped the people of the Sahel become skilled traders. The environment helped advance the ancient civilization known as Sahel.

  The greenhouse effect, nuclear contamination, toxic chemicals, oil spills, air pollution, water pollution: these are all issues that affect every single living being on this planet we call home. The environment and issues pertaining to the environment apply directly to the entire world. Greenpeace, an international environmental organization that is dedicated to preserving the earth’s natural resources, addresses these numerous environmental issues through peaceful campaigning and demonstrations.

             Members of the “Don’t Make a Wave Committee” founded Greenpeace in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada in 1971. The “Don’t Make a Wave Committee” was a small group opposed to nuclear weapons testing by the United States military in Alaska. Later, the committee changed its name to Greenpeace to echo its greater goal of creating a green and peaceful world. Greenpeace has more than forty offices in 30 countries with its headquarters in Amsterdam, Netherlands. It is a growing organization that has dedicated a lot of time and manpower to making this world a better and safer place for its inhabitants. Through peacefully lobbying and demonstration, Greenpeace has affected change for the better and, hopefully, will continue to do so in the future. The main issues that Greenpeace concerns itself with include climate changes, toxic chemicals, and nuclear disarmament and contamination.
             Greenpeace has acknowledged that one of the greatest threats to the planet is global climate change. Scientists and governments alike have all established that the problem is serious and real. In 1997, industrialized countries agreed at the climate summit in Kyoto to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases they pump into the atmosphere.

  It is now the second millennium and technology has advanced tremendously throughout the years. And continues to do so as well. New and improved products and gadgets need batteries to conduct its purpose. Company’s such as Battery Solutions states that the demand for batteries in the U.S. is projected to increase 5.8% every year through 2002. Battery Solutions claim that in 1998 there were over three billion industrial and household batteries sold in the United States alone. This demand for batteries will continue, as long as technology advances. It is a known fact that batteries power much of the equipment we use everyday for work or play. Telephone, laptops, radios, cars, and scores of other devices are all made portable with batteries. But what do you do with a battery after it runs down, or a rechargeable battery won’t recharge? Many consumer would simply toss them into the garbage, not knowing what harm battery waste can do. All used batteries are hazardous waste. So they should be recycled and disposed correctly.

             Batteries come in many shapes in sizes and several types. Batteries are identified in two different categories. The two types are primary batteries and secondary batteries. Primary batteries are batteries that have the same plate-active material as secondary types. However, these batteries are constructed so that only one continuous or intermittent discharge can be obtained. Types of primary batteries are alkaline, lithium, carbon-zinc, mercury, silver, and zinc batteries. Primary batteries are usually used for portable low-power appliances. Alkaline, Lithium, and carbon-zinc batteries are used for similar things such as radios, cameras, appliances, toys, and flashlights. Mercury, silver, and zinc batteries are used for smaller objects like hearing aids, pagers, calculators, and watches.

 In today’s world, humans are in a very relaxed cycle: they eat, they watch television, they sleep. What most people do not realise are the health risks they are taking every day when they do their daily tasks. Humans are becoming more and more reliant on machines to do simple activities, such as changing the channel or traveling. I agree that technology does make activities uncomplicated, and genuinely makes life easier, but how can a person stay physically fit and healthy when he/she does nothing himself/herself? In Ishmael by Daniel Quinn, many environmental issues are discussed. Among the issues, Quinn talks about technology and how humans believe it to be a turning point in society, but will eventually lead to the downfall of humans.

             People are at great risk to their health with the advancements in technology. Not only have individuals fabricated new ways of entertainment, but have built factories, which pollute the air they breathe and water they drink. In Ishmael, Quinn tells of man trying to fly; when man fails, he does not just simply give up and wait to fly, but creates a new way, that is not fool-proof. Humans will do anything to make life easier, but for no reason than to make life easier. But is this really making life relaxing? People still have to go to work, still have to breathe in polluted air, and other such effects, all of which may be hazardous to their health. Humans keep creating objects that are harmful to the environment, and they call this “technology.” Well, this may be “technology,” but obviously citizens do not see that it is taking control of their lives. Most technology is for luxury and entertainment, while a select few fabrications are necessities, (airplanes, food machines, etc.). People really need to stop relying on artificial intelligence for simple tasks. 

The world’s population has grown more in the last 50 years than it haddone in the previous 4 million years[1]. This quantum leap in the human population has put severe strains on the finite resources and the fragile
environment of our planet. What is more, the present rate of the galloping population growth shows no signs of slowing down, especially in the developing countries. Such a high rate of growth is clearly unsustainable and needs to be controlled before the runaway human population proves to be the ultimate undoing of the human race itself. In this essay I shall discuss why the population growth is such a serious problem and the effect  it is having on the earth’s environment. Debate about the effects of population growth has raged ever since, Thomas Malthus, a British intellectual wrote his famous Essay on the Principle of Population in 1798. Malthus contended that the tendency for  the population was to grow exponentially while food supplies could only grow arithmetically. His theory meant that the human population was destined to outstrip the global food supplies that would eventually lead towidespread starvation and disease. This has clearly not happened[2] so far, mainly because Malthus had not foreseen the extent to which technology, farming techniques and the Green Revolution’ would increase food production. (Hardaway 1188) Despite adequate availability of food in the world as a whole, the WHO reports that as many as 19,000 people (mostly infants and children) die each day from hunger and malnutrition. (Quoted by Brown et al, 6) The difference in the situation predicted by Malthus and the present scenario is that large numbers of people starve, not due to shortage of food, but due to poverty. It is arguable, of course, whether poverty too is the result of over-population. 

 Today’s physical fitness environment is a far cry from where it was just a few short years ago. In fact, Americans have always been health conscious, and that line of thinking has only gotten stronger as more information has become available through various media, including the internet, and television.

             Not only has the proliferation of information been a huge benefit for the average American, but other areas have benefited as well, including the studies that have been perpetuated to fulfill that need for information.
             One such study showed that “age-adjusted all cause mortality rates declined across physical fitness quintiles from 64.0 per 10,000 person-years in the least-fit men to 18.6 per 10,000 person-years in the most-fit men (slope, -4.5). Corresponding values for women were 39.5 per 10,000 person-years to 8.5 per 10,000 person-years (slope, -5.5).” (Blair 1989)
             With provable results such as the ones provided by this study, many individuals are attempting to stave off the inevitable, while ensuring a longer and healthier lifestyle by eating healthier foods, consistent exercising while at the same time passing on those habits to the younger generation.
             Schools are also looking to provide a healthier environment for that younger generation by providing more, and healthier choices for the students in the lunchrooms, more and more vigorous physical education classes, and a more supportive attitude towards after-school physical sports programs. Many school systems are looking to provide not only physical education programs but also exercise programs for those not necessarily physically inclined.
             There is a big difference between physical education, physical activity and exercise as portrayed by a recent study that showed; “Physical activity in daily life can be categorized into occupational, sports, conditioning, household, or other activities.

  There are many problems concerning the environment. Pollution, destruction of the rainforests, and the consumption of all of our planet’s natural resources are just a few. None of these issues quite compare to the problem of global warming. Global warming is a problem that affects not just some people, but everything and everyone. People must take action to stop global warming and must realise the severity of this problem before it is too late. The future depends on what we do now to slow the process of global warming.

             What exactly is global warming? Global warming is a problem that emerged as a major issue in the late 1980’s. Global warming can be defined simply as a rise in the average land temperature around the earth. Currently, the average temperature of the earth is roughly 57 degrees Fahrenheit. This temperature could be the result of several different factors. Some of the factors that cause the earth’s temperature to rise are natural, but humans have caused many others.
             Surrounding the issue of global warming is the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect plays an important role in the issue of global warming, but it is not the reason behind why global warming is occurring. The earth produces greenhouse gasses naturally, and without this gas, humans along with many other forms of life, would not be able to survive. The reason for this is that earth would be much too cold for many life forms to exist if it did not have some form of gas to heat up the environment. Without the greenhouse effect, the earth would be 40-60 degrees cooler than its current temperature. The problem though is that the earth is producing a large amount of this gas, and we are going to become much too warm. Life cannot survive in a certain amount of warmth as well, so we as the people who live here have to maintain a certain middle ground.

 Human Dimension Establishing an environmental ethic is of utmost concern to the human species to better comprehend our place in the world and our potentials for the future. In doing so, we must extend our thinking of rights and responsibilities. I believe we must incorporate not only a temporal component, but also a spatial understanding of the world as an organic biotic community and how consumption is a part of the natural order. Aldo Leopold believes that conservation ethics must be rooted in a determination: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”

             I would like to start with Leopold’s statement, and further explore how the definitions of integrity, stability and beauty can be better understood given three corollary’s: 1. All organic entities must consume to survive – it is not only a right, but a responsibility 2. There are limited resources to be consumed by organic entities on the planet 3. The human species has the ability, through rational thought, to conserve ever-depleting resources Leopold’s ethic attempts to extend what is of human, moral concern to include animals, ecosystems, and endangered species. How can this concern be expressed in today’s society? I see one problem with this argument in that there is little discussion about power and influence that is inherent in current definitions of rights. Therefore, I will introduce the notion that organic entities, those that depend on the consumption of energy for survival, must retain the right to consume resources to survive. Notions of right and wrong now have no standing – it is a fact that organic entities must consume to maintain life.

  It is not simple to reduce the environmental impact of automobiles worldwide. It is hard to find a straightforward solution for making automobiles better for the environment without drastically increasing costs or cutting down on performance. the best way to deal with this problem is the Life-cycle approach. The goal of the life cycle approach at is to make vehicles that are more efficient and inexpensive. It embraces environmental performance and cost factors. The life cycle of an automobile begins with material production and concludes with retirement.

             The public is now conscious of environmental issues that have increased. However, the automobile industry as a whole must undertake this issue immediately. To paraphrase a segment of Richard Porters book “Economics at the wheel,” International automotive manufacturing is dominated by a fairly small number of large producers. The automobile industry is the leading manufacturing enterprise in the world. It is also one of the major industrial systems that use many resources. The automobile industries in Europe and the U.S. use approximately 46 million tons of material annually to produce 24 million vehicles. Today, a vehicle consists of approximately 15,000 parts. Steel, iron and plastic, and non-ferrous metal dominate automobile construction. They account for more than 80% of the material used in today’s vehicles.
             I first learned about the total life-cycle analysis of automobiles during a lecture in Chem.  My professor Don Shillady pointed me in the right direction to obtain sufficient information for this report. During Don Shilladys lecture, I learned the obtainment and processing of new resources that serve as input for automotive material cause environmental impacts and concerns as well. In addition, large amounts of energy are consumed in heating, cooling, and producing millions of tons of steel, aluminum, plastic etc.

 Whether it be through intensified media attention, or due to the efforts of prominent scientists and other members of society, we have become increasingly aware of the detrimental effects that technological advances in industry and agriculture have on the global environment. However, as Carl Sagan points out in “Pulling the Plug on Mother Earth” awareness is not enough, nor is society’s response to the catastrophic implications of environmental pollution rapid enough. Slowness to implement sound strategies are in part due to the fact that the threats we face are nebulous, since they come in the form of particles of invisible gases and radioactivity, and in part because response to pollution appears to be so costly at individual, governmental and corporate levels. It appears that great material loss, as well as visual manifestation, have been the only ways to galvanize action towards altering and limiting technologies so that adverse chemicals and substances are no longer belched into the environment. For example, Sagan is right on the mark when he indicates that it took the reality that CFCs were destroying the sensitive but protective ozone layer to encourage large chemical companies to begin a gradual phase-out of these substances, even when scientists had already discovered the terrible effects of the chemical combination. Sagan says that to slowly stop usage of such obviously dangerous substances is not enough, for even with current conditions, it is estimated that the damaged ozone layer will require at least 100 years to repair itself. In the interim, we are risking danger to the food chain, global warming, and increased cases of skin cancer. Rather than risk these catastrophes, Sagan calls for the immediate phase-out of CFCs, as well as to improve energy usage, plant trees, and curb the population explosion as supplemental methods to improve the environment.

 Lorainne Elliot begins his article by saying that an exact definition of “global environmental governance” cannot be grasped but he depicts it as “a useful shorthand to describe changes in contemporary international political practice; as a metaphor for ‘world collective life’; and as a Trojan horse for neoliberalism and green corporatism.” From his opening statement, we can already see that Elliot views global environmental governance with a suspicious eye.

             Elliot goes on to state that global environmental governance “reflects, constitutes and masks global relations of power and powerlessness. It is neither normatively neutral or benign” Elliot looks beyond the surface and digs deeper into the structure of the problem, claiming that global environmental governance normalizes neoliberal policies, as embodied by the WTO and World Bank. Further, our group believes that since the US contributes a large sum to the funding of the WB and WTO, and since most of the employees of the said institutions are trained under neoliberal principles, these institutions reflect the interests and the voice of the US. This is an embodiment of the realists’ hegemonic stability theory. Going back to the article, Elliot further argues that local voices are marginalized.
             The author states that environmental issues are gaining importance because environmental degradation is happening at an alarming rate. Because of this, there is a pressing need for global environmental governance.
             Elliot also sees the state as incapable of addressing the transnational environmental issues. Furthermore, Elliot asserts that environmental issues are eroding state sovereignty because of its transnational nature.
             Elliot argues that the key to global environmental governance is democracy. Democracy will ensure justice and equity.

 Imagine sitting in a restaurant, enjoying a finely prepared steak. You suddenly lose your appetite at the thought of inhaling the toxic chemicals, which are floating your way from a cigarette the woman at the table next to you has just lit. Cigarette smoke contains over 4,000 chemicals. Exposure to environmental smoke or secondhand smoke is responsible for 51,000 non-smoker deaths in the United States each year (Banzhaf 1). In addition, cigarette smoke smell and stale taste have ruined many meals in restaurants all over the country. In order to eliminate this uncomfortable and deadly environment, the federal government should require all restaurants to become non-smoking or to create enclosed smoking areas. Furthermore, they should install air-cleaning systems, which would create a cleaner, safer and healthier environment for everyone.

             Most restaurants that contain smoking sections do not adequately separate them from the non-smoking sections, causing second-hand smoke. This not only disrupts some patron’s meals but also can be deadly. The Friendly’s restaurant near my home has a little glass wall about 3×2 feet in size that separates the non-smoking section from the smoking section. This wall does nothing to help prevent smoke from entering non-smoking areas. Many restaurants require customers to smoke at the bar. This also does little for smoke prevention, because of smoke drifts into other parts of the restaurant. The result is that customers still breath in deadly carcinogens that cigarettes produce.
             Non-smoking policies are catching on in various public places and restaurants. This policy would solve the problem of spoiled meals caused by cigarette smoke, as well as maintaining a healthy environment by eliminating cancer-causing chemicals in the air produced by cigarettes. Separate rooms, through which smoke could not penetrate, would also be an acceptable solution. 

 The Factories poured out soot-filled smoke out of the large, black chimneys. Industrialisation spurred many physical affects on the environment; some were positive and some negative.

             Industrialisation promoted many new inventions. The first of many machines, that manufactured goods, was the cloth-making machines. These power-driven spindles made the production of yarn cheaper and faster than the muscle driven hand spinners. Spinning machines, looms, and the steam engine brought about a major change in this era, because with all the new uses for machinery, iron and coal were put to use. Iron parts replaced wooden parts of machines because iron is much stronger than wood and didn’t wear as easily. Coal was very abundant in England’s mines so coal became very important because it introduced a thrifty way to smelt iron. Also, coal became very significant in the power for steam engines (Hunt, p.469).
             Before the use of machinery could really thrive, an improved method of transportation needed to be met. This would present a better way to transport raw materials to factories and finished products from the factories to be sold. Early eighteenth-century roads were rut-filled dirt trails. John Macadam invented Macadam roads. These roads were made out of a combination of stones and mud that was rolled securely together until smooth and hard. About 1800, canals that connected iron and coal mine to factories were built. Then in 1837, these canals began to be replaced by railroads. The first railroads were essentially steam driven wagons that ran on iron rails. About 1848, the development of national railroad system was being constructed