Climate change science

One of my biggest concerns is the way in which people are obtaining their information about human-induced climate change. Presently my understanding is that most Australians are generating their opinions on this matter entirely from information available from mainstream media outlets. Currently these sources are generally not providing enough factual and scientific information for people to truly understand what is happening to our planet and its climate as a result of human activities.

I personally have read more broadly on human-induced climate change than just the mainstream media. However, I am still guilty of not sourcing the original science or reports that rely heavily on the scientific material available (in a form that I could easily refer back to the original science). As such I have decided to start my personal journey to obtain some more of the facts and research by reviewing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment. The most recent reports are the 2007 reports, with a newer report with updated information and conclusions due in the not too distant future. The 2007 reports, including a summary report, are available on the IPCC's publication page of their website.

Why review these reports? Basically, the IPCC's reports are the best summary of climate change science available to me without reading every scientific paper published on the issue. Someone else (a group of well-trained, conservative scientists) has reviewed the scientific literature and has then written a fully referenced report explaining in plain English what is happening to the planet's climate and specifically how it is changing.

I also consider these reports to be the easiest way to access the peer-reviewed scientific information on this issue. Much of the scientific literature, unless your part of a tertiary institution or a relevant government or research body, is hard to obtain, with most journals requiring subscriptions. These subscriptions can be significantly costly for a member of the general public, a Council library or an individual. An alternate model to obtain the science would be for me to take the time finding all of the relevant research on the internet and then contact each of the authors directly to obtain a copy of their papers. This would be an extremely timely, cumbersome and inaccurate process. So off I go to wade through the IPCC reports.  

I will post relevant and useful information as I plough through them. I would love to hear anyone else's experience of these reports. Pin It

Books versus Ebook readers

I have a personal passion for books and love to read, but even more than that I just love looking through book stores. The onset of e-readers may see the end of my strollings in these wonderful commercial entities. There is however debate as to whether the e-readers are truly more environmentally friendly than our lovely paperbacks!

I read an article in the latest G Magazine today which compared the environmental footprint of our traditional paper books and the e-readers. The first portion of this article made me feel that there certainly must be an overriding detrimental impact from the e-reader, however, the conclusion of the article in fact was the total opposite (based on a number of assumptions). The e-reader despite needing to be powered by electricity and requiring new batteries on occasion has less environmental impact than our normal book, even when the book is sourced from local publishers and printed with vegetable dye on recycled paper. Ho hum!

Despite all this, I think I will probably continue to purchase the lovely paperback on occasion, but certainly will be utilising my library as much as possible and forward on to other people books that I have purchased and loved. I also love attending the annual Lifeline bookfest, a great place to purchase pre-loved books and help out a worthy charity organisation. Pin It

Nature Deficit Disorder

I listened to a podcast today from the ABC website about Nature Deficit Disorder. It was an interview with the author (Richard Louv) of the book called "Last Child in the Woods".I found this fascinating as a parent of a toddler who wants to be outside all of the time.

The podcast discussed our innate need as children to be outside and what the implications of not learning and playing in the outdoors in an unsupervised manner was. There were discussions about how parents are now frightened to let their children outside for fear of what might happen to them and legislation preventing children from undertaking activities that their parents or grandparents participated in in their childhood, such as building cubby houses in trees, etc. It also discussed our desire as children to have 'secretive' activities and the necessity of this for mental health, etc.

I don't think I have fears of holding my child's development back by preventing her from going outside because I believe that I will be encouraging her to get out and about as she grows older. The one thing that struck a tune with me, was Richard's discussion on how children no longer are allowed to appreciate and learn about nature just as it is. Rather they can be subjected by parents and educators about the doomsday state the planet is in and thus they become concerned about everything in their environment and don't fully appreciate or learn about the intricacies of nature for themselves. This really struck a cord with me, as I was just telling my daughter last night while she was playing in her bath and having the tap running, that she had to turn off the tap because she would drain the world dry of water. She is under 2 and already I am tainting her exploration of nature due to my "doomsday" perspective of the world's resources.

If I can get my hands on this book I plan on reading it to better educate myself about this perspective because I do think being outside is an important thing for people's general and mental health. Pin It