1.

Begin by using one or two of the many online EF calculators to get an estimate of your
personal EF. For example, you could use any of the following:
• WWF: EcoGuru tool
• Global Footprint Network: Footprint Calculator

Also, feel free to use other online calculators that you find.
Use the following questions to write a reflection on EF in your online discussion post:
• Which calculator did you use? What was your EF? Did you think that the calculator(s)
provided a reasonable estimate of your EF? Why or why not?
Answer – Global Footprint
3.8
Yes it provided a fair estimate considering the the carbon footprint % which was 56%. I think
this is due to the number of times we use cars for personal use only without sharing.
• What do you think you would need to do to decrease your footprint by 25%?
Reduce the car usage on weekly basis and switch to public transport
• What are some activities that would help protect the environment if a lot of people did
them?
In my opinion, just by being cautious while choosing the mode of transport that we use while
commuting to work or making a decision if we really need to drive to get the household
items to a nearby area would make a lot of difference.
Another activity is being aware of the ecofriendly startups which offer good options for
locally grown vegetables and fruits rather the frozen ones since the amount of energy used to
import and store the unavailable or foreign items is huge and not a sustainable option
• If humans had a smaller ecological footprint, do you think that would enable other
creatures to sustain themselves because they would have more resources? Or are the impacts
that humans make on the natural world too dramatic for other creatures to support
themselves?
A tiny stride for humanity, a huge boost for the planet. Clearly, having a minimal ecological
impact is good. This indicates that since we only have one planet, the fewer planets we need
to sustain our way of life, the better. Cleaner food, water, and air have all been associated
with healthier ecosystems. Forest habitat preservation promotes carbon sequestration and
prevents erosion. A strong, safe, and lucrative food system is ensured by protecting
agricultural land. Aquatic ecosystem preservation guarantees a steady supply of fresh water.
Finally, because many plants and animals are used in contemporary treatments, biodiversity
protection benefits human health.
According to a recent study, humans have wiped out roughly 60% of the world's wildlife
populations during the past four decades. Key animal habitats have been lost due to overuse
of species, deforestation, and agricultural use throughout the world.
Human-driven activities (such as logging, mining, road and dam construction, industrial and
residential development, crop cultivation, animal grazing, and pesticide use) have severely
harmed threatened and endangered species populations at an alarming rate.

2. Two Views: Online Discussions (Post 11) -

Assignment 2: Online Discussion Post 11

Pro-development Side Anti-development Side

 Meets the increasing demands  Water wastage

 Alternative for nonrenewable sources
 Creation of Mining jobs
 Energy efficiency
 Lower emissions
 Terrestrial Impacts and solid waste
disposal
 Environment damage
 Hazards to marine and forest life
 Potential Emergencies like fuel spillage,
explosions

a. Some people call this area the “oil” sands and some call it the “tar” sands. Is there any
difference in the use of these terms? If so, what is the difference? Which do you favour,
and why?
Tar sands, commonly referred to as oil sands, are made up primarily of sand, clay,
water, and bitumen, a viscous material that resembles molasses. Bitumen, which is
used to make gasoline and other petroleum products, is composed of hydrocarbons,
the same molecules found in liquid oil.
Bitumen is so thick that it behaves much like cold molasses when it is at room
temperature. Due to the distinction between bitumen and tar (asphalt), this resource is
frequently referred to as "tar sands," but that name is erroneous. The term "oil sands"
accurately describes the final byproduct of bitumen production: crude oil.
b. Both sides employ figures of authority—scientists and researchers—who argue for or
against the development of the oil sands. How do you know who to believe? Who do
you believe and why?
In my opinion and as per the reference materials Increasing oil sands production poses
carbon challenges. And scientists claim Oil Sands as energy projects which is
pressing environmental issues. Also as per the research of national geographic,
Experts caution that Canada is unlikely to achieve its 2020 carbon emission
reduction goal. Additionally, it is not likely to achieve the Paris climate
agreement's 2030 objective, which is nearly completely attributable to rising
emissions from the oil and gas industry, which are projected to reach 100
million metric tonnes annually by that time. According to a study that appeared
in Nature Communications in April, actual emissions from the Canadian oil sands
are around 30% greater than what the industry reports. These pollutants were
measured directly from aircraft.
Using Google Maps' satellite view, take a brief glance north to see some of the
effects on the countryside. One of the largest tailings waste pond systems in the
world, with enough water to fill more than 500,000 Olympic swimming pools, is
dispersed along the Athabasca River's banks. Ducks and other birds must be
kept away from these since they are so harmful.
As per my learning from environmental studies this is definitely not a
sustainable alternative and there should be concrete plan to tie this up with the
 benefits of environment for our future generations and I agree with the
scientists that the impacts are non-reversible. is not good for the environment
and hence
Reference - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/alberta-
canadas-tar-sands-is-growing-but-indigenous-people-fight-back

c. Do you think that you can live without oil? If not, can you live with the consequences
of oil exploration and production?
The quick response is "yes." Without oil, life on Earth is possible. It has previously (pre-
industrial periods of the various nations). In various nations, there are a number of
indigenous tribes that don't use petrochemicals but instead use rendered animal fats for
specific purposes (fuel for heat, lamps, etc...).

"It depends," is the lengthy response. Specifically, on what you are prepared to give up to
stop using petrochemicals. Petrochemicals are essential to the successful operation of most
nations' "energy" sectors. If you're not particularly using petrochemicals as a fuel source
(like natural gas or diesel) for your power-generating machinery, then you're probably
using them in some other capacity on that machinery (like as a lubricant, coolant, etc.).
You will be dependent on petrochemical production and refinement for this specific
component of worldwide operations unless you are ready to stop using generated power
or you can find an alternative, non-petrochemical source for fuel, lubricant, or cooling
(namely energy production). Similar to how the energy sector depends significantly on
refined petrochemicals, so do the global transportation and agriculture networks. They
require petrochemicals in order to lubricate and power their machinery. Additionally,
they need the chemicals to make the road surfaces.
Petrochemicals are necessary for the medical industries' drug compound research and, in
some cases, direct application.

Oil Development activities are expected to grow to meet the increasing needs and can be
carried out safely with minimum environment impacts during exploration. This should be
done with help of robust commitment towards environment protection. The host
government should have great understanding of exploration effects on nature. Since the
impacts can’t be ignored.

3. Learning Activity 2 - What the World Eats: Online Discussions

(Post 13)

1. Read the following excerpted sections from "What the World Eats". Which family’s weekly
groceries most resemble yours (or a typical family’s)? Justify your answer by considering not
only the content but also the source of food and the distance it travelled to reach your plate.
 Indian groceries resembles my weekly eating routine. Grain is the major part.
Amaranth (rajgira in Hindi), barley (jau), pearl millet (bajra), finger millet (ragi),
and sorghum are the five most popular ancient grains that have the potential to be
used more frequently in Asian Indian cooking, along with brown rice as a
replacement for white rice (jowar)
FCI moves grain in order to remove inventories from locations with excess
supplies and meet demand. Rail is used to transfer stocks in more than 85% of all
cases. Road transportation between states is primarily used in regions of the nation
without rail connections. Additionally, foodgrain inventories are transported by
ocean vessels to the Lakshadweep and Andaman & Nicobar Islands, as well as to
Kerala and Agartala by coastal shipping and riverine movement (Tripura).

2. Which family’s groceries would you like to eat and why?

I would like to consume like the Spanish families since they have considerably less grain in
the diet and rather have a good mixture of other alternatives. Spanish food adheres to the
Mediterranean diet and is often quite healthful.

4. What societal and economic factors do you think have the greatest influence on the
eating patterns of a country? Identify three factors that influence how a country eats
(provide references from the reading).
Hunger is, of course, the primary motivator for eating, but other factors than
physiological or nutritional requirements also play a role in what we decide to eat.
Other elements that affect food selection include:

 Biological factors including appetite, taste, and hunger

 Economic factors including price, income, and availability
 Physical factors include time, education, access, and skills (like cooking)
 Social factors like culture, family, peers, and eating habits
 Psychological factors including anxiety, stress, and guilt
 Attitudes, convictions, and information regarding food