Hello everyone!
Recently when surfing on the Internet I've found interesting
articles on one of the most impressive constructions in the modern world ‒
Three Gorges Dam in China. It's not that I am a building and construction
freak, but this is the largest electric dam on Earth and one of the most
controversial human creations. Not only did it cause significant and already
visible environmental changes, but though not many people are aware of this
fact, it changed the rotation of our planet. Well, the possibly goods news is
that this side effect is fairly insignificant. NASA scientists calculated that
this slight shift increased the length of day by 0.06 microseconds and made
Earth only very slightly more round in the middle and flat on the top. Do you feel relief? If
specialists claim we have nothing to worry about, then I guess we shouldn't
worry. Then why am I worried? Why don't I feel relief? People are messing with
our planet and to be honest I'm not sure if it's possible to predict the long-term
consequences of such interference.
I hope you'll enjoy the texts and that we'll have an
interesting discussion. I'm very interested in your opinion with regards to
this topic.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of
nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused
some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it
cause?
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict
the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or
environment?
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the
future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for
the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteObviously some people tend to intervene in the world of nature and feel absolutely that have the right to do so. There are many examples where this border was violated. An example is cutting down forests - many species of animals and plants that suffered are now threatened with extinction. Of course, people who are focused on exploitation and huge income are not interested in the fate of nature.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
Buildings account for an average of 41% of the world’s energy use. American building construction is responsible for a huge percentage of the greenhouse gas emissions that have been affecting climate change. In fact, the buildings are responsible for 38% of all CO2 emissions. Buildings are responsible for not just a large percentage of the world’s water use, but a large percentage of wasted water as well. It’s estimated that buildings use 13.6% of all potable water, which is roughly 15 trillion gallons of water per year.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I think architects take into account the current situation, but they are not able to predict the future or take into account all factors that have an impact on the environment.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
There are many people who want to control the fate of others, not only the rulers of the country, but even ordinary people. Of course, it should not be so, but we know from history that every now and then such people appear and change the history.
Thank you for your comment.I totally agree with you that cutting down trees is also a big problem of the modern world. It's really sad that people don't care about environment and other species. What will we leave for future generations? Lots of concrete and CO2? Let's hope not!
Delete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteThey don't have right to do that, but they do. People always want more and more. For many of generations we are trying to subordinate world of nature,but we should not. We should be part of it.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I was reading some papers about what is the impact on enviroment cousing by meat farms and making expansion by cutting forests to create more new pastures. Conclusion was this that even if we people will stop using all cars, factories ets but will still keep farm animals going, we will be still facing problem of big emission of C02 and there still will be problem with changing enviroment.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
Yes I think yes, scientists are sending rockets into space so I think they can predict what can happen if Earth rotation will change. But will anyone listen to them, I don't think so.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
I agree about this with Cezary. I will add that this not right to makes such decision that have impact on other generations.
I've also read a similar article regarding meat farms and farming cattle and other animals. It's really amazing that the fastest way to reduce CO2 emission is to persuade people to become vegetarians. I find it really amusing.
DeleteI guess you're right scientists may be well aware of the fact what the future might bring and what consequences of certain moves are, but their voice won't be heard, as it's all about money.
It's very philosophical subject. I'm always charmed by all visions where people live in a perfect symbiosis with nature. But maybe it's impossible to live comfortably and close to nature at the same time (on a global scale of course). It's natural for people to do what optimize their comfort, profits, wellbeing etc. It's difficult to decide if building such a construction that benefit people in some way but possibly harm in another is right or wrong.
ReplyDeleteAs for questions about consequences, these may be very difficult to predict according to the theory of chaos. There are many variables that may sum up to significant factors over time. Often it's very difficult to predict unobvious relations of such factors thus predict effects of initial changes.
I totally agree with you. It's really hard to predict unobvious relations between particular things. There may always be some factors that one didn't take into account, because one wasn't aware of them and their influence on other items.
DeleteAs per perfect symbiosis, it's really sad, but it's utopia. I guess it's agains human nature. We like to change things, destroy, bring war and destruction. It's really sad.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteThanks for this article, I have never thought that humans are able to change even earth rotation. This is not a good information. I am afraid of what else they will do with enviroment. They should not do this but as it was said they will continue.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I think that many inventions caused climate or enviromental changes. Think about cars, fireplaces and everything that cause smog and air pollutions. Isn't it significant change?
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I don't think so. They are able to predict consequences for the next years but not for a long period of time.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
It is not right but all of us who live on this planet, we influence each other. We should care about other people but there will always be someone who would not. We should not agree for that but worrying too much is pointless.
Thank you for presenting your point of view. I was also thinking about cars, factories and air pollution. If we are what we eat, then we also are what we breathe in. Our lungs are one big toxic dump. I hope we'll leave some remains of fresh air four our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Delete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion all the creatures have the right to change what they want. Even ants are changing something in the world of nature by building their anthills.
But I know that humans should be smarter and more careful, as they have tools and mechanisms allowing them for huge changes.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I think all the things we build affect environment in some way. But it is not as significant and it may happen that some buildings increase while others decrease the same factor in the environment.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I remember that some time ago a huge meteorite went through the atmosphere and NASA said they didn't expect it. We cannot even predict a weather correctly and you ask about the Earth rotation and environment.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
No one should decide for the others without their permission, but I think China was not aware of the consequences.
On the other hand, building a nuclear power plant may affect both your citizens and the citizens of the countries near you as well. And what?
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteAs humans, we have to (and always will want to) survive. We want to reproduce. We want to live the best possible lives we can. It is natural that to achieve that we will change our surrounding. It is not a problem of nowadays - as humans we changed the earth starting from the very beginning of evolving our brains and skills. It is not a matter of any rights. We changed everything to be where we are and I suppose we will not stop. The question is: if we will change the world in a way to not destroy the planet.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
It depends. Sometimes I wonder if the bigger impact has a war in a negative context. As then humans don't even care about humanity, environment, the earth itself. So I would ask about - what activities have the bigger impact, to precisely divide contructions / ideas done to help people live better lives (even if nature is changed because of that) from some activities/event like war, that destroys everything that matters the most.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
No, I think that they can try (and should do it), but they are not able to predict every scenario. We have to remember that Earth can damage itself by for example volcanos eruptions or some meteors can hit us - no one can predict that with 100% accuracy.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
No. But, to be realistic, it is really hard to get acceptance from all countries before the particular country starts to construct something.
The source material was something between a religious rant (the "religion of nature"), but it turned around to have some interesting facts and scientific musings (like - consequences of accumulating large volumes of water over tectonic cracks).
ReplyDeleteLet's get to the questions.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
Are humans somehow separate from 'nature'? This is really getting unpleasant - from one side there are futurologists, which say we are obsolete, the singularity will wipe us out, and this is a good thing. The machines will be even smarter, and will use all of Earth's resources completely, and then conquer the rest of the universe. On the other hand, we humans are seen as the ultimate evil, and have no right to e.g. wipe out the mosquitoes using genetic engineering, because "reasons".
In short, there is no way for mankind to not have an impact on 'nature', except for ceasing to exist. The notion of 'rights' (which are obligations and privileges pertaining to the interaction between humans - no predator will respect your 'human rights').
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I would bring up the Aral sea. It was also a 'large project', and it caused an environmental catastrophe.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
Well - the simulations are always prone to the 'Butterfly Effect', which means that after a number of time steps, small differences in initial conditions lead to huge differences in the model state. It is not about butterflies causing hurricanes, but I think we all here know this. Because of this, long term effects of large scale actions cannot be predicted. This doesn't mean that no actions should ever be taken.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
As for what was to be taken from the article - most consequences were rather localized. Flooding and landslides affect the local population, and earthquakes have also a limited geographical range. The rest of the world is either better off (enjoying longer daytime, and being less panicked about 'global warming' thanks to so many megawatts of renewable power), or just missing out a little bit (like not being able to see the Chinese dolphin, if they go extinct because of the dam). It is not the same as being buried below cubic meters of mud from a landslide.
As for the right to harm other nations through irresponsible actions - well, no country has it. But then, the compliance with the right of other nations depends on political will, which includes diplomatic influence, economic power and military potential.
To sum up my opinion - there are still many ways this project can be helped. Probably they can forgo a couple of megawatts, keep the water at safer levels, and build smaller local hydroelectric plants in more places. Limiting the fluctuations and their speed might also be beneficient. There must be a more sustainable trade-off between power output and safety for people and environment.
Thank you very much for your comment. You made some very valid points, especially the one regarding dam project improvements. Your're so right, slight changes, keeping water at fairly same level, building local plants may be really beneficial for the dam itself, environment and nature.
DeleteAlso Aral Sea Disappearance is a great example of human activity leading to irreversible changes to environment.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteI do not want to judge this kind of activities because it depends from the situation. Nature has own processes that can solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately we have to realize that a part of problems that actually occurs in our environment is caused by human. Nature is accustomed to evolution. Otherwise, when things are going too fast - nature can not solve this kind of problem with such efficiency.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I have heard about cows, which produce too much CO2. When cow eats a grass it produces a lot of CO2. We can say they are the cause of global warming.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I think it is possible but they do not have enough amount of data yet. To achieve (predict consequences) that you need a data from long time period. You have to analyse archive data, prepare proper model and do thousands of complicated simulations. Small human error in an model returns completely useless results.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
This question is tendentious. Ofcourse the answer is no, it does not. Nevertheless we have to respect their rights. I think the best solution would be a global regulations that are accepted by world community and should be respected. Couple years ago I have heard (I hope it's a rumor) about swallows, which are part of polish buildings in villages, but their presence in cowshed is restricted by law regulations.
Oh yes, I heard about cows eating grass and producing CO2 as well. But though the article presented some real data supporting this statement, I'm still wondering if it's really true. It sounds really unbelievable.
Delete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteNearly every step in human history has unfortunately been accompanied with a leap in environmental degradation. With advancements in technology and agriculture though, humans began to find more efficient ways of sustaining themselves. These advancements allowed for more permanent settlements, which led to rapid population growth and a distancing from nature.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
Did You consider how New York impact environment? Unfortunately we do not have data how it was look like before tons of concrete was being put in one place.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
Most of scientist are basing on correlations, in my opinion it is hard to predict 100% accuracy. By examining the historic records and monitoring those fluctuations, scientists might be able to forecast.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
Europe and USA had their go at destroying the planet centuries ago, therefore, so the argument goes, developing countries are entitled to their turn at all out efforts at destroying the planet.
You made an excellent point, we do not actually know how tons of concrete influence the environment and what the world would be like without enormous cities like New York, Beijing, Las Vegas etc. The impact of urbanisation may be similar to the one of the Chinese dam.
Delete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteIt's too late to ask such questions. Humans do it the whole time. We didn't thing about enviroment when can make a lot of money. We burn forest, poison the rivers and kill everything that will stand in our road. It's sad but that's true.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
Every construction have greater or lower affect on the enviroment. E.G. all of water sluice block communication for animals which migrate from one way of river to other.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
Their simulation can predict only the obvious consequence. We wouldn't be able to predict all of them. Simulation never are good enought to reflect the real world. This experiment are very important becouse show us how enormous disaster that would be.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
Actions of one country which cause consequence for other should have to get agreement for it. It's unfair that other country couldn't do anything when their environment get completly change in one of his region.
1. I’ve read recently interesting opinion: “as general, our life can be either dangerous adventure, or nothing at all”. The changes are the most constant thing, so I don’t think it is possible to stop human’s interference into global nature. This is a permanent process. And I think we have right to do it, because the environment is given us to use it to survive. Don’t think I support nature destroying. I just think the limits of our acting shall be indicated reasonably by the law provisions according to ethic rules. To achieve this, we have to work hardly educating new generations, to teach them seeing differences between humanitarian and aggressive behavior, towards other people, animals and all the nature. This is coherency required for better life on our planet. The only way for our civilization to survive.
ReplyDelete2. I thing all our activity shall be analyzed together and as a total phenomenon has impact on our planet. Single objects shouldn’t be considered alone in this respect. Such analysis is always not full, sampling. For example wind farms. There are many people saying they totally change the environment. I work in company building them and I’ve seen many places where such infrastructure exist parallel to the traditional one, with the nature, animals around and nothing bad really happens. I guess this is a kind of example where human brain’s limit disturbs to accept technological alternative not interfering substantially into the climate, nature, environment.
3. I don’t think the scientists are able to predict all consequences which can appear. These are the changes consisting of complex processes and the results can also be very sophisticated. We are simply learning in every case like that, and every case is a different story.
4. As for me, these are not biological or political issues - you touch philosophical one, similarly as in point 1. I’d rather started thinking about the borders we pass interfering into other people’s spheres every day – that’s the beginning of the story. If we don’t care about the needs of our families, friends, then we are not going to respect global human rights. From the other side, if we are attentive, helpful, open to the others, then we’ll put our contribution to creating world respecting natural rights. For me, the issue is – if we have right to interfere in others’ lives, and on which conditions, on which situations it should be allowed. Where the impassable borders of our freedom should be posed?...
Thank you very much for an interesting comment. I also heard some negative opinions with regards to wind farms, but they seem fairly innocent in comparison to garbage dumps, concrete giants, dams changing water flow, cows polluting Earch with CO2 etc. I guess with time people will acquire enough data so as to establish if "environment friendly" projects are really so "environment friendly".
Delete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteI’m convinced that human beings have the right to intervene in the world of nature. On the other hand we should consider at what level this intervention should be. We should not do everything because not everything benefits us. In my opinion every important step should be seriously considered.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
No, I don’t know such examples. However in my opinion many modern products have a significant impact on the environment. I mean the impact on the greenhouse effect. Of course, this is not a direct threat for us although we will certainly feel the effects in the future.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I believe that they are able to predict various effects. They have to analyse big data in complex situations. Sometimes it just comes down to divination telling but then scientists are aware of it and such research results are simply rejected. It’s known that there is a probability of mistake.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
First of all you must compare the pros and cons of this investment. At the end of the presented article, important factors influencing such a decision were mentioned. Usually, big affairs have certain problematic issues behind them. It is important that they do not obscure the positive sides of the project. In my opinion presented dam is more pro-ecological than it threatens (let’s consider the energy it will create).
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteVery hard ethical problem. You can’t treat it as 0/1 problem where there is only yes or now answer. There is a lot of grey area between those two answers. It depends from many factors like “where? Why? When? How much?”
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
Single construction ? I don’t think so. But if we treat cities as such creations than of course that yes. It has significant impact on the climate and environment.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
No. We can have an idea but we are not able to predict that.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
No, they do not
You're absolutely right, question no. 1 pertains to hard ethical problems. It's related to how we perceive the world, if we consider it our property or not. Does it really belong to human beings only? Or maybe we should share it fairly with other species.
DeleteThank you for this interesting article. Amazing Construction!
ReplyDelete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
People have all the power and knowledge to change the world. They should do it, but so as not to look only at themselves but also at nature. There are limits but we can move them.
2. Do you know any other constructions / creases that caused some significant climate / environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I do not know other constructions.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to act? I think so, but in this case, it is important who finances the research :)
4. Does one have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is also harmful to other countries, nations, people.
We have international organizations and they should decide, not individual countries.
Thank you for an interesting article. On the one hand, development requires interference in the environment. Here, the question arises; where are the boundaries? This is a serious problem. I think we all feel that it has been exceeded. The effects of various activities can be observed only after many years. As we look at the landscape of our country, we often see rectified rivers - this is also a good example of what seems to be beneficial in the beginning, it often turns out to be pointless in the end. The last question is also very difficult but in my opinion, no country should create structures that affect the functioning of the entire planet - but on the other hand, too-extensive constraints limit the development.
ReplyDelete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteHuman beings do not have right to intervening in the world of nature, because we are one from many species living on our planet, but it seems that many people do not care about it. It is frightening how much we (as humanity) are changing the world without any thoughts about plants and animals, without even caring about our children and grandchildren.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
I think the most obvious examples are houses and factories, that are creating air pollution. We don't have to look for as spectacular constructions as Three Gorges Dam to find the ones that are changing environment.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
In my opinion they are able to predict most of them. Probably not the 100% of the consequences as there are many factors influencing nature and many environmental factors that can be changed by human activity.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
I think, that "no" is the obvious answer, but again, many people don't care about it. I can say more, some people would like to have such power to decide what the future of others should look like.
1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteIt's a sign of the times. However, plants and trees are considered to be the rescuers of the nature. If we wouldn't save them, our next generation will have to pay for it. So, shall we start planting new trees?
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
Small things, cars, refridgerators and so on. Coal plants etc.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
I don't think so. I think it's very similar to using crystal ball to predict future. If you want even more speculation, please visit: http://www.futuretimeline.net/
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
They can, because they have enough money. Money buys a man's silence for a time. A lot of money can buy whole country. Another article about it : https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/11/10-iconic-american-companies-owned-by-chinese-investors.html#slide=1
I would choose role of Devil Advocate and speak differently to most of people before me. I understand that climate on the global scale are changed because of Three Gorges Dam but you should note that lots of villages aren't a victim of flood because river is regulated. I remember that when Lublin airport ware building people spoke up that rare mammal Speckled ground squirrel would be extinct because of construction. They catch few of them and relocate to the different place and airport was finally build. To be honest it is easy to find an argument to deny most of the investments. If it is climate why we don't focus on cow's methane productions. Might we stop eating beef because of the consequences
ReplyDelete1. What do you think about intervening in the world of nature? Do human beings have the right to do that?
ReplyDeleteI'm interested in geopolitics. The main rule is that stronger forces always do what is more convenient for them. The same rule is in social relations. Of course it shouldn't work in this way - but this is reality.
2. Do you know any other constructions/creations that caused some significant climate/environmental changes? What kind of changes did it cause?
There is a topic of channel rivers in western countries. This way of management of rivers infrastructure allows to increase a volume of water transport. On the other hand it destroys most of fauna and flora. It doesn't have global impact.
3. Do you think that scientists are really able to predict the consequences of interference when it comes to Earth rotation or environment?
Nowdays science has a lot of tools for a very accurate measurements. Mathematical and computional abilities are also very developed. With some level of tolerance for error it is possible.
4. Does one country have the right to decide about the future of other countries, other people? The dam itself is not only harmful for the Chinese and their country, but also for other countries, nations, people.
As I wrote in point one, there is no moral right. The reality is that stronger and biger don't take care of others.