Solar Energy- An Innovative Way to Catch Some Rays!

Lauren Thakur

Soak up some sun!

As summer rolls around, and temperatures soar, we often look for ways to beat the heat, and avoid contact with the sun at all costs. But instead of running away from what could arguably be the most important resource in our lives, we can learn to use it for the greater good. One way to harness this energy is through solar panels. When I went to my grandparents house as a kid, I noticed that their neighbor's yard had a funny looking side roof. After explaining to me that it wasn't some crazy roof decor, they told me how they have solar panels, and how it is benefitting not only them but everyone around them. It thought that this idea was so innovative and interesting, and from that point on, I have always wanted to put solar panels when I purchase my own house.

Almost everyone has heard of solar panels, but how many people actually understand how they work? Solar panels use photovoltaic cells that convert light into solar electricity. When the sun's light comes into contact with the panels, the photovoltaic cells convert it into DC, or direct electricity. The DC electricity is then converted by an inverter into AC electricity, or alternating current electricity, which is used to power your home. The leftover electricity that you don't use is sent into the grid. Usually, people with solar panels have an agreement with their utility company that lowers their electricity costs due to their contribution to the grid. So not only are you making your own energy from these solar panels, but you can also save money on electricity bills!

Although solar energy has many benefits and helps with our issues regarding nonrenewable energy, there are some downsides. Solar panels are kind of biased when it comes to putting them up on your house. Not all places around the world are equipped for solar energy, and it is favorable depending on where you are. Countries such as Russia and Canada have a tougher time when it comes to successfully generating solar electricity because they do not get as much annual sunlight as places like Texas. It is also hard to rely on solar energy because it is dependent on the sun, which is not out as much in the winter and is not out at all at night. Big companies who want to harness a lot of solar energy require a lot of space, and their solar fields are taking up land that can be used for agriculture. Also, mining is required in order to obtain the materials needed for photovoltaic cells. While solar energy saves you money, it is very expensive to install, costing up to $47,300 just to power a four bedroom house.

Around the globe, we have been trying to find solutions to our rapidly declining supply of nonrenewable resources. While solar energy provides a solution by using the sun to generate electricity, which will be a source that is around for longer than other sources such as coal, it has costly negatives. For most people, solar energy sounds like a good plan and a good investment (being environmentally friendly and lowering your electricity does sound pretty sweet, doesn't it?). But in the long run, people don't see it as cost beneficial and efficient for all of the electricity that they use on a daily basis. So before you turn on your light, TV, or XBOX, think about how solar energy can be used to power our necessities around us.

Questions:

1. Have you ever considered looking into solar panels or installing them in the future?

2. Do you believe that solar energy is more beneficial or harmful in the long term?

3. What other sources of renewable energy would you be interested in investing in?

Sources:

https://www.renewableresourcescoalition.org/solar-energy-disadvantages/

https://www.vivintsolar.com/learning-center/how-does-solar-power-work

https://www.solar-nation.org/can-i-earn-money-with-my-solar-power-system

Mining in Alaska

Audrey Thakur

Why the Last Frontier is a BIG Concern...

     This past summer, I went on a cruise to Alaska. At first I was not that excited because like everyone else, the only thing I knew about The Last Frontier was that there are eskimos living in igloos and it is close enough to Russia that some people can see it from their backyard (which is not true by the way, I cruised along the coast and never got a glimpse of Russia or anything else for that matter).  However, once I made it to the the most cold and remote state in the United States, I was actually intrigued and I immediately fell in love with it. With it's gorgeous wilderness and mesmerizing glaciers, how could anyone think such a place was boring? After returning from my fabulous adventures of climbing mountains and zip-lining between trees deep in the forest, I was so fascinated that I continued to research and learn about the beautiful state.  Which brings me to present day, where is discovered a MAJOR issue that is destroying the environment I once enjoyed. 

I actually took this picture (it's gorgeous right?!)

Now, I know most people are not as passionate about Alaska as I am, but that's OK. I mean, it's so far away that it's kind of out of sight and out of mind. But, through this blog I want to educate you guys a little bit more about what's going on in Alaska and how it's environment is in danger (just because it's so far away doesn't mean it doesn't face the same issues as the states on the mainland). Alaska is rich in natural resources, specifically zinc, lead, copper, silver, gold, coal, etc. Because of this, the state is heavily mined. There are many mining industries that are based in Alaska in order to get the most rich and valuable materials. But, as we learned in our APES class, mining takes a HUGE toll on the environment and it is rare that a habitat will ever be the same after being mined. Currently, there is a gold and copper mine off of the Kamishak Bay that transports its materials through a corridor in the Alaskan wilderness. This causes a high risk to the inhabitants in the Alaskan wilderness as their home is being stripped away and destroyed. 

I also took this picture of a famous glacier in Alaska 

This issue has actually made headlines for years, but like I said earlier, the average person does not really read much about Alaska. This area is home to many bears, wolves, and the water is full of sockeye salmon. The mining that takes place in this region is concerning to many people because it pollutes the water and will ultimately destroy one of the biggest salmon producers in the region (I've had this Alaskan salmon, and it is good enough to fight back and prevent mining in this area). While the pollutant issue is concerning, an even bigger issue is how these companies transport their materials. In order to get these materials from the remote wilderness of Alaska to other parts of our country, they have to construct long corridors through the wilderness with gasoline pipelines and other harmful chemicals. Not only is the wildlife in danger, but this corridor is very close to two national parks: Katmai and Lake Clark which will also be affected immensely. The spill of toxins and other chemicals could put plants and animals in danger for miles. People are also upset about this topic because this is one of the only rich and natural wildernesses left in the country, and mining could ruin it. 

Kamishak Bay and the Pebble Mine Facility

As you have read, mining in the Alaskan wilderness presents many problems besides habitat loss. Places like the beaches surrounding the waters and National Parks are greatly affected by this activity.  Many scientists have protested the construction of mining facilities in Alaska along with the Natives of the state. There are simply too many risks to creating a mining facility in the remote wilderness (In my opinion and hopefully yours too after reading this, the goods just don't outweigh the bad in this scenario). More and more people are starting to notice this issue and are speaking up about it. I know that because this place is so far away, it is easy to forget about these issues and assume that the Alaskan ecosystems are in not danger. But, I encourage you to put a little more thought into this great state and consider how we can help turn it around. Because after all, it is one of the most neglected states in the country...besides Wyoming, of course (seriously, have any of you guys ever met someone from Wyoming? No? My point exactly). If we all put in a little more consideration, we can help preserve the environment for many more years to come. 

Discussion Questions:

-Have you ever had a vacation that you weren't looking forward to but then actually enjoyed it once you got there? If so where? 

-Do you think that big industries should continue to create mines in Alaska?

-What do you think is the most dangerous factor in mining industry?

Sources:

About the Alaska Mining Industry: https://www.akrdc.org/mining

The Pebble Mine project and it's consequences: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/01/risky-plan-to-haul-minerals-from-mine-in-alaskan-wilderness/

About the Wildlife in Alaska: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/aknatureandscience/akwildlife.htm

Should Private Zoos be Illegal?

Should Private Zoos be Illegal?

By:Jonathan Suni

With the popularity of Tiger King, the documentary on Netflix, so high I decided to write this blog to see if Carole Baskin is truly the hero of the story. While there are local laws, ordinances, and regulations varying state to state, Carole Baskin wanted private zoos completely banned. Of course there will always be organizations that hate the idea of roadside zoos like PETA and of course Baskin. But there are still private zoos up and running all throughout our nation, so obviously something is stopping the federal government from just shutting them all down.  

Just to name a few roadside zoos, there is the infamous G.W. Zoo, Waccatee Zoological Farm, Cherokee Bear Zoo and Santa’s Land, Clark’s trading Post, among hundreds of more. Being a private zoo, these zoos are subject to bad conditions because at times like winter when their revenue is almost cut off completely they get into a serious situation where they can barely feed their animals. Zoos like the Fort Worth Zoo don’t rely as heavily on their ticket sales and have outside funds coming in to help with slower seasons, unlike their private counterparts. Many of Joe Exotics tigers were sent to a sanctuary in Colorado that ran off of revenue from tourists. But now due to the Coronavirus, it had to shut down and forty known Tigers are starving.

While there is another large debate circulating around zoos, should there be zoos at all, this I believe is the more important conversation to have. At least the majority of zoos give animals sufficient food and shelter, while private zoos can create a mass grave for starving animals during economic slow periods. Tourists keep these tourist traps up and running because they get a much better experience than a public city zoo, being able to play with baby tiger cubs and going face to face with full grown tigers and lions. They pay hundreds to keep something up and running that is much worse than meets the eyes.

Will Carole Baskin get what she wants? She pushes every day at state and national offices to get rid of these private zoos that are torturing animals. She was successful in uncovering and showing the federal government what was truly going on in that zoo run by Joe Exotic, so maybe she will build her credibility and put an end to these happily disguised torture camps.

1. Do you think private zoos should be legal or illegal?
2. Are you Team Joe Exotic or Team Baskin?
3. Let’s say private zoos are out of the picture, are regular zoos next?

https://www.peta.org/living/entertainment/deadly-destinations/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2020/04/21/this-sanctuary-took-dozens-tiger-king-joe-exotics-tigers-now-its-struggling-stay-afloat/

https://www.netflix.com/title/81115994

The Impacts of Glitter on the Environment

The Effects of Glitter on the Environment

By: Erin Spiek

We’ve all used glitter at some point in our lives. I mean, who didn’t find joy using the sparkly stuff to decorate crafts in elementary school? Or maybe you sent a glitter bomb to your friend as a prank. But like most things these days, there are adverse effects on the environment. Most glitter products are made from plastic, and when they are released into the environment, they can cause a variety of issues.

Glitter is a microplastic, which means that it is less than 5 mm in length. Microplastic is one of the worst kinds of plastic pollution, and it makes up for 85% of plastic in the environment. It is so harmful because its tiny size allows it to easily pass through water filtration systems and end up oceans and lakes. Once it's in the water, it can easily be consumed by very small organisms and work its way up the food chain onto our plates. It’s consumed by fish, plankton, birds, and even oysters. A study from Plymouth University found that 33% of fish caught in the U.K. had plastic in their systems. It also collects in their stomachs, which can lead to starvation. 

Microplastics on the beach

Ingestion is not the only harmful effect on marine life, though. Microplastic can also provide a “lifeboat” for bacteria, which means that potentially harmful microbes are more likely to survive in aquatic environments. Finally, over time, glitter releases chemicals that can disrupt human and animal hormones. For what seems like such a small, insignificant piece of everyday life, glitter causes a lot of problems that are not easily solved.

However, as this gains more attention in the media, there are some things being done to stop the problems glitter causes. In 2015, the U.S. passed a law that banned microbeads, another microplastic found in face and body washes, and it was implemented in 2017. Since they’re both microplastics, scientists believe that it would be beneficial to ban both glitter and microbeads. Similarly, a group in the U.K. called 38 Degrees has started a petition that calls for a total ban of glitter.

Recently, there have also been alternatives to glitter making their way into stores. Brands like Glitter Revolution and BioGlitz have created biodegradable options that work just as well as normal glitter — it just has to be created carefully so it doesn’t break down. It may be hard to find in everyday life, but it may be worth it to prevent the pollution of the oceans. Similarly, Lush has begun to use synthetic mica and mineral shimmer in their bath bombs, both of which are plastic-free. So while glitter is still being used and impacting the environment, it is good to know that there are steps being taken towards lowering plastic pollution.

Questions: 

1. How often do you use glitter? Do you think about the consequences when you do use it?
2. Do you think it’s important for people to raise awareness about glitter? How should we go about it?
3. What do you think is the best way to stop glitter and other microplastic from polluting the oceans?

Sources:

https://www.insider.com/why-glitter-is-bad-for-the-environment-2019-3

https://www.allure.com/story/glitter-makeup-environmental-effects

 https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/11/glitter-plastics-ocean-pollution-environment-spd/#close

 https://www.bustle.com/p/is-glitter-bad-for-the-environment-some-scientists-think-it-should-be-banned-full-stop-6764078

Ozone Depletion

Ozone Depletion
By: Caleb Speed

     Ozone depletion, progressive diminishing of Earth's ozone layer in the upper atmosphere brought about by the arrival of synthetic mixes containing vaporous chlorine or bromine from industry and other human exercises. The thinning is generally articulated in the polar regions, particularly over Antarctica. Ozone consumption is a significant ecological issue since it builds the measure of bright (UV) radiation that arrives at Earth's surface, which expands the pace of skin malignancy, eye cataracts, and hereditary and insusceptible system damage. The Montreal Protocol, approved in 1987, was the first of a few exhaustive global understandings instituted to stop the creation and utilization of ozone-draining synthetics. Because of proceeded with universal collaboration on this issue, the ozone layer is relied upon to recoup after some time.
Antarctic ozone hole

The recognition of the dangers presented by chlorine and bromine to the ozone layer spawned an international effort to restrict the production and the use of CFCs and other halocarbons. The 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer started the phaseout of CFCs in 1993 and looked to accomplish a 50 percent decrease in worldwide utilization from 1986 levels by 1998. A progression of changes to the Montreal Protocol in the next years was intended to reinforce the controls on CFCs and different halocarbons. By 2005 the utilization of ozone-draining synthetic concoctions constrained by the understanding had fallen by 90–95 percent in the nations that were gatherings to the convention.

During the mid 2000s, researchers expected that stratospheric ozone levels would keep on rising gradually over ensuing decades. Without a doubt, a few researchers battled that, as levels of responsive chlorine and bromine declined in the stratosphere, the most exceedingly terrible of ozone exhaustion would pass. Figuring in varieties in air temperatures (which add to the size of ozone openings), researchers expected that proceeded with decreases in chlorine stacking would bring about littler ozone gaps above Antarctica (which since 1992 have spread over more than 20.7 million square km [8 million square miles]) after 2040. By and large ozone fixations from the shafts have kept on falling since 1998; however, a recent report indicated that decreases in ozone focuses in the lower stratosphere appeared differently in relation to increases made in the upper stratosphere between 60° N and 60° S. Another indication of the ozone layer's recuperation happened in September 2019, when researchers recorded the littlest ozone opening since 1982 (some 16.3 million square km [6.3 million square miles] at its pinnacle degree) above Antarctica. (In 1982 the ozone opening's pinnacle degree was somewhat less than 16.1 million square km [6.2 million square miles].)

Since ozone is an ozone harming substance, the breakdown and foreseen recuperation of the ozone layer influences Earth's atmosphere. Logical examinations show that the reduction in stratospheric ozone saw since the 1970s has created a cooling impact—or, all the more precisely, that it has balanced a little piece of the warming that has come about because of rising centralizations of carbon dioxide and other ozone harming substances during this period. As the ozone layer gradually recoups in the coming decades, this cooling impact is required to subside.

Questions:

1.) How do we know that natural sources are not responsible for ozone depletion?

2.) What are you doing in your life to prevent further ozone depletion?

3.)  Do you think the ozone layer will fully recover in our lifespan?


Sources:

https://www.britannica.com/science/ozone-depletion/Ozone-layer-recovery

https://www.epa.gov/ozone-layer-protection/

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csl/assessments/ozone/2018/twentyquestions/

“Drinking Responsibly” Has a New Meaning *NOT CLICKBAIT*

Rubie Shinedling
What’s up APES, welcome to my blog. The birds are dying. My absolute favorite creatures on this planet are disappearing at a frighteningly alarming rate. It might seem like there is no hope for our feathered friends. However, there’s a simple way that each and every one of us can help put a stop to this tragedy. It has a little something to do with our nation’s favorite beverage: coffee.

Birds are an essential part of the daily workings of our planet. Not only do they provide the human race with an infinite amount of beauty, inspiration, and wisdom (from the comfort of our own backyards!), but they each have countless purposes on this planet. They play the roles of predators, prey, and scavengers, and without them, entire ecosystems would collapse. These critters are great pollinators and aid in seed dispersal around the world. Some birds are even able to carry seeds over 300 kilometers. In addition to these and countless other reasons, these creatures are very sensitive to any changes in their habitats, and are easy for scientists to study; therefore, they provide invaluable information on the overall health of the environment.

A 2017 study published in Science counted for the first time in history a wide scale loss of birds in the United States and Canada. Since the 1970’s, 3 billion birds have vanished, equating to a net loss of 30% of the continent’s bird population. All ecosystems in North America have experienced this loss. Species native to boreal forests have experienced a 33% loss in population, while grasslands have lost 53% of theirs. These statistics are an accurate reflection of how urbanization, pesticides, and invasive species have had a negative effect on much of North America’s wildlife. However, even common backyard birds that actually benefit from human life, like barn swallows and dark-eyed juncos, have experienced major declines. In fact, guys like these seem to have suffered the most.

Most of the birds we get to see from our own back porches do not actually make permanent homes of our homes; they’re just passing through. You might see more yellow birds around here in the wintertime, or you might see an abundance of hummingbirds in the summer despite hardly seeing them during any other season. This is because these and many other birds are migratory, meaning they travel North and South with each changing season, following their main food source. For example, American Goldfinches may travel from Canada to Texas in the winter in order to find some seeds, whereas in the summer, Ruby-Throated hummingbirds will fly from Costa Rica to Texas in search of nectar. Migratory birds like these make up the majority of the backyard birds we see every day, but unfortunately, they also make up 2.5 of the 3 billion birds that have disappeared in the past 50 years. This is largely due to habitat loss in Central and South America.

Habitat loss is a major issue plaguing the entire planet, but it is especially important to migratory bird loss in the Western Hemisphere. These migratory birds spend a majority of their year in these continents, where their ecosystems are being converted into agricultural land. A large percentage of this new farmland is being used to grow coffee. Coffee is a shade and moisture loving plant, and until about half a century ago, it was grown using a technique called “shade-farming”, where rows of coffee plants were grown under a canopy of native trees and foliage. This process caused coffee beans to ripen quite slowly, but it gave them a rich flavor. It also allowed rainforests to continue to thrive, and protected native ecosystems, giving migratory birds a home whenever they need it. In addition, growing coffee in rainforests gave farmers natural “pesticides”, in the form of birds and other animals feasting on the insects that would have been damaging the crops. By using “shade-farming”, natural fertilizer from the waste of plants and animals was provided. However, because of the slow speed at which the plants grew, farmers and businessmen decided they needed to come up with a more “efficient” method of farming in order to keep up with the growing coffee industry. In the 1970s, a technique called open-sun farming was introduced. This meant clearing forested land in order to plant rows and rows of coffee plants to grow them in full sunlight. The method proved to produce more coffee and was much more efficient. However, without the benefits of growing these crops in rainforests, farmers started paying for artificial fertilizers and chemical pesticides, bringing soil erosion to an all-time high. On top of this, the coffee simply didn’t taste as good.

Today, coffee farms take up 27 million acres of the tropical forest belt, the place most of North America’s migratory birds call home for various seasons of the year. Currently, 93.4% of the global coffee market uses full sun farming, including all of our favorite coffee brands like Starbucks and Dunkin’ Donuts. The other 6.6% still uses shaded farming, the original way it was grown and the way it ought to be now. In order to save the birds, we need to switch back to shade-grown coffee. We can do this by buying coffee from certified Bird-Friendly® farms, which are required to use only sustainable practices as well as shade farming. Some companies that sell coffee from certified Bird-Friendly® farms include Birds and Beans®, Redstart Roasters®, and Wood Warbler Coffee®. In addition to switching the coffee we use in homes, we can urge big coffee companies to make the switch by boycotting them until they make the change, and maybe even sending in a letter or two. 

In one year, Americans consume 146 billion cups of coffee. At this rate, all birds could be extinct within this century. The best way we can reverse this pattern is by thinking before we drink. Not only will responsible coffee drinking bring habitats back to birds and other living organisms, but it will also help in the fight against climate change and will help support small family farms that exclusively practice sustainable farming. Given the current events, now is a better time than ever to support small businesses like these. This is something that every single coffee-drinking person can do, including you. Do your part to save the birds and this planet. Make the switch to shade-grown coffee today!

TL/DR: The birds are dying but if we switch to shade-grown coffee we can save them!

Questions:

1. Are you gonna switch to shade grown coffee? Why or why not?
2. What are some other steps we can all take to help bring back the birds?
3. What’s your favorite bird? 

Sources:

https://www.3billionbirds.org/findings

https://www.audubon.org/news/north-america-has-lost-more-1-4-birds-last-50-years-new-study-says

https://nationalzoo.si.edu/migratory-birds/ecological-benefits-shade-grown-coffee

https://www.dlgcoffee.org/news/2017/4/6/coffee-cultivation-sun-grown-shade-grown-and-how-it-impacts-the-environment-and-the-farmers

https://theexoticbean.com/blog/coffee-types/shade-grown-vs-sun-grown-coffee-matters/

Super Cool Live Bird Cams!!! (check out the barred owls!)

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/cams/

Bonus Link:
https://youtu.be/86oxFI5lftY

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Energy

By Tony Shin

As human population is increasing, factories had to generate a lot more energy for everyone to access. Electricity is one of them. In modern day, people are trying to use more renewable energy(solar, wind, and water etc) than the fossil fuels in order to reduce carbon emissions. But the problem is, they’re expensive and not efficient. In fact, 85% of the world’s electricity is provided by non-renewable energy: the fossil fuels, coal, oil, and gas, which is a cheap and lot more efficient than renewable energy, but it also creates tremendous amount of greenhouse gases.

Generally, people think that nuclear energy is one of the dangerous non-renewable energy and emits lot of greenhouse gases. Using nuclear energy is indeed risky, however, nuclear energy itself is clean and renewable. Nuclear energy generates significant amount of electricity at the lowest cost. In fact, Chinese government advocated nuclear plants to prevent air pollution, while generating electricity in a cheap and efficient way. However back then, China’s 69% of electricity has been produced by fossil fuels and coals, which emitted greenhouse gases. As a result, the State Council warned China to reduce the carbon emissions 40 ~ 45%. Unfortunately, Chinese government couldn’t control the carbon emissions, so they decided to utilize nuclear energy to reduce carbon emissions, while generating a lot of electricity.

However, there’s one problem that we all know about nuclear energy: radioactive waste. Even though it’s cheap to generate electricity with nuclear energy, the cost of disposing radioactive waste is complex and expensive. Since it’s mostly composed with Cesium, it can lead to any type of cancer or instant death. Not only workers have to deal with radioactive waste but also be generous with their factories. In 1986, 4 nuclear plants in Chernobyl, Ukraine were exploded because due to the impaired reactor design that operated by unprofessional personnel. As a result, 54 employees were killed by radiation poisoning and made Chernobyl uninhabitable for 20,000 years , but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. In 2011, a nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan was caused by a tsunami. During the major earthquake, a 15-meter tsunami completely devastated the power supply, which deactivated the cooling system that cools down 3 nuclear reactors. As a result, all 3 cores were melted and collapsed, killing over 2000 people, and also left Fukushima uninhabitable.

In fact, many countries are still using nuclear energy to generate electricity. However, some western countries, Germany and France, are trying to shut down all of their nuclear power plants. Although Germany’s population is slowly increasing, India is struggling to shut down their nuclear power plants because doing so can cause blackouts and hurt the India economy. Nevertheless, after Fukushima, many countries stop building more nuclear power plants, while China persists to build more.


Questions:

1. How effective is the Chinese government’s decision to build more nuclear power plants to reduce carbon emissions?

2. Do you think nuclear energy can solve the carbon emission problem? Why or why not?

3. Do you think nuclear energy beneficial to the environment?

Sources:
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power.aspx

https://e360.yale.edu/features/why-nuclear-power-must-be-part-of-the-energy-solution-environmentalists-climate

http://ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/BENEFITS-of-NUCLEAR.pdf

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-wastes-myths-and-realities.aspx

Consequences of the Ice Caps Melting

Consequences of the Ice Caps Melting

By: Rohit Shetty

With the ongoing increase in climate change and global warming, the future of the polar ice caps is not looking too bright. The ice caps are melting at an exponential rate, and according to analysts, the the ice caps are melting six times faster they were in the 1990s. The ice caps are a vital part of this world, and if they were to melt completely, there would be significant consequences. Such consequences range from rising sea-levels and habitat loss to the possibility of the next disease outbreak.

Before we explore the impact of the ice caps melting, let us first take a look at the causes for the ice caps are melting, and why they are melting at such a rapid rate. First of all, human-induced global warming acted as a catalyst for the ice caps melting, however, it is not the primary reason for the exponential melting rate. A process known as the ice-albedo feedback loop is the primary cause of the rapid melting rate. When the ice initially melts, the dark surface of the ground is uncovered, which results in more heat being absorbed, ultimately leading to more ice melting. This phenomenon is the reason scientists are so worried about the future of the ice caps; the ice-albedo feedback loop has caused the ice to melt at such an uncontrollable rate that humans are not able to react in time.

Now that you have a basic understanding of what exactly is happening to the polar ice caps, let us dive into the consequences of the ice caps melting. I would say that the most significant consequence of the ice-caps melting is a rise in sea levels. Scientists predict that when the Antarctic ice melts, the rise in the global sea level will be around 200 feet; this would result in the entire Eastern seaboard, as well as major west coast cities like San Fransisco and Los Angeles drowning underwater. Such a drastic rise in sea-levels may corrupt global economies; the loss of land will require citizens to evacuate and relocate, leaving behind major shipping ports and businesses. In addition, this type of geographical change will cause extreme habitat loss.

Finally, the melting of ice caps could result in the next disease outbreak. Now I know what you must be thinking, "How could ice melting cause a disease outbreak?" Well, let me tell you! The arctic permafrost is extremely old (thousand, or maybe even millions of years old), and the frozen permafrost soil is an excellent place for bacteria to linger for a very long time. This means that diseases from centuries ago, like the bubonic plague, could be preserved in the ice. Now, with global warming being at an all-time high, if the frozen permafrost were to melt away, diseases, such as those discussed above, could be released back into the world.

Sources:

- https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/11/polar-ice-caps-melting-six-times-faster-than-in-1990s

- http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170504-there-are-diseases-hidden-in-ice-and-they-are-waking-up

- https://sciencing.com/how-does-polar-ice-melting-affect-the-environment-13400295.html

Questions:

• How do you think that you, personally, can contribute to slowing down the rate at which the ice-caps are melting?

• Do you think that you will be significantly impacted by the ice-caps melting in your lifetime?

• What are some other consequences of the ice-caps melting?