healthy logging versus unhealthy logging

We have been using fuel oil as energy resource to run electric generator, and we know that fuel oil is consider as a non-renewable resource. Thus we are encourage to make use of renewable resource to produce electricity such as solar power, wind, water and etc. So what make a resource renewable or non-renewable? One definition is the resource need to be always readily available ,and it is able to replenish itself faster than it is been used.

We were told that trees are a renewable resource. Yet it can also be state as a non-renewable resource. This has to due with what kind of logging policy been employed.First of all an unhealthy policy of logging is a method that people follow when cutting down of trees and they never replenishes the trees lost. Whereas a healthy logging policy is a method that people follow when cutting down of trees they always sustain the rate of planting of trees to the rate of logging of trees. So there will be no depletion of forests. Therefore trees will be renewable resource when healthy policy is been follow and non-renewable resource when unhealthy policy is been used.

One situation on how healthy logging policy is been employ is, for every 1 tree been chopped 7 trees seeding is been planted. This has ensured that trees will no run out after 30 years.

In a nut shell, healthy logging is to make sure trees become a renewable resource and unhealthy logging make trees become non-renewable resource.

very very short paragraph

Deforestation has been pinpointed as a serious environmental problem in Southeast Asia. what are the causes that give rise to this problem?

The main cause that gives rise to deforestation in Southeast Asia is urbanization. During urbanization land is required to provide accommodation, food and economic activities. For this development, the only source of land would be either from forests or highlands. Since clearing of forests is easier than clearing of hill slope when creating land for development, forests face the danger of being wiped off.
Normally when we spend money we always find way to earn money, so that we keep a balance between output and input without exhausting all our wealth. But in this case, the balance cannot be established. It is because forests size is not easy maintained without using other land for reforestation. Furthermore, land is not something that can be created without sacrifice other element. Therefore deforestation becomes unavoidable for urbanization sake.

(my blog buddy is Jen)

how ironic

All around the world everybody wanted peace not war. So weapon is created to stop war invasion, riot and all other disturbance actives. Ironically, weapon is the source of all problems.

Since the occurrence of World War 2, many countries adopt the idea of deterrence to protect their country for invasion. Yet there is no perfect solution for a problem, when thing is meant for good intention people is always able to use it for evil plot. For example, pen is use for writing but people can use it to harm other by stabbing it through the ear of a person to kill them.

Moreover, weapons created have more destructive power it not only disturb the peace but also destroy the natural environment.

First of all, to create anything we need materials. So where can we obtain the material? The answer is from the Earth itself. And human activity on mining has greatly destroyed landscape. Plus with the destructive power of weapon land can be easily destroy.

Even the ban of creation of weapon could solve the problem. However, even simple item can use to harm people, and disturb the peace.

In conclusion, the creation of weapon is not to be blame; it is the mentality of human that affect the peace they wanted.

Opinion to my question

I totally agreed that the use of public transport more often than driving own car will greatly reduced air pollution. According to what I found out from Wikipedia a single deck bus in Singapore is able to carry 86 passengers, and the MRT train in Singapore is able to carry 1920 passengers. If we convert this amount of passengers to the number of 5-seated car needed to carry them around, we will need a total of 401 cars to bring them around, when only 1 bus and train is needed to do this job.

Furthermore, the population of Singapore was about of 4 million in 2007. If every 5 people owns a car, there will be approximately 0.8 million cars traveling on the road. Since Singapore is a small island, with this amount of cars traveling around traffic jam will definitely occur all the time. When traffic jam occur the operation time of a car will increase. With car operation time increased more greenhouse gases will be emitted out because the times of emission of gases increased.

On the other hand, if all people use public transport, there will be only 2000 train and bus traveling around Singapore. Since MRT train move on its own railway network and does not travel on road, and with only 2000 bus traveling on the road there will be lesser chance of get traffic jam. So with little chances of getting traffic jam, the operation time of transport decreases. With operation time decreases less greenhouse gases will be emitted out because the times of emission of gases decreased.

To sum up, with a reduction of 0.8 million cars to 4000 public transports traveling around in Singapore air pollution in Singapore will definitely reduce. It is because the amount of gases emitted is directly proportional to the amount of transports used and the usage time of each transport.

source:www.permatopia.com/wetlands/traffic.html

(my blog buddy was Ken)

picture source: www.enviroblog.org/2007/04/