How does tourism affect the environment?
Traveling is one of the favorite activities of people around the world especially the millennials, but sometimes it can have a harmful effect on the environment.The air pollution coming from tourist transportation is one of the major negative effects of tourism. Traveling by rail, air, and road results to air pollution that damages the environment. Apparently, a large portion of air emissions is caused by 60% of air travel from tourists going from one place to another. Additionally, transport emissions can result to photochemical pollution, acid rain, and global warming.Land resources consist of forests, wildlife, minerals, fertile soil, wetland, and fossil fuels. The expanded construction of recreational facilities adds more pressure to both stunning landscapes and natural resources. This may result to land degradation because of the changes that is happening, which are deleterious to the land resources. More so, forests regularly endure the destructive effect of tourism as deforestation created by land clearing as well as fuel wood accumulation.One of the most essential natural resources is water. It is very evident that the tourism industry overuses the water resources for the development of golf courses, swimming pools, hotels, and even the personal use of water by some tourists. As a result, these could lead to the degradation of water supplies and water shortages. It is never really proper to waste water as everyone’s told to conserve it in any ways at home. So, it is better to save water as much as possible, since water scarcity is being a major issue in some parts of the world now.The impact of tourism are of course attributed to ignorant and overzealous tourists who blatantly ignores environmental rules. And closing down islands are the first step in ensuring that the environment is not damaged beyond repair.
How does poverty in developing countries affect the environment?
What about Resource Stripping, such as deforestation of the rainforests? Illegal tracks and logging are often done by people who have been displaced by large corporations. Poaching and trading in protected species, Clearing areas of forest to grow illegal drug crops etc recruitment by the Drug barrons is easy because those who face severe poverty are prepared to take risks with their health and the environment is secondary to their survival. Where there is a lot of poverty people are prepared to accept sweatshop and hazardous jobs. Some of the most polluting industries are being relocated to areas with high poverty. Legislation is less in developing countries and health and safety is ignored for economic gain. Pollution of air, water, and land is accepted as economic costs as is the negative impact on worker's health.
What are the effects of environmental pollution on human health?
Environmental pollution has a cumulative effect on the health of not just humans, but every living being.Pollution mainly is categorised as air, water, noise and land pollution.Air pollution due to various emissions can cause breathing in of toxic pollutants like carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, particulate matter, etc. These pollutants have varied impacts. Breathing ailments are common, nausea, headache, dizziness or skin irritations are also observed.Water is polluted by chemicals used in industries, pharmacies and also domestically. Sewage from residential/commercial places and effluents from industries are a major cause of water pollution. Also emissions from industry cause acid rain. Ingesting polluted water can cause gastrointestinal ailments, nausea, diarrhoea. Continuously consuming polluted water with lead, arsenic can make individuals prone to cancer. Recently increasing pollution has also caused mass killing of a number of fishes.Noise pollution by automobiles, industries, machines, etc. can reduce hearing capability. In extreme cases, it may cause permanent hearing loss.Land pollution may impact human health mainly by consumption of food grown in polluted area.
Why do we need Environmental Protection?
Because the environment is being destroyed. If we do not protect our environment and continue to destroy all the forests, landslides and flashfloods would occur, less oxygen in the air, and will cause people more trouble instead of helping them. If we used up all the potable water, where would we get more? If we ate all the fish and chickens and cows and everything, what else would we eat? I know, I'm exaggerating, but if we do not have environmental protection, maybe it will happen.
How does batteries affect the environment?
heavy metals (such as those named) are bad for the environment, just as they are bad for humans. all of those metals are poisonous and can cause problems in animals just like they do to humans. i know that mercury is incredibly poisonous, lead causes brain developement problems and nickel in comparison is less harmful but that does not mean it doesnt hurt the environment. when batteries are simply thrown in landfills, these metals leach into ground water and into the environment.
Which should be given a priority - environmental protection or economic growth and energy development?
Gallup asked these 2 questions in a recent poll. "With which one of these statements about the environment and the economy do you most agree – protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth (or) economic growth should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent?" "With which one of these statements about the environment and energy production do you most agree – protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of limiting the amount of energy supplies (such as oil, gas and coal) which the United States produces (or) development of U.S. energy supplies (such as oil, gas and coal) should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent?" For the first time in a year, environmental protection beat energy development, 55-39%. Since the BP Gulf oil disaster, over the past 2 months Democrats and Independents shifted toward environmental protection by 15 points. Republicans remained unchanged, 62-30% in favor of energy development over environmental protection. The results for economic growth were similar, 50-43% in favor of environmental protection, ahead of economic development for the first time in 2 years. Since the BP disaster, Dems moved towards environmental protection by 12 points, independents by 17 points, and Republicans by 5 points. http://www.gallup.com/poll/137882/Oil-Sp... Interestingly, environmental protection was valued more highly in the '80s and '90s, peaking at 71-19% in favor of environmental protection over economic growth in 1990. How would you answer these questions, and what do you think of these demographics and shifts?