Kirsten Ircha 9/23/17
AP Biology E/F Even Current Event #2
AP Biology E/F Even Current Event #2
Citation:
Strickland, Ashley. “Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say.”
CNN, Cable News Network, 31 July 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/07/31/health/climate-change-two-degrees-studies/index.html.
Ashley Strickland wrote an insightful article pertaining to climate change entitled, Earth to warm 2 degrees Celsius by the end of this century. The article generally speaks on how the global temperature is expected to rise by more than 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. These conclusions were reached from two different studies, using different methods, published in the journal, Nature Climate Change. The first study came to the consensus that a 95% chance exists that the Earth will warm by more than 2 degrees Celsius, while only a 1% chance exists that the global temperature rise will be below 1.5 degrees Celsius. Although the first study used statistical analysis to draw conclusions, the second study drew data from past emissions of greenhouse gases and the burning of fossil fuels. These scientists found that even if humans completely stopped burning fossil fuels today, the Earth will continue to heat up by more than 2 degrees Celsius by 2100. Based on this data, the second study also found that this temperature increase will most likely be as high as 3 degrees Celsius if emissions continue for 15 more years. Thorsten Mauritsen, author of the second study, elaborated on subject stating, "Even if we would stop burning fossil fuels today, then the Earth would continue to warm slowly." These studies were completed before the United States left the Paris Agreement and estimates of temperature rise are even greater due to this event. A 2 degree marked increase in temperature this century was the limit set up by the 2016 Paris Agreement, initially proposed by the Yale economist William Nordhaus in 1977. If this mark is surpassed, it is estimated that life on the planet would change greatly as human health and happiness would be negatively affected. The article goes on to further outline how currently 12.6 million people die annually due to pollution, extreme weather, and climate-related disease, and these number are expected to grow by 250,000 between 2030 and 2050. Currently, limiting the temperature rise for this century to 2 degrees Celsius is unlikely to occur unless more ways to mitigate the effects of emissions are used. However, the article does suggest very broad ways in which to reduce emissions including installing clean energy, increasing financial incentives to avoid greenhouse emissions, and greatly funding research that will lead to at least a partial technological fix of emissions
This article was extremely relevant to society as the actions individuals take now will have astounding impact on the future history of the planet. As we continue to admit massive amount of greenhouse gases and fossil fuels each day, we are continually adding to the problems of global warming. Although we may think that we are too small to make any significant difference, collectively we have the power to reduce the global rise in temperature in the coming century. Building off of this idea, if society does not change its habits, we will be bound to experience the horrible effects of our actions including, rising seas, mass extinctions, super droughts, increased wildfires, intense hurricanes, decreased crops and fresh water, and the melting of the Arctic is expected. Furthermore, air quality would be reduced, both water and food would be contaminated, and greater infection carried by mosquitoes and ticks along with mental health issues would occur, as reported by the Medical Society Consortium on Climate and Health. This topic is vital to the world now, as choices we make today will make or break the Earth tomorrow.
I feel the article was well written as it came from the reliable news source, CNN. The language used was quite simple, allowing the ideas to be understood at many levels of education and age. Furthermore, any complex thoughts were stated clearly, allowing the everyday person to fully understand the finding of the complex studies. However, I felt that the article provided an abundance of information about the problem, but offered few solutions or ways to aid in this issue. This was due to the fact that the paragraph explaining what can be done to help was extremely brief and offered little to no guidance as to how the typical person can reduce their greenhouse gas and fossil fuel emissions. This almost defeated the purpose of the article as it provided only information on what had been done incorrectly in the past but does not go into what can be done in the future. I feel that this article could be improved with an extension of a couple more paragraphs to explain how limiting emissions can be done through day to day choices. This addition would provide the reader with the tools to take action, or a stand against climate change.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBiology
ReplyDeleteOlivia Scotti
9/24/17
Current Event #2
Strickland, Ashley. “Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say.”
CNN, Cable News Network, 31 July 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/07/31/health/climate-change-two-degrees-studies/index.html.
There were many aspects of Kirsten’s review written well. One part of this review that was done well was her ability to give statistical data and results from the experiment conducted. For instance, she gave numbers on the results of the experiment like there is a “ 95% chance exists that the Earth will warm by more than 2 degrees Celsius, while only a 1% chance exists that the global temperature rise will be below 1.5 degrees Celsius.” Through providing quantitative data about the experiment the reader is able to understand the magnitude of this problem. Also it makes her review stronger through providing evidence on how likely it is for earth temperature to rise. Another aspect that strengthened the review was her ability to describe the different studies that were conducted in order to learn the effects of climate change. For example in one of the studies she describes that even if all emissions are stopped this still will not prevent a rise in earth's temperature. Through providing details on the studies conducted the reader understands what the article discussed and how climate change is really becoming an issue. Another aspect of the review which was done well was Kirsten’s ability to provide multiple details on what will happen if this issue is not resolved. For instance she states how it will cause “rising seas, mass extinctions, super droughts, increased wildfires, intense hurricanes, decreased crops and fresh water, and the melting of the Arctic.” These details allow you to really understand the main point of the article and how people must understand the effects of climate change.
Although there were many parts of Kirsten’s review written well there were areas for improvement. One part that could have been improved was more details and background information on the issue discussed. This article mainly discussed the studies conducted and the results of those studies rather than providing background information on how they decided to conduct these studies. Also she could have provided more details about climate change to allow the reader to understand the topics of the article more clearly. Another part of the review that could have been improved on was the lack of quotes. Although she did add a quote from Thorsten Mauritsen that was only one person’s opinion and the review could have been stronger if other scientists who conducted the studies had been quoted. Also if she added more quotes from the article we could understand the tone of the author more and see if her style is biased to the issue being discussed.
Overall this review was very well written and allowed the reader to understand a new topic. Her review was written clearly and smoothly which allowed the reader to learn about the topic more easily and understand the experiments conducted. I enjoyed reading this review because I learned something new about the drastic results climate change if we do not make a change. Also by describing many solutions that can be done to solve this problem the reader understands ways to make a change. Also through listing so many problems that result from climate change the reader is more aware that something has to be done and climate change causes more than one small problem. Overall I liked how she described the research that was done and their results and what was occurring in the present world that affects this issue. Through discussing these things she allowed the reader to get a better grasp on the topic and the importance of making a change.
Amanda Shkreli
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Current Event Review #2
September 25, 2017
“Earth to warm 2 degrees Celsius by the end of this century”
Strickland, Ashley. “Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say.”
CNN, Cable News Network, 31 July 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/07/31/health/climate-change-two-degrees-studies/index.html.
Kirsten Ircha’s review of “Earth to warm 2 degrees Celsius by the end of this century,” summarizes new findings regarding global temperature, and how it is expected to rise by two degrees by the end of the century. In this review, Ircha includes three aspects that make her review well written. Firstly, Ircha explained the results of the two studies that were conducted so that the reader would be able to understand their purpose. For example, Ircha describes how the first study concluded that a 95% chance exists that the Earth will warm by more than 2 degrees celsius, while only a 1% chance exists that the global temperature rise will be below 1.5 degrees celsius. Ircha also explains how in the following study, scientists discovered that even if humans refrained from burning fossil fuels today, the Earth would continue to heat up by more than two degrees celsius by 2100. If the burning of fossil fuels continues for fifteen more years, the temperature increase is most likely to be as high as 3 degrees celsius. Another aspect of Ircha’s review that is admirable is her use of the quote, "Even if we would stop burning fossil fuels today, then the Earth would continue to warm slowly.” This quote, written by Thorsten Mauritsen, is used to support her previous claims concerning the continuation of global warming in the absence of the burning of fossil fuels. By supporting her claims with this quote, written by the author of the second study, Ircha solidifies her statements. Finally, Ircha includes the effects of global warming today, such as how 12.6 million people die annually due to pollution, extreme weather, and climate related diseases. Ircha analyzes the possible effects of global warming, predicting that life on the planet would change greatly as human health and happiness would be negatively affected. By incorporating this information in her review, Ircha further emphasizes the significance of global warming, and how we need to take action.
Though Ircha’s review is well written, there are certain areas where there is room for improvement. While she included analysis of the results of the two studies, she lacks information about the processes the scientists used to come to their conclusions. Ircha notes that the first study used statistical analysis, however, she doesn’t offer much information regarding what it is, or the reason why the scientists chose to use this method. A simple way to fix this flaw would be to explain what statistical analysis is, and how it related to the study. Another area that leaves room for improvement is in the beginning of the review, where Ircha lacks background information concerning the topic of global warming. In order for the reader to reach a thorough understanding of climate change, I believe that information explaining what climate change is and when it was first discovered is necessary.
As a result of reading this review, I understand that global temperatures are expected to rise more than 2 degrees celsius by the end of this century, and that if society does not change its habits, we will have to endure the negative effects of our actions. These negative effects include, rising seas, mass extinctions, super droughts, increased wildfires, intense hurricanes, decreased crops and fresh water, and the melting of the Arctic. The reason why I chose this article is because after the United States left the Paris Agreement, I became interested in climate change, and how greenhouse gases and the burning of fossil fuels negatively impact our environment. This review has encouraged me, to care more about the environment, because if humans continue to carelessly damage the Earth, the generations to come will face a planet that is unrecognizable.
Jack Kochansky
ReplyDeleteAP Biology EF Even
Mr. Ippolito
30 September 2017
“Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say”
By Ashley Strickland
Reviewed by Kirsten Ircha
Strickland, Ashley. “Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say.”
CNN, Cable News Network, 31 July 2017,
www.cnn.com/2017/07/31/health/climate-change-two-degrees-studies/index.html.
In this current event, Kirsten Ircha did a great job of reviewing an article about climate change, which is extremely important in our modern world and in the study of biology as a result of the extensive repercussions it has had and will continue to have. She provided an in-depth analysis of the article, explaining both its strengths and the weaknesses. From her review, it seems evident that she understands the importance of our actions today on the global climate of the future and ecosystems around the world. By offering specific examples from her own knowledge and experience, she was able to elaborate on the core ideas of the article. Kirsten also refers to specific studies cited in the article and compares the two, which helps to reinforce the reliability of the findings. She also points out many key statistics for future global warming, highlighting the need for action as soon as possible. For example, she points out the predicted future global warming, both from initial studies and more recent ones. Kirsten understands that while actions like the Paris Accord in recent years were a huge step forward in assuaging the problem of climate change, other policies adapted, like leaving the Paris Agreement and continuing to rely heavily on coal, have damaged worldwide efforts. The review itself is also very well-written, which makes it easy to understand and follow her reasoning. There were few grammatical or syntax mistakes throughout. Overall, it was a very strong article review that demonstrated a clear understanding of the issue at hand and the key ideas of the author. Climate change is an issue of utmost importance in our modern world, and raising awareness for it is one small step in the long process of solving this long-term problem.
Although Kirsten’s review was very good, there were a few ways that she could have improved it. For example, while she cites many statistics that strengthen her review, she is lacking in the field of specific quotes. In fact, she only includes one, and that one does not provide much information beyond what had already been stated. It would have strengthened here review even further if she had added a few direct quotes in order to provide specific evidence for her points. It would have also been nice to hear some more points of critique about the article because she only included one -- that it did not offer many solutions for people to take to respond to climate change. She acknowledges that it does offer a few broad solutions to the issue, but it does not provide specifics for normal readers of the article. If Kirsten had offered a few more pieces of critique, it would have strengthened her review.
By reading Kirsten’s review of Strickland’s article on climate change, I learned a few useful pieces of information. Although I already know a lot about climate change, the problems it will cause in the near and distant future, and several potentially breakthrough ways of dealing with it, I did not know some of the very scary statistics that Kirsten points out. When she points out that 12.6 million people die annually as a result of events caused by climate change, it really puts into perspective the impacts of this terrible global trend on human life. When talking about climate change, it is far too easy to just think about statistical probabilities and numerical trends rather than actually considering the impact that it has on real human life. It is genuinely shocking that we have let the global climate get to such a dire place and that we still cannot seem to agree whether or not to solve the problem.
I thought Kirsten did a great job with the writing of her Current Event on Earth to Warm 2 Degrees Celsius by the End of This Century, Studies Say by Ashley Strickland. Also, she was able to regurgitate information from what she retained in a clear manner. For example, she says, “A 2 degree marked increase in temperature this century was the limit set up by the 2016 Paris Agreement, initially proposed by the Yale economist William Nordhaus in 1977. If this mark is surpassed, it is estimated that life on the planet would change greatly as human health and happiness would be negatively affected. The article goes on to further outline how currently 12.6 million people die annually due to pollution, extreme weather, and climate-related disease, and these number are expected to grow by 250,000 between 2030 and 2050.” This is important in a review assignment to show that you understood the information. In the second paragraph, she had an impactful analyzing of the article which put the topic of climate change into perspective. For example, when she says, “This article was extremely relevant to society as the actions individuals take now will have astounding impact on the future history of the planet. As we continue to admit massive amount of greenhouse gases and fossil fuels each day, we are continually adding to the problems of global warming. Although we may think that we are too small to make any significant difference, collectively we have the power to reduce the global rise in temperature in the coming century.” As she continues, she is able to build off of her previous ideas. In her last paragraph, her criticism of the author’s article was valid and to the point. For example she states, “However, I felt that the article provided an abundance of information about the problem, but offered few solutions or ways to aid in this issue. This was due to the fact that the paragraph explaining what can be done to help was extremely brief and offered little to no guidance as to how the typical person can reduce their greenhouse gas and fossil fuel emissions. This almost defeated the purpose of the article as it provided only information on what had been done incorrectly in the past but does not go into what can be done in the future,” and after this she continues with a solution.
ReplyDeleteKirsten did a thorough job of analyzing the CNN article. She was able to criticize it, yet still provide solutions. However, one thing I did notice was how there was limited citations from the original article. For the data, which was not cited either, I think it is actually acceptable as long as it’s in her own words because it shows that she was able to interpret and understand it. Second, I thought that Kirsten’s review could have went into more depth about the ways society and scientists are working to improve the potential outcome of climate change. Also, I feel that if she had provided ways people could help, it would be more inspiring to the reader.
I took away a great deal of information from this article. Learning that society contributes immensely to climate change was opening and persuades you to want to take action and help. Kirsten states in her article that the Earth is predicted to warm more than two degrees celsius. One statement that I found truly impactful was, “f this mark is surpassed, it is estimated that life on the planet would change greatly as human health and happiness would be negatively affected. The article goes on to further outline how currently 12.6 million people die annually due to pollution, extreme weather, and climate-related disease, and these number are expected to grow by 250,000 between 2030 and 2050.” I found this terrifying that the number of people who would die is 12.6 million all due to climate change. Overall, Kristen was able to provide a great summary, analysis and personal reaction to this article that was evident to the reader.