The Information You Provided In Your PowerPoint Prese 282153

The Information You Provided In Your Powerpoint Presentation On Threats to the Global Environment

The United Nations has requested an additional analysis report addressing issues raised during debates on threats to the global environment. Specifically, you are to evaluate four threats not covered in your previous PowerPoint presentation, focusing on two of these threats and explaining why they are considered less critical than the four threats you previously highlighted. The report should include an introduction, sections discussing each chosen threat with supporting reasons and credible sources, and a conclusion summarizing your rationale. The total length should be up to four pages, excluding cover and references, and must adhere to formal academic standards including proper citations and a reference list.

Paper For Above instruction

Environmental threats continue to pose significant challenges on a global scale, demanding prioritization by international organizations like the United Nations. While some threats garner widespread acknowledgment for their immediate and severe impacts, others are perceived as less critical due to various factors such as mitigation feasibility, immediate visibility, or perceived long-term versus short-term consequences. In this analysis, I focus on four threats not previously discussed in my PowerPoint presentation: civil war, cultural taboos, inappropriate uses of technology, and energy sources. Among these, I will select civil war and energy sources for detailed examination, providing reasons why they are considered less critical compared to other threats like climate change and globalization, which I previously prioritized.

Threat 1: Civil War

The perception of civil war as an environmental threat might seem indirect, yet conflicts profoundly impact environmental sustainability and resource management. Civil war often leads to environmental degradation through destruction of ecosystems, deforestation, pollution, and displacement of populations. However, compared to threats like climate change, civil wars are often seen as less critical because they tend to be localized, with their environmental impacts confined mainly within conflict zones. Moreover, civil conflicts are primarily driven by political, ethnic, or economic issues rather than environmental factors, which diminishes their perceived status as environmental threats. Finally, the international community’s focus tends to be more on resolving the conflict itself rather than environmental restoration post-conflict, which contributes to its lower prioritization.

Supporting this view, scholars argue that while civil war exacerbates environmental issues, its roots are predominantly socio-political rather than purely environmental (Collier, 2007). Additionally, efforts to mitigate civil wars often involve diplomatic and military interventions that overshadow environmental concerns (Sisk, 2013). Lastly, the localized nature of civil war impacts means its environmental consequences—though serious—are less likely to threaten global environmental stability compared to phenomena like climate change or ocean acidification (Eckstein et al., 2019).

Threat 2: Energy Sources

The perception of energy sources as an environmental threat varies depending on the type of energy. Non-renewable sources such as coal, oil, and natural gas are associated with pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and resource depletion, making them significant contributors to climate change. Conversely, renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydroelectric power are seen as part of the solution rather than the problem. I perceive energy sources, particularly traditional fossil fuels, as less critical than threats like climate change or global pollution because advancements in renewable energy technology are rapidly lowering environmental impacts and increasing accessibility.

Furthermore, transitioning energy infrastructure to renewable sources is facing economic and technological challenges that impede rapid change, but current investments are promising. The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA, 2020) reports significant growth in renewable capacity, which indicates a shift toward cleaner energy without immediate threat to global stability. Additionally, while extraction and use of fossil fuels have environmental costs, they are essential for economic development and energy security in many countries, which diminishes their perceived threat level compared to imminent hazards like rising sea levels or biodiversity loss (IEA, 2021). Therefore, although energy sources pose environmental challenges, their criticality is perceived as less immediate due to ongoing mitigation efforts and technological advancements.

Conclusion

In summary, civil war and traditional energy sources are viewed as less critical threats to the global environment compared to issues like climate change and globalization because their impacts are often localized, their root causes are socio-political or economic rather than environmental, and ongoing mitigation efforts are reducing their potential for global disruption. Civil wars, while damaging to ecosystems within conflict zones, rarely threaten global environmental stability directly. Similarly, reliance on fossil fuels, although environmentally damaging, is increasingly being replaced by renewable energy solutions, which reduces their relative threat level. The United Nations can use this understanding to prioritize resources and policy interventions toward more immediate threats such as climate change, which demands urgent global action to mitigate its catastrophic potential.

References

• Collier, P. (2007). The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It. Oxford University Press.
• Eckstein, D., Künzel, V., & Schäfer, L. (2019). The Climate Risk Atlas 2019. Germanwatch.
• International Energy Agency (IEA). (2021). World Energy Outlook 2021. IEA Publications.
• International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). (2020). Renewable Capacity Statistics 2020. IRENA.
• Sisk, T. D. (2013). Power Sharing and Civil War Settlement. International Peacekeeping, 20(3), 305-320.