Skip to main content

RESEARCH - THE ENVIRONMENTALIST STANCE

Following the 'Great Global Warming Swindle' it felt only fair to delve into the 'opposition' views which come in the shape of environmentalists and particularly conservation organisations, in which there are plenty, some have different approaches to addressing these global issues but the aim for the majority remains the same. These organisations take a completely different stance on the causes and effects of man-made global warming and climate change as well as having clear visions and implementing changes to address these global issues. Steering away from politically motivated and funded scientific research and exploring first hand the detrimental effects that industrialism and consumerism are having on the environment. 

These organisations including 'Conservation International' ' The Climate Reality project' 'Greenpeace' 'Environmental defence fund' and hundreds more all focus on a wide range of topics relating to eco-systems, biodiversity, human well-being, global stability, sustainable energy and of course climate.. spreading their research and addressing these issues all around the world. 

Climate change is reshaping human civilisation and the environment around it and how we respond will determine the future of not only our species but also the other lifeforms we share this planet with. The climate of the planet is ever changing but according to these climate organisations the pace of this change is now faster than ever, threatening to make parts of the planet uninhabitable for life as we know it, worsening poverty, swamping coastlines, wiping out masses of species.. in short climate change is the most pressing global challenge ever faced. Nature is humanity's biggest ally in the fight against climate change and these organisations are trying to protect that.

'Conservation International' report on their website that 'Some 65 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions is from burning fossil fuels, and deforestation accounts for about 11 percent of those caused by humans'. This is the challenged faced by these organisations as they aim to reduce these emissions as their trends show we are on course for a massive temperature rise before 2100 causing catastrophic effects. Agreements made in the Paris Agreement fall short of the cuts required to limit this mass global temperature rise and according to these organisations, even if all emissions are stopped immediately the effects will continue for centuries due to the cumulative impacts of emissions already in the atmosphere. These reports directly conflict with the findings of the IPCC and other scientific research as they found that there is in fact a correlation with greenhouse gas emissions (particularly Carbon dioxide) but rising carbon dioxide levels are a result of temperature rises, not a cause. 

(There are 2 ways that a greenhouse gas (often abbreviated GHG) can enter our atmosphere. One of them is through human activities. The main human sources of GHG emissions are: fossil fuel use, deforestation, intensive livestock farming, use of synthetic fertilizers and industrial processes. The other is through natural processes like animal and plant respiration.)

The vision for these organisations is to have a world where natures contribution to addressing climate change is maximised and lives up to its potential to mitigate it
'tropical forests alone can deliver 30% of mitigation action needed to prevent catastrophic climate change'
but also is fully deployed in places where eco-systems an help vulnerable populations adapt to the already present and future effects of climate change.And they are already addressing these issues by helping communities adapt to the current effects, for example rising sea levels, flooding, draught etc.. and they are using mitigating factors for the reduction of emissions and enhancing carbon storage.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

CORNELIA PARKER - THE STORY OF COLD DARK MATTER

Cold Dark Matter: An Exploded View  is the restored contents of a garden shed exploded by the British Army at the request of the artist Cornelia Parker. The surviving pieces have been used by Parker to create an installation suspended from the ceiling as if held mid-explosion. Lit by a single lightbulb the fragments cast dramatic shadows on the gallery’s walls.  In an interview with Tate curator Michaela Parkin, Parker suggested that an explosion was something she had wanted to do for a long time. To her, an explosion is an ‘archetypal’ image, familiar to us from childhood to adult life:       Somehow the idea and imminence of the ‘explosion’ in society seemed such an iconic thing. You were being constantly bombarded with its imagery, from the violence of the comic strip, through action films, in documentaries about Super Novas and the Big Bang, and least of all on the news in never ending reports of war. Parker liked the idea of something that happened...
Post a Comment
Read more

CLAIRE BISHOP - COLLABORATIONS AND ITS DISCONTENTS

Claire Bishop’s short paper begins with a curious quote from Dan Graham: “All artists are alike. They dream of doing something that’s more social, more critical, and more real than art” (60) . A brazen comment, this generalisation gives Bishop’s discussion a provocative start. It also anticipates her assumption that all “real” art is necessarily concerned with aesthetics. This helps to explain her interest in discussing “the social turn” as Art—or, more accurately, a lack thereof . After briefly describing both the recent proliferation of publicly engaged art practices and their value as therapy for repairing the social bond , Bishop maps prevailing perceptions of this art as polarized. There are the “non-believers,” the aesthetes who dismiss the art as uninteresting, and there are “the believers” the zealots, the activists who, according to Bishop, “…reject aesthetic questions a s synonymous with the market and cultural hierarchy ” (61). Curiously, Bishop fails to identify a third ...
Post a Comment
Read more

REFLECTION ON PUBLIC COLLABORATION !.

For this piece the initial artwork wasnt documented digitally by film or phtograph, i wanted to let the objects and the piece exist on their own within the space and allow the interactions and participation to happen without there being any sense that it is an art work. I feel like the results are completely different by just writing about the interactions as a reflection and a time lapse done in the simplest form by using text.  I found that the audience were rather confused about the obejcts as they were so precariously placed and people are used being informed about the art works or public art pieces. Knowing this the first investigation of this project was a success, i was able to gather an understanding of how people would interact with my art work and how it would display my concept.  After this investigation I do feel as though i need to reconsider how i document these installations, I still want them to be discrete and have a sense of the unknowing but also wo...
Post a Comment
Read more