Geography News - Dec 3rd 2012

• 1) Carbon emissions continues to increase in 2012 and are too high to curb climate change - Carbon dioxide levels have increased from 2011 to 2012 by nearly 3%, and this increase means that at the current rate of emissions, climate change may escalate beyond the predicted 2 degrees threshold. A recent study showed that nearly 37 billion tonnes of CO2 had been emitted last year, hitting a record high in 2011. This extremely high number caused scientists to worry about the irreversible and harmful effects of global warming, and may mean that global warming may affect sea level rise faster than previously predicted. 
• This news raises issues about policy making and climate change (Kingdon's policy window, crisis and a strategy needed, etc.) It is largely the consensus that human beings have pumped billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere and has contributed to the warming effect we see. There needs to be action in societies all over the globe regarding reducing CO2 emissions, but why isn't any country seriously implementing policies and technologies now ? 
• One viable solution is to implement technologies that can create renewable energy. New light bulbs that last longer are being invented, as is liquid metal batteries which an MIT professor explained about in an energy TED talk. 
• I am interested, personally, in focusing on solar and photovoltaic as the sun is an abundant energy source which can be easily captured and tapped. It does not require engineering of infrastructure, such as for hydroelectricity, nor does it require any turbines to generate movement. The sun is invisible to the naked eye, yet is plentiful in many Asian, European and American countries. 
• If we make solar cheaper and more efficient, and develop a liquid metal battery to store it's energy so that it can be gridded, then solar can replace current uses of coal and fossil fuels. This is, I believe, a good way to lower the global CO2 emissions as each tonne of coal burned releases 3 tonnes of CO2. 

• 2) Syria's displaced population increasing - Syria's authoritarian leader Assad is waging war against his oppositions, who want him to step down from his power and position. The result of this civil war is that there is growing numbers of refugees who are escaping political oppression. There are around 2.5 million internally displaced persons and 400,000 migrants in nearby countries who had fled from their homes.  10,000 people cross the Syria borders everyday to get away from the violence and war. America is worried about intervening because it might increase the number of Islamists. The Syrian people's living conditions are degraded and many live in unhygienic slums and refugee tents. 
• Migration is the issue here. Migration is defined as the movement of people in and out of both national boundaries and local boundaries. This is important to Geography because it involves people moving into foreign spaces across different time scales, for economic, social, political and cultural reasons. 
• Refugees are defined as people fleeing their home country because of political oppression. Giving them refugee status is a useful generalization  one that grants the refugees special rights and entitlements fo aid etc.  Syria has vast numbers of political refugees, yet they are not granted any entitlements or hold special rights. The civil war is political - the fighters do not care about the society and the people's families. Hence, these refugees don't have a choice but to move away from their homes and into crowded, dirty places nearby. This causes crowding problems, leading to a knock on spiral of cumulative causation. 
• What also struck me was how there's clearly a "Western" and "Eastern" divide amongst world view on the Syrian conflicts. Edward Said's theory about the Orient holds true - one refugee complained how there are so many journalists "staring at us in the face" whilst the refugee endured muddy floors and soaking tents in their attempts to flee. To what extend does this mentality worsen the conflict ? 
• Should America even be playing the role of "the hero" and decide which side it can support ?