FINAL EXAM ESSAY

"As an environmentalist, This House regrets the incoming Duterte Presidency"

Duterte already planned on road widenings, addition of roads and plans on converting some lands into roads. Base on the site balita.ph, he said that the government might consider expanding the city roads, also observed that the suburban roads are too tight that they need expansion. He explained that the govenment must buy a portion of properties needed for the road expansion which for me, can affect much on the environment. "Government must agree to provisions to buy prtions of the farmland that will be affected by the road widening activities. It goes beyond simply spending on construction materials, labor and equipment" - Rodrigo Duterte. 

Trees are going to be cut down and lands abundant with grass and environmental species are going to be converted into roads. It is really harmful to the environment and may lead to more pollution. Trees are giving us oxygen and fresh air and I do not want to let it be converted into something that can harm the environment more. In cebu where a German expert, Dr. Manfred Poppe said "Road widening projects are not totally solving the problem. I dont think the streets need to be widened because it is negatively affecting public spaces". For me what he said is true, road widening is not the real solution but instead reducing car ownership, which Dr. Manfred suggested as a solution for traffics. 

Cutting down even just one tree is already too much. Like how one life would be taken away is not less but it is much more. Road widenings can also lead to more cars which can lead to more carbon dioxide released in the earth's atmosphere and harm the environment. Duterte also said about coal plants construction. "You open the Philippines for all power players, I guarantee you the electricity will become cheaper" - Duterte said. Coal plants have great impacts on the environment, mainly air pollution. Burning coal is also a leading cause of smog, acid rain, and toxic air pollution. In United States, coal plants are the leading source of Sulfur dioxide pollution which takes a major impact on public health and can form small acidic particulates that can penetrate into human lungs. Sulfur dioxide causes acid rain which damages crops, forests and soil. Nitrogen oxide pollution also caused by coal plants causes ground level ozone or smog. Particulate matter still released by coal plants can cause chronic bronchitis, aggravated asthma and premature death. Coal plants are also responsible for mercury emissions. Construction of coal plants cause great harm to the environment. "We need energy to develop, we are just a developing nation"- Duterte said. Yes we may be a developing nation but we do not need to harm the environment to develop. The environment is already at aharmful state and coal plants could lead to a horrifying scenario on the environment. It can affect not only the environment but also the people, affecting or harming the environment which leads to health problems, complexions, sickness, diseases. Harming the environment is harming the world and everything in it. We need to lessen the release of greenhouse gases. Coal plants, road widenings aren't helping the environment to recover. If these coal plants are constructed then the environment is at a bad state. So why as an environmentalist, I fear the incoming Duterte presidency? Because first, road widenings can convert nature, can cut trees, can lead to more cars which releases more carbon dioxide and causes air pollution. Second, coal plants are a big deal to the environment's atmosphere. It is unhealth not only for the environment but also to us people.

References:
 http://balita.ph/2010/12/28/duterte-eyes-expansion-of-city-roads/
 http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/business/2015/11/19/road-widening-not-solution-442443
 http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/03/22/1565436/nothing-wrong-coal-plants-duterte
(http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/c02c.html#.V0mc3fnvOM8

Motion 8 Blog 18

"This house believes that conscious consumerism has done more harm than good towards the beneficiaries of these campaigns/advocacies".
Conscious consumerism is the ability to decide how to spend your money and what products to buy, where the products come from and how the companies handle your money. It may do harm cause people who are waiting for its benefits may become dependent which lead to worse cases. But for me it can do more good for it will not only help the beneficiaries but also help the consumers for being conscious of the products they buy and conscious to the environment. You are not called conscious consumer if you just buy products without even knowing the backgrounds of it. The companies can also benefit from it. If companies are also socially conscious/responsible, for example, "A coffee corporation imports coffees from a country divided into two, evil land and fair land. Evil land offer their coffees at a cheaper price which is not fair for their coffee farmers. They are the only ones who can benefit it, not the farmers. Fair land offer their coffees at a fair price which helps not only them but also their coffee farmers. Because that coffee corp. imports only those expensive but responsibly sourced coffees so not only them can benefit but also the consumers and others.(Sir I forgot and I cannot find the site of my reference for this example sir sorry, but clearly this isn't my example.). For me conscious consumerism is best not only for the environment but for the world. I would prefer to be on the opposition side than the government.

Motion 7 Blog 17

"This house would revoke architecture licenses from architects of establishments that significantly damage the environment"
Architectural license takes hard work, sweat, standing from failures, lack of sleep, just to acquire it. We architecture students need to study for 5 years to know about architecture. When we become architects and we already have projects, our proposal and plans of the projects undergo on processes and investigations to the government and others who checks up our plans. So when they see something about our plans that can damage the environment they should have reject the project in the first place than letting the architects build the structure then revoking their license when it damages the environment. Fair and clean process from those who investigate the architects' proposals and plans is also a need. Because as what the government side debated that it may lead to corruption when licenses are not revoked because they can just put prices just to establish things. So we also need fair and clean processes. For me I prefer to side the Opposition than the government.

Motion 6 Blog 16

"This house believes that countries that are governed by religious laws that prohibit women from getting an education should send their girls to school"
As what sir Yasi have said, that even if sending the girls to school, the point of view of those countries to their women will never change. So we need to change their point of view to their women first before the case of sending them to school inorder to strengthen the rights of women. The talents/abilities of women will be wasted if those countries continue to believe on their religious laws. Their views toward women may change if the capabilities and rights of women are proven. Laws which prohibit women from getting an educatuon should also be changed. For me I would side on the government than the opposition.

Motion 5 Blog 15

"This house would force and finance the children of farmers to take agriculture-related courses and pursue agricultural careers". 
The children of farmers already has an experience in farming and may have know about it for they are living in a farming area. If they take up agri-related course and pursue agricultural careers they may even own a land or own the land of their parents if they are educated enough about agriculture. But not all children of farmers want to take up agriculture. You cannot force someone to take up something or do something they don't even want to do. We all have human rights and we have the right of freedom. Their children can still help in agriculture throught their own ways. It is hard for them to do things they don't want to and it might even end up on a worse case scenario. For me we should not force them, we should just stop tenancy. Dividing the lands properly and the income. Mostly tenants own all the income and no share is given to the farmers that is why most of the farmers are discouraged to do more of what they are doing. Then the problem of losing farmers in the future will be out of the picture. For me I prefer to be the Opposition team than the government.

Motion 4 Blog 14

"This house would use biological weaponries against terrorist groups that destroy the environment".
As the government side debated that biological weapons would be cheaper if used, and non-lethal gases will be used inorder not to kill civilians around the area but only paralyzes them and they also propose more number antidotes than biological weapons. But still we cannot assure nothing will happen even when no civilians will be killed. It may traumatize the civilian, it may also lead to complexions of sickness when they are paralyzed. Terrorists nowadays cannot easily be tracked or found, they can be one of any people around an area or a place. So it is hard to use bioligical weapons when they are hard to be determined and with civilians around. Terrorists can even have the possibility to acquire those bioligical weapons which is a more disastrous scenario, which is nowadays terrorists are the ones who are already using those kind of weapons. For me I would prefer to be the opposition than the government.

Motion 3 Blog 13

"This house would not accept refugees from affected countries in an instance of global pandemics wherein virus/diseases are highly contagious". For me we should accept refugees even from affected countries but with investigations and checkups. Our help will reflect soon when this pandemics happen to our country. Yes our government may not able to handle if refugees are in big numbers, but not literally all of the refugees should be accepted, only some of it due to lack of facilities. That's why organizations exist inorder to help the government from handling the refugees. I understand that refugees are not necessarily accepted just to help them, we can help by sending them needs, or helping them relocate to other countries/places who can help them more than us. But If we will accept them and help them, then by the time comes, soon, they will also help us in times of global pandemics. They are humans and they have human rights. For me I prefer to be the Opposition than to be the Government. 

Motion 2 Blog 12

This house believes that it is legitimate for private citizens to use violence to stop poachers in the act. In my understanding and with the help of your enlightenment Sir, ^_^, this motion doesn't really mean that private citizen who caught poachers in the act to use violence. It is ok to use violence, not forcing them to use violence. But not violence to the extent of killing. Using violence when poachers are already CAUGHT IN THE ACT to arrest them. But they can stop poachers who are going towards their act, through non-violence. Know that it doesn't necessarily force someone to use violence on poachers. For me I prefer to be the government than the opposition on this motion. I am against violence but there are times that we need it for disciplinary purpose. It's not violence to the extent of killing anyway.

Motion 1 Blog 11

What I understand in this motion "This house would ban the sale and consumption of sharks' fins instead of imposing sin tax", for me it is better to ban its sale and consumption. But first what I understand is why people keep on selling sharks' fins is because they have no choice, it is their only way of living, in their own thoughts. Sharks are so valuable than other fishes. But if its sales and consumptions continue, this sharks will go towards extinction. Imposing sin tax may be good to lessen it, but for me banning is better. It is better to prevent it from going extinct. People can still earn income from sharks but in a better way. Not by killing them. Sight seeing of sharks, seeing the beauty of sharks, they are more valuable alive than being dead. I prefer to be the government than to be the opposition in this motion

Racing Extinction

THE WORLD IS SINGING, BUT WE'VE STOP LISTENING. In china, as the video have shown, many creatures/species were there. Endangered species, sold, used as businesses. I didn't even know that was already what is happening in the world until I watched that video. This world really is insane. Killing is not the solution for us to live. Those poor creatures has their own lives too. The world can't afford to lose more of it. Everything is going towards extinction because of us humans. We would'nt wait for the time that even us will also be extinct. These should stop, not tomorrow, not soon, but right now. If only people can see the beauty of these things then they'll probably make use of these creatures in a better way, not by killing them. Because of human activities, the world is a horrifying scene. "That by the time when trees are extinct, animals are extinct, the sea and the ocean is already unswimmable, and the fresh air is gone, that's when we only realize that we cannot eat money".(A quote from google, i forgot the actual site :3). 

Invasive Species

The video is trying to explain how invasive species can destroy the ecosystem and our environment itself. Species that was transported or brought and introduced to a new environment where it can invade the area and can even be at the top of other predators. As the video explained, natural factors are one of the reasons of having species brought to another environment but mostly the reason why there are invasive species is because of us humans who unintentionally brought our plants and animals to another environment.

The issue affects us sometimes through our own selfish desires that we tend to compete and even wanted to be on top of other filipinos. We tend to invade others where there is no one that is capable of invading us.

For me, we might not be able to stop invasive species but we can lessen the problem. We cannot avoid invasive species by controlling the behavior of a specie, it may seem to be impossible to do that. It is hard but i think we should discipline ourselves to not just let go directly of our animals or plants into somewhere that is new to them.

A letter for the Future President

Dear Future President,

           I know, in my mind, who I want to be the next president and I want to tell him something. Future president please change this country. It may seem impossible right? Because this country can never change unless each one of us will change. It should always start within ourselves, the man in the mirror. But with your help future president, we can change ourselves. If you can strictly put into effect the laws of our country, if you can discipline us, if you can stop corruption and make this country safe, if you can show us that you truly are a good leader and a role model to us, then maybe there's a hope for this country. Mr. President, i know for you it is hard to govern this country, but millions of us believe in you, so please believe in yourself. Together if we just believe, we can change this country. Future president for me or maybe for the majority, we do not wish for a golden country or a rich country, we just wish that by the time we walk on the streets, we are confident enough that nothing bad will happen on the people or at least bad things will be lessened, that by the time we cross on roads especially highways, nothing much will happen to us hoping that the drivers will now be disciplined under the law. But dear future president, I hope you will improve the transportation here, not just in Manila not just in Cebu but everything in Philippines. This may help lessen the traffic if the transportation is effective under the law. Then people will not be bothered or will not be hassled to commute for it will be much comfortable. Dear Future President, I know if we all work together we can make a change. :)

Old and New USC-TC

                             

             The old University of San Carlos Technolocigal Center in talamban, do not have much of structures or buildings yet. It seems to have fresh air and a relaxing ambiance due to the setting of nature.

                              
               The new University of San Carlos now have much structures for school purposes. It still has the essence of nature. They cut down trees for the construction of buildings which is unhealthy for the nature but we cannot redo things by our own will because many things should be considered.

Cebu Trends

The 3rd mactan bridge have plans already and is going to be made soon enough through the public-private partnership. Hoping this would reduce or lessen traffics on the other bridges. This bridge is a connection from cebu city to cordova. The MPTDC (Metro Pacific Tollways Development Corp.) signed a joint venture agreement with the Cordova municipal government for the construction of the 27.9php billion third Cebu-Mactan bridge.

For me this will be an advantage and an easier way for the people living in Cordova for they do not need to travel long onto the mandaue bridge just to get into Cebu. Hoping this would also be an advantage to people near mandaue bridge reducing traffics as much as possible.

Rise of Animals

The video is trying to explain about where vertebrates like us and other creatures that already have bones today came from. Scientists found fossils inorder to prove their beliefs of our origin and tend to examine these fossils inorder to make theories or conclusions about how the vertebrates started. Back in my younger years, when I was a child, it's not that I'm against science but I just could not believe in their theories like dinosaurs exists or these things exist through these fossils and that bones. But a lot of videos including the one we watched, already proves a lot that it may be possible or it really is possible for things to exist. Atleast we may have something to know about the origin of the world's creatures and how it evolves through years.

Those early vertebrates started in the sea, long long time ago. Soon enough evolved with legs and lungs that introduced the land species called Amphibians. These creatures have their eggs laid underwater inorder for it to survive the environment. Then soon amphibians developed and evolved into another species called Reptiles, They have hard skins and are cold-blooded. The first reptiles on this earth were called Dinosaurs that were already extinct long long ago. Then soon evolved into mammals which are warm-blooded and could survive the environment more than the previous species. They can lay their eggs on land. Then mammals evolved into birds that could rule the skies. They use their wings to fly, much more amazing than mammals.

Who should own the nature?

All of us should own the nature, not just the government, not just you or me, not just them. As explained in the video, because of the fear of the government that the forests might be used too much., they put things under a law in order to control things but results into a worse situation. People tend to use more and more of the resources in the forests because they only think of their needs. They don't feel like working together anymore instead they compete with each other in getting their own resources. So as the video also explained that it would be much better If people should own a land so he/she can take care of it. Because If people know they own that land then they can take more care of that land because they don't want their land or resources to crash down. That would be more effective than having the government place things under the law.

The Problem with Open Access

The video explains about the limitations of resources, like how many animals you should place on a field in order to balance the situation of the limited resources. If you place more than what the resource needs, you may think you benefit more because you tend to get more of what you've placed there but in reality you're losing more because you placed more than the capacity of the resource as explained in the video where If you place animals more than the carrying capacity of the field then the grass wouldn't have enough time to regrow for the animals. It's like scarcity where people have limitless wants but we only have limited resources, so we need to basically decide about how to allocate resources efficiently in order to satisfy basic needs and as many additional wants as possible.

In order for the field to satisfy each of the animal's needs, the number of animals placed on it should not exceed on the field's carrying capacity. But with the problem of open access, were non of the people using own the land, they tend to use it more, as much as possible not knowing they are losing something.

Biogeochemical Cycles

A percentage of all the biogeochemical cycles, mostly oxygen, is what humans breathe in. Without oxygen we cannot even step on this earth alive. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas we people mostly produce to the earth's atmosphere and it is responsible for most of the warming. The greenhouse gases' effect on climate change depends on how much of these gases are released on the atmosphere, how long will these gases' be on the earth's atmosphere and how powerful these gases can be. Carbon dioxide is the most important gas emitted by humans but other gases contribute to climate change too, like methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases. This can affect human's health and the way we are living especially due to the changing of climate.

Inducere Ipse

Hi there ! I would like to "Intoduce Myself", the meaning of the title above, I am Francis Dale Ybañez and I am 18 years of age. I always play music(singing, guitar, etc.) in my day to day life. Music is one of my hobbies and is a part of my life. It is where I escape from reality, expressing things through the art of music.

                                          

I am not the kind of a sporty type, but I like doing things outdoors. The skies never fail to amuse me. It gives me comfort feelings and it makes me feel free. All I want in my life is to be happy.

                                         

The things I do day-to-day that helps the environment is that now, I seldom use things that harms the environment like appliances, cars(I don't own a car anyway) and other stuffs. The things I do that harms the environment is that I always throw trashes anywhere because I'm lazy.