Image for post
Image for post
Steven Depolo | Kedm.org

On Tuesday, 8th December, 2020, the House overpoweringly passed the $741 billion defense policy bill with a veto-proof bipartisan majority of 335–78 which made it out of the reach of Trump’s wacky and weird veto threat (which always is, anyways). Even if Trump tries to veto the vote, the House would be in a position to override it. When I read the report about the vote in the New York Times, I felt extremely pleased about the prospect of bipartisanship returning to American polity regarding matters of national interests. I even started dreaming of this kind of unity among the Republicans and the Democrats extending into the future too, which can guide the nation to greater heights of growth and prosperity. To me the positive vote seemed an even greater achievement, especially when I read about the prerequisite in the bill to strip all the Confederate names from American military bases. To me, it seemed like a bold step to renounce the racially exclusionary past of America. It can have positive ramifications into making it a more inclusionary, more equal and a complete nation. But, then reality dawned on me. …


Is it right to blame beef so much for climate change? Let us look at it objectively without any bias.

Image for post
Image for post

There is lot of discussion going on about food and its role in climate change. The debate got intensified after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its special report in October 2018 recommended drastic reduction in meat consumption. Citizens of UK and US were advised to cut beef consumption by 90% and milk by 60% while increasing consumption of beans and pulses to four and six times respectively. Spawning from the above analysis are many articles popping up daily in popular news sources advising people to boycott meat, like this one which says “The single most effective action you can take to combat climate change is to stop eating meat”. But is it right to blame beef so much for climate change? …


Let low carbon footprint be the new moral code

Image for post
Image for post
Courtesy: Skitterphoto

It is a no-brainer that the more we drive, the more we dump Greenhouse gases (GHG) into the atmosphere. But there is more to it than meets the eye. In 2018, there were around 276.1 million vehicles on the roads in the United States of which the personal vehicles sector alone was responsible for 60% of transportation related emissions. Personal cars and light-duty trucks in 2018 were responsible for roughly 772 million metric tons CO2e and 334 million metric tons CO2e, respectively of U.S. transportation emissions and 17% of total U.S. emissions. Transportation which accounts for around 29% of CO2 emissions is the second leading source of GHG emissions in the U.S. just behind electricity generation. In most other countries high in per capita emissions too, the situations are similar. We know that barring some metros in the U.S. which are good in public transportation, it is difficult to survive without a car. There is another aspect to this problem too. A survey done in UK in 2015 showed that 79% of those who surveyed admitted to driving on journeys that could be made on foot, bicycle or by public transport. …


Have hurricanes become more dangerous due to climate change?

Image for post
Image for post
Trail of destruction unleashed by Hurricane Harvey. Photo By: Malcolm McClendon

It was an April morning and I was sipping my morning coffee sitting on the balcony of my apartment. Across the street there is a large mango grove belonging to a Temple. The many young and unripe mangoes hanging on the branches swinging to the tune of the gentle breeze was a pleasant sight. It was mid-summer and the leaves all were somewhat dreary and frail. Yet they were happily swaying in the placid and pleasant breeze and appeared to be beckoning me. I felt little perturbed fearing what would befall on those beautiful trees in a day or two. Cyclone Fani is supposed to make landfall on the Chennai coast within the next two days. …


Image for post
Image for post

Sometimes I feel like there should be another way to divide human history like in BC and AD, in order to consider the latest interventions which have changed human behavior like never before. Like ‘BG’ and ‘AG’, which can denote the eras before and after the advent of Gaming. Such is the kind of influence gaming wields on the current generation, irrespective of age and gender. I even feel that those parents, who were fortunate enough to bring up their children before gaming happened are a lucky lot since not many of their offspring were lost to this very deceptive menace which has taken over the lives of our younger generation now. Of late, the battle royale genre of games are most popular which test the survival skills of the digital alter-ego of oneself where the gamer himself/herself or in a group are evaluated for the cleverness, swiftness and deftness in eliminating all their opponents. The last man standing will be the winner. It is kind of a ‘kill-all to survive’ game. That the gaming industry is booming with reported revenues of $137.9 billion in 2018 in contrast to the reported revenue of the movie industry’s $41.7 billion in the same year says a lot about the soaring popularity of gaming. On a lighter note, there was news about a couple getting hitched while playing a popular battle royale game. The irony is that after getting married they ditched the game. Perhaps each of them wanted to last the game of marriage together. I try not to be a morality monger here, but the truth has to be told any ways. I am not going to talk about how detrimental gaming is on the personal front. …


Image for post
Image for post
A green and secure future or a grave and gruesome future? Its time to decide. Image by Tumisu from Pixabay

“Life is a beautiful thing, as long as I hold the string
I’d be a silly so and so, if I should ever let go”

— Frank Sinatra

We hold the string still and it will be more than silly to let it go. We can still take charge and lessen the adverse effects of climate change. Even now it is not too late. According to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we have time till 2030 to radically cut down the annual emission of 40 billion tons of CO2 and to limit global warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius from the pre-industrial levels. That is seemingly the only way to save ourselves from a climate catastrophe. …

About

Prince George

PhD in Genetics, Climate activist & Nature lover trying to create awareness about the need for sustainable living which is protective of our Planet.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store